then you might be a little better liked... You don't need to swear to be heard you know - it doesn't make you look big and it's not clever :p .

80r15

March 14th, 2003, 10:12 PM

ummmm for any fucking experienced organic chemist, tabun or sarin is not exceptionally challenging. My idea was a caltrop in a sphere with nerve gas in it. AND YOURE telling me im lame. So while youre running away from cops in your "kike skin" boots, you will take the time to set up a taser and net??? Are you fucking stupid. The only nerve gas you will see is the one that they fill your chamber wiht at the state pen. And you call yourself chemists??? Yes, sarin, soman, or tabun might not be cheap or *easy* to make, it can still be made by anyone who knows what theyre doing. If youre too fucking stupid to make those, use CL2(g) or mustard gas... Oh wait, those are to hard and expensive to synthesize too, right??? I mean, they were only used in WW1, so you need really fucking advanced technology to synthesize them. If youre too stupid to figure out the synthesis procedure for Cl2 or mustard gas, let me know, and I will help your dumb ass out. The only thing youre good for is to listen to what NBK2000 says, repeat it multiple times, and criticize anyones post who is new to the forum. Notice new to the forum, NOT ORGANIC CHEM. in your case its the other way around. So go out, find an 8th grade chem book, and start learning what the fuck an ionic bond is nad what valence electrons are..... <small>[ March 14, 2003, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: 80r15 ]

blazter

March 15th, 2003, 12:11 AM

I would like to cast my vote for giving 80r15 HED. The worthless flaming does little to help, and is polluting this perfectly good thread. I wasn't sure if i was in favor of the fairly strict forum rules, but now im all in favor of strict enforcement. oh "nad" by the way last I checked HCN was used in the gas chambers, which is NOT a nerve agent. It interfers with normal respiration, by inhibiting the cytochrome oxidase enzyme.

megalomania

March 15th, 2003, 12:45 AM

I am afraid you may have slightly damaged your credibility, 80r15, by suggesting sealing nerve gas with playdoe... Making chemicals is one thing, and more is the power to you for knowing how, but using them is a different manner. Especially

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter chemical weapons.

Come on guys, your looking for kewls to crush :) He hasn't broken any rules that I would bother banning for. Lets see how my experiment in member flaming enforcement works :)

NightStalker

March 15th, 2003, 02:38 AM

Geeze, 80r15, how many times can you say the word "FUCK" in a post before you give me a hard-on from your constant invitation to do so? FIVE TIMES?! You make stunningly brilliant use of a language developed over thousands of years. A language as fluid on the tongue as a fine wine, as graceful as a soaring eagle, as expressive as a Motzart concerto', and as versatile as a swiss knife...all of it...reduced to a shit smeared rock in the flailing appendage of the screaming simian that is you.

quote:

---

The only thing youre good for is to listen to what NBK2000 says, repeat it multiple times, and criticize anyones post who is new to the forum.

---

Very well then...since I'm simply a toady who cravenly parrots everything NBK says, I'll take my best shot at parroting what he'd say if he was here to be parroted by my craven toadying. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Confidential report of the SS Sturmhuhn Security Classification: Low ATTN: Reichsführer-SS Sturmhuhn NBK2000 We've just intercepted this internal communique (from our mole within ECHELON) to the Politburo of the untermensch-forum Science Madness by the top handler of their espionage apparat, as regards the capture and execution of their latest spy to attempt infiltration. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= +=+=+=+=+= U|_+RA t0P S3qR3T reP@r+ Mission Name: Wintermute Assigned Agent: 80r15 (ENG TRANS: Bore Us) Mission: Infiltrate Roguesci, posing as an 3l!+3 weapons master, and gain their trust. Once accepted into the inner circle, report back all advanced weapons knowledge to mother russia, for domestic manufacture and use against chechean seperatist running dog capitalist FILTH! Mission Status: Failure. Agent 80r15 has failed to be accept. His 3l1+3 skillz were sub-par to those of the "Forumites" (as they refer to themselves), thus he was unable to gain acceptance by even the most recent of members, let alone the truely elite. Agent Status: KIA. Agent 80r15 was captured by roguesci's internal security apparat, the "SS Sturmhuhn" (lead by the infamous NBK, who's wanted by the UN for numerous human rights abuses involving torture, small farm animals, and other things too disturbing to mention), taken to their HEDquarters (prumably to be interrogated) before being summarily executed in the Hot Electron Death chamber. Conclusion: It's the opinion of this handler that further attempts at infiltration would be pointless. Obviously, the supposed decrease in their internal security (the "huggey-feeley" period) was just a ploy to lure out any potential infiltrators into the open, by dangling the lure of an easing in membership standards where Roguesci's enemies would be sure to take the opportunity to attempt an infiltration, thus revealing their presence. Gentlemen, I'm afraid that we have been outfoxed by a true master of the craft, NBK, having fallen for such a simple, yet devastatingly effective ploy, as the one that resulted in our agents discovery and execution. END R3P0rT +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= +=+=+=+=+= Analysis: As per our previous periods of "lax" security, our enemies have taken this opportunity to attempt yet another futile attempt to infiltrate our ranks. And, once again, the simple minded untermensch have fallen for such a simple trick so many times that you'd think they'd have learned by now. Even hanging the fly-blown and blackened corpses of previously captured spies on the BFL Avenue hasn't deterred them. Naturally, this can be attributed to their inferior intelligence, which is why they're untermensch in the first place, eh? Conclusion: Continue with Operation "Lame Drain", until the current batch of enemy infiltrators have been removed, before restoring normal member security standards. HEIL NBK!

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Feel better now? I certainly do! Now, as for YOUR lame idea that:

quote:

---

...for any fucking (another invitation? Nightstalker) experienced organic chemist, tabun or sarin is not exceptionally challenging.

---

quote:

---

If youre too stupid to figure out the synthesis procedure for Cl<sub>2 or H, let me know, and I will help your dumb ass out.

---

quote:

---

My idea was a caltrop in a sphere with nerve gas in it. AND YOURE telling me im lame.

---

Hey 80r15, I have another l33+ idea - what about an A-bomb in a pretzel? What do you think, huh? Then we could put that in play-dough and surround it with sarin-smeared caltrops! HAHAHA! :D :D Why don't you quit with this idea, and start posting some of your advanced knowledge of organic chemistry? Because you're not gaining any respect this way...

80r15

March 15th, 2003, 08:27 AM

ALL HAIL MEGALOMANIA!!!!! Thank you greatly Megalomania... The thing is, I had an idea of mixing caltrops with the little green balls in THE ROCK(btw VX or EA2912? i think is amber, not green, and its not "gooey" like they portay it in the movie) and decided to make a little joke with it on this forum(the playdough thing). At sciencemadness, this would have been laughed at and people would have moved on, but apparantly there is a different mood here, and now I recognize that. I will be more "careful" about what or where I post..... btw 1 4m n0t 4 "k3wl", 1 4m 4 h4x0r.....PS thank you for not banning me Megalomania. edit: I don't think that you could get enough U-235 into a pretzel to make it go super-critical... As for the pictures...Fucking I don't fucking need to fucking prove myself to you fucking idiots fuck shit fucking gays. lol :) <small>[ March 15, 2003, 07:46 AM: Message edited by: 80r15 ]

Al Nobel

March 15th, 2003, 08:35 AM

Palestinians use potatoes with lots of nails in it to stop Israeli vehicles (biodegradable caltrops :D ). I searched for some pictures but I´ve found only a german site with general information. http://www.nadir.org/nadir/ initiativ/sanis/archiv/intifada/kap_02.htm

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter And 80r15 the potatoes are of course compatible with Anthrax,VX... <small>[ March 15, 2003, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: Al Nobel ]

Anthony

March 15th, 2003, 08:16 PM

The most obvious thing is that "Boris" started with a completely off-topic post. VX filled glass spheres are not caltrops by any stretch of the imagination! "make a little joke with it on this forum(the playdough thing). At sciencemadness, this would have been laughed at and people would have moved on" You're a newbie, and judging by the way you present yourself, how were people supposed to realise you were only joking. You'd be amazed at some of the ideas some people come up with and actually think are good. Secondly, we work with serious materials; sensitive explosives that endanger life and limb, and even more dangerous CW agents (hypothetically...). Joking around isn't always wise, what is said in jest may be taken seriously by someone, who goes on to serious injure or kill themselves.

80r15

March 15th, 2003, 11:30 PM

and your SS whatever cannot stop the Komitet Gosudarstvennoye Bezopastnosti!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

firebreether

March 16th, 2003, 12:43 AM

Have your tires ever been punctured by a nail? They stay in there and leak very slowly which probably wouldn't help you too much with a cop on yer butt. Because the caltrops aren't stuck to the ground it seems like they should puncture, then get stuck in the tire and just "roll with it". I dont know if the extra prongs of a caltrop would affect it much. It seems to me that you need something that'll really rip the heck out of a tire so that it violently flats. The hollow caltrops from the CIA look just the ticket, or the stamped steel ones, with all the barbs on them. <small>[ March 16, 2003, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: firebreether ]

chemwarrior

March 16th, 2003, 01:09 AM

80r15, Just stop now while your ahead. You dont really want to get banned, do you? 'Tis funny though. Would have been better had NBK been here. Its allways funny to watch him 'stalk and kill' a kewl. Oh, and 80r15, your damn lucky that Polverone and Madscientist are kind about fools on sciencemadness.org, else you would have been banned long ago. I would also advise you to cease the use of those :mad: faces all the time. You DID see, Im assuming, where Polverone removed them from a post and, quite polietly, asked you to cease using them right? And btw, had NBK been here, I doubt we would have heard anything except the sizzling of HED. :D

Energy84

March 16th, 2003, 01:12 AM

I really like the idea of stamping caltrops from single sheets of steel. Although it might be a bitch to get a set of dies custom made for the job, it'd be really easy to make them once you got the die. So, has anybody seen a die for these or know any other ways of making those nice barbed caltrops?

chemwarrior

March 16th, 2003, 02:10 AM

I havent seen a mold for them before, but I imagine that by taking a ready-made one from a barb-wire fence and makeing a plaster cast of it, one could then take and make a steel mold, if they had access to the equipment. Then they could make a multiple caltrop cast from which a person could make hunderds in less than an hour. This would be much easier, and, I think, much cheaper, than buying the wire and cutting all the bards from it. Also, it would make for an easy way of getting rid of scrap metal you have laying around. Then again, I might just be grasping at air, but...

80r15

March 16th, 2003, 08:54 AM

chemwarrior shut the fuck up. you dont contribute shit to scienecmadness and I do. Ok b1t(h? n0w 5hut th3 fu(k u[]D!! and i dont want to get banned but if thats what NBK is gonna do, then so be it... I still have sciencemadness and quite frankly, 1 h4v3nt l34rnt 5h1t 4t th15 51t3 yet... <small>[ March 16, 2003, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: 80r15 ]

Mr Cool

March 16th, 2003, 10:45 AM

Damn, you know it's really hard to type while laughing your ass off... Anyway, I've been searching sciencemadness, and have to say that you have contributed NOTHING to it! Well, unless these count as contributions:

quote:

---

WELL,,, define suicide(if you mean killing themselves...duh) than YES its true. Hell I have almost killed myself on NUMEROUS occasions. Once i almost got septic(where your body dies of dehydration) thnks to rust, and once I spilt some acidic rust solution on myself and my leg had weird bumbs for a week or two..., and once i had a broken piece of erlyn meyer flask circulating around in me until the doctor got it out and prevented me from slicing up myself. AND NOW i will try a HF synthesis very shortly(which eats away at bones and heart if absorbed through skin) but i dont mind almost dying for the sake of science

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

and i will continue doing my "experiments" forever. But I would never like, shoot myself in the head, or Stand in a nice cloud of VX... *BANG*(HEADLINES:::::::::::::::R1ngm45t3r is found dead with large bullethole in head and massive amounts of VX in bloodstream.....................)HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHa ha ha

---

quote:

---

TEACH THEM A LESSON WITH HF. one athat they will never forget for as long, or short as they live DONT GET MAD, Anhillate them........

---

Lol, I had to edit out thirty-four :mad: 's!! Hahahaha, I'm still waiting for something useful from you, and still laughing my ass off at you! Edit:

quote:

---

1 h4v3nt l34rnt 5h1t 4t th15 51t3 yet

---

Clearly, the poor kid hasn't even learned how to type yet! HAHAHA!!!! <small>[ March 16, 2003, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]

darkdontay

March 16th, 2003, 01:23 PM

Maybe if we just ignore him he will wither away. I have a PDF scan of a book called [please I know the name alone sounds KEWL] "Secret Guide to Making Ninja Weapons". Now their is a section on making Caltrops. I will upload the book once UPLOAD Premission are resumed. I'm also looking for some good photos's of polic spike stripes. I would like to find a practical way of making them. Well I'm off to do more research.

chemwarrior

March 16th, 2003, 01:49 PM

80r15, show me just ONE post of yours, on either site, that has actually been useful. Im pretty damn sure you cann't show me one. Oh, and btw, you ought know you can not compare sciencemadness.org with roguescience.org. THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. I mean, come on, one is about explosives and weapons, and the other is about chemistry. They are both, in their own rights, good sites, but when fools like you begin to cluter them, they begin to go downhill. So, do EVERYONE a favor and go start your own little 'E&W Forum HED victims website' and save us the trouble of typing out replies to you.

nbk2000

September 12th, 2003, 02:28 AM

Been a while since I last saw Nightstalkers little parody, god's what a hoot! :D Anyways, back on topic... there's a site ran by one of the LANL boys that has an interesting barrier design for vehicles that uses pipe and cable. Go to http://www.pushback.com/terror/PipeBarrier/ for details. Here's a picture of a truck hitting the barrier at 40mph and flipping upside-down! :o :) http://www.pushback.com/terror/PipeBarrier/PipeBarrier.jpeg The neat thing about this is that it might be possible to use large diameter plastic piping, like that used in agriculture, to build such a barrier, rather than the steel pipe, since it only needs to make the piggies stop for a minute, while they figure out how to get around it (which they shouldn't be able to if you position it properly), given you at least a miles headway on them, making it nearly impossible for them to catch up to you. :p Another idea I had recently was to use a small explosive charge inside of concrete lightposts to drop them onto the road, forming an instant road block. They're easy to get into, have a built in power supply, and would easily fracture and fall from a small charge inside of them. When the pole hit the road, it'd break into many tire-shredding chunks. If luck is with you, then a few hundreds pounds of concrete will fall on Mr. Pig's head. :D

Dark Meat

September 22nd, 2003, 08:48 AM

nbk, this is hardly a contribution, but way way WAY back up in this thread... well, the first post (yeah, i just read everything, it's late, and i can't think of anything better) you said putting something extremely slippery on a stairway would have good effects, since no one would be holding the rails as obviously they are, on invading your turf, far too mighty and powerful for... rails? anyways, first thing i thought was that when falling, the reaction for me would be to grab out at the rail (i've done this countless times, minus the lubricant... i am uncoordinated as hell) ... so, wrapping nichrome wire around the rail, assuming that they won't burn and you know that someone is coming, would enhance the effect by a lot since anyone trying to come up would a) slip, and either fall to their doom, or slip, and grab at the rail to support their weight... which would result in b) letting go of the rail quick sharp and falling down to their doom harder. my theory is, when they grab the rail, they will put all of their weight onto it, and with the shock will practically launch themselves down the stairs, where if they are simply climbing up, and fall, chances are their body weight would be positioned forwards. this post seems a bit k3wl, but i'll post it anything since it conjures interesting images in my head. i had some ideas and some things my friends and i use on my mind before... so i may post these tomorrow... but now it's late.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Kid Orgo

September 22nd, 2003, 04:26 PM

Why not just cover the rail in the slippery shit? On a similar vein, what about simply loosening the railing until it comes off at a touch?

Anyone ever seen Terrible Secret of Space? "Do you have stairs in your lair? Piggies must go down the stairs."

nbk2000

September 22nd, 2003, 08:10 PM

Two strips of metal on opposing sides of the rail, connected to an outlet, would do the trick quite handily. But, RTPB "Plan for Failure" says that it will only be hot when YOU are holding it, not when the pork is, so that rules it out as being too likely to kill you, and not the pork. Remember, invading piggies are either in your house and on your ass within a couple minutes, or they pull out and surround you once they lose the surprise factor. Thus, under 5 minutes of your life would the cops be inside your house, compared to many years for you to be in there. Who's the most likely to be killed by a faulty boobytrap in your own home? Thought so. Want something safe to store that'd wipe your house clean of all life? Get a 5 gallon bucket with a lid. Attach a hose from the lid to the air intake of your central air, with a switch so you can turn it on anytime you need to. Have several gallons of battery acid in the bucket at all times and a paper bag (sealed in a plastic baggie) with several pounds of sodium cyanide next to the bucket. Pigs come knocking, you drop the paper bag of cyanide (after removing it from the plastic, duh!) into the acid and slam the lid on. It'll take a few seconds for the acid to soak through the paper, giving you time to get the lid on before it generates a pound or so of hydrogen cyanide gas. This is dispersed through your house via the central air and eradicates the highly annoying indoor pest known as the "kevlar roach". :D Naturally, the room you are in is NOT vented through the central air system, and you've got a gas mask with an air hose leading to the outdoors. Give it five minutes then switch the C/A to vent with external air intake while you go about collecting the goodies off the bodies of the kevlar roaches. :D

vulture

September 23rd, 2003, 06:59 AM

How about boobytrapping or filling the doorhinges with something nasty? The "kevlar roaches" like to kick down doors, thereby destroying the hinges. When you wander around your house, you're just using the doors as any other normal person would. Locking the boobytrapped doors might be a good way to make sure they kick it down. I wonder if a reasonably well painted door on a wall would fool them when they come rushing in. I've seen paintings of doors on walls which were very realistic, so realistic that I slammed my head into one when trying to walk through. :mad: Anyways, imagine them trying to kick down a door that's been painted onto the wall. :D

nbk2000

September 24th, 2003, 02:38 AM

A person could nail a half inch sheet of plywood to a wall studs, cover it with wood veneer (to make it look like a door and not a sheet of plywood nailed to a wall), attach a doorknob, and surround it with a wood trim. Voila, decoy door! :D This is ony feasible on doors that swing towards the person, otherwise you'll have to build a recessed frame for the fake door and install it into the wall. Either way, it'd be amusing to see the looks on the kevlar roaches faces when they see a hallway with a dozen "doors', only one of which is real. :p The hinges is a good idea, but I've had two doors fall off their hinges in my life, meaning two times I'd have been killed if it was booby-trapped. :(

Monkeychunks

September 25th, 2003, 11:38 AM

For barbbed caltrops, 3-hooked fishing hooks can be heated, bent into shape, and then heat treated again. Chicken wire, matris springs, or those things they put under cement when building a new road or foundation are good ideas, but not of them are made of high carbon steel, so they can't be heat treated. You can also make the kinds they sell over the internet by cutting a piece of sheet metal into a rectangle and then cutting the ends in half about 1/3 of the way and twisting them outward at a angle. If nails had large enough heads, you could cut/grind the heads into a triangle shaped blade. That would stick every time.

Ropik

April 7th, 2004, 02:03 PM

Very nasty surprise for "rushers" can be made by stretch a thin steel stranded wire in half ankle/knee height and follow it with

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

carpet/thin rubber sheet/thin plywood board with nails pushed to it. The "Duct nail nasty tape" would work perfectly. When rusher runs for you, he is stopped by the wire and falls... what is forward? In the best he will need serious finger/palm treatment.

nbk2000

April 15th, 2004, 01:20 PM

There's a new thing called "Tire Balls", which are inflated balls that are inserted into a tire, and which make it impervious to flattening, as only the ball that is punctured will deflate, while the others maintain the tires integrity. Google search using "tire balls" for more info.

xperk

April 19th, 2004, 05:57 PM

now why do I get the idea that the company hired a feminist ad agency to name their product? ouch... Well maybe an explosive low-cost caltrop could do the trick: instead of a nail inserted in the plaster place a short tube with a .22 in it. In one end the tube is cut at an angle hence sharp enough to penetrate the tire. For reasurrance of ignition a pebble or a piece of welding rod may be glued onto a part of the rim of the cartridge - if the tube has some sort of edge or cut preventing it from falling out of the tire the repeated rotary impacts would at some point set of the charge and possibly deflate several tire balls due to the ricochette effect.. Secondly on discharge the casing would dislodge itself from the tube allowing for free airflow..

nbk2000

April 20th, 2004, 05:51 PM

I was at an ag. supply store recently and saw thresher blades. Ooooooooh! :D Plates of steel shaped like triangles, with razor sharp serrated edges, and big as the palm of my hand. :) And only $1/each. :D I'm thinking if they were welded to hinges, and attached to a segmented strip that could be rolled out across a road, that'd be more than adequate for deflating even truck tire. The blades would lie flat till a cable pull that ran through them lifted them up into cutting position, whereupon the end of the blade would fit into a slot cut into the strip that would support it in the vertical position. These could be easily welded into a permanent upright position and fixed to the road with a power-driver to form an impassable barrier to [MIL-SPEAK]shape your battlespace[/MIL-SPEAK] and aid your E&E from carnivorous pork. :p

Anders

April 20th, 2004, 09:27 PM

On the subject of creating a smokescreen, one sure way is using diesel-oil. The consept is nothing more than a variation of the trusted russian method of creating a smokescreen on their MBTs. Just mount a spare windscreen washer pump +reservoir on a vacant space in the engine compartmeet, connect it to the electrical system, then make a contact for it in the cab. Next, drill a hole in the exhaust pipe as close to the engine as possible. Connect the hose from the pump with a piece of copper tubing(to protect the original plastic tubing from the heat) and fix it on to the exhaust pipe. Then just add diesel-oil to the reservoir and when needing a big, dense, white/grey smoke screen , just hit the button for your alternative windscreen washer. (note: a)the exhaust system must have operational temp. to work and b) this is both toxic and must likely to violate most trafic laws in the world, but boy does it work !!!!

nbk2000

May 12th, 2004, 09:22 PM

For protecting yourself against nails, spikes, and glass shards, there's now a shoe insert available from www.kpindustries.com called the "Pro Safety Sole", that'll help protect you from these impediments. RTPB "Plan for Failure" says you must be prepared to defend against your own weapons.

Bigfoot

May 12th, 2004, 11:10 PM

To restrict movement: ATF. No, not the feds, ;) the red gunk you put in your automatic transmission to keep it working. Slippery to walk on. Have a car with a bad tranny seal, leaked about 3 quarts onto garage floor last winter. I've done cleanup with kaolin, but I won't walk on it when wet, 'cause it's still quite slippery when wet. Floor is concrete, drive is asphalt. Both are slippery. The asphalt is worse, though. Stayed slipperier longer, dry. As for a vehicular smokescreen, my favorite expedient is a dry-chemical fire extinguisher. I'm a total nut for the 5 lb. models, keep a few on hand and charged. When I pick up a "salvage" unit, I empty it on the street, where the community college kids drag race. Very nice "smoke screen." Lasts a minute or 2 in still air. Discharged from a moving car...do it once and be hooked. Can't be arrested for having a couple big extinguishers in your car, ready to go! Your mechanic won't think anything of it. And they'll double as fire control devices!

teshilo

May 14th, 2004, 08:46 AM

For urban actions possible combinations as smoke+oil+spikes may be used againsts both personell and cars, and as about booby-trapped caltrops.?Any who want cleaned road with caltrops, get the very big surprise :D

THAT Dude

August 21st, 2004, 04:52 PM

Have you ever seen those tent poles that have an elastic band running down the center ,some of them are designed to unfold and snap in place on their own(if you hold just one end,throw it in air, etc). If you made some thing simular but had spikes or blades sticking out it would hopefully act as a spike strip that you could throw out the window of a moving vehicle. ;)

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Contaning them maybe a problem from a concelment stand point ,as they are odd looking and dangerous it would be hard to have ready to use and not have to worry about sitting one, but you could mount one or more under your vehicle pretty esely as long as you take steps to make shore that it/they did not spring out and slash your tires when you deploy them. Some sort of delay mechanism should be used to keep that from happening,but I'm not shore how you would rig that :( :confused: . You might want to rig it to explode by remote for more kick to punch thrue steel belted tires or to damage the under side of the car(transmission,etc).

nbk2000

October 20th, 2006, 01:28 PM

Found the proximity fuze circuit for the PDM in US Patent 3939770. :) And a related one in US Patent 3754508.

billybobjoe

October 20th, 2006, 04:19 PM

I just had an idea, you can rent one of those abrasive chop saws for about 23 bucks a day. So rent it and buy a few hundred feet of 1/4 inch round by 1/16 wall mild steel tubing, about a hudred bucks. Then set the mitre to 45 deg and just keep cutting them off at 2". Put these into your plaster caltrops and they would do a nice job to feet, cars, or trucks.

teshilo

October 21st, 2006, 11:39 AM

Modern caltrops patents: http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=US5921703&F=0 http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=FR2780077&F=0

Meawoppl

October 21st, 2006, 02:38 PM

I was bored once and put a number of wood screws through the sides of a coke bottle. In the year that it occupied my desk it occured to me that if such a construction were run over by a car would likely cause at least one or more of the screws to puncture the tire, attaching the bottle to the wheel and making an awful noise as the car bumped over it each time. The leak would likely be slow, unless the bottle was forcibly pulled out b/c the screw threads would ream the hole they left. I imagine it would be rather effective if planted in front of a parked car. Not to mention the fact that it would just look like trash to the casual observer. [edit] Another good note about railways, you can feel a train for miles ahead on the rails . . . admittledy that may be harder if going 100 mph+. [edit #2] Do I get any credit for catching the "Wintermute" joke? It was a good one Nightstalker.

Hirudinea

October 22nd, 2006, 01:01 AM

Modern caltrops patents: http://v3.espacenet.com/jpeg?PN=US5921703 That picture reminds me of metal corner shelf brackets I've seen at Home Depot, with a Dremel you might be able to make some of the above.

the_twitchy1

October 22nd, 2006, 02:48 PM

One idea that I didn't see was tripointed fishhooks tied together in a net. A single trihook fishhook is not that useful as a caltrop as it will bend under shoes instead of impaling them. However, tying them together in a 4' x 4' net of fine wire (or even fishing line) will cause them to 'wrap around' a target leg, catching on clothing and skin. And a barbed hook is a HUGE pain to remove from a body part, I can tell you from experience. It would only work with targets that are moving relatively fast, as someone taking their time wouldn't have a 'wraparound' effect. It still would slow them down, though, as removing a barbed fishhook from a shoe is hard, too.

Jacks Complete

October 22nd, 2006, 08:07 PM

See http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/improvised-weapons/5776-stop-sticks.html for discussion of a related item, the "Stop stick".

Alexires

October 22nd, 2006, 10:23 PM

I was just thinking. How about using small springs? You should be able to buy a heap of inch long springs and spread them over the floor. Also, I'm assuming due to its name (Hi speed chase) excessive speed will be involved. On a trip up north a month or so back, we were following a 4 wheel drive when the tires must have picked up a stone and thrown it with such force at the bottom of the car that it bounced back down, hit the road and then bounced high enough to smash into the middle of our windscreen. Have a light metal plate that covers the bottom of your car (similar to a bash plate, but bigger and thinner). When the piggies are in chase, have some way of dumping a few hundred (or thousand) bb's, marbles or ceramic balls on the road.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Hopefully they would bounce off the bottom of the car and go high enough to do some damage to windscreen or somethings else. Even if they don't, if your in an urban area a thousand bb's doing 80 km/h (50 miles an hour) are going to break a whole lot of shit.

Hirudinea

October 22nd, 2006, 11:57 PM

On a trip up north a month or so back, we were following a 4 wheel drive when the tires must have picked up a stone and thrown it with such force at the bottom of the car that it bounced back down, hit the road and then bounced high enough to smash into the middle of or windscreen.

in an urban area a thousand bb's doing 80 km/h (50 miles an hour) are going to break a whole lot of shit. Mabye you could modify a hubcap on the rear wheel to throw BBs at someone chasing you by its rotational speed? vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Taplight landmines Log in

View Full Version : Taplight landmines A-BOMB

November 29th, 2001, 09:53 AM

You all have seen these lights that you push the top and they light (I had a url for the site that sells them) so it is a allmost premade landmine just take it apart and pull out the light bulb and grind of the tip and fill with AP or HDMT and fill the rest of the body with ANFO or ANHM snap back together put in batterys and bury. So thats my idea for today. -----------------live by the bomb die by the bomb -----------------And come to my not so done SITE HERE (http://paintball-and-stuff.freesevers.com)

Energy84

November 29th, 2001, 03:34 PM

Whoa, man, that's a wicked idea! Simple as hell too! I'm gonna have to remember that one... So, who's gonna test it out? hehehe -----------------why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?

Anthony

November 29th, 2001, 04:04 PM

As long as they use an actual bulb and not an LED. You could use them to replace exisiting buttons on equipment. Or stick one to a wall in a public place, maybe with a sticker above it saying "do not press".

CyclonitePyro

November 29th, 2001, 07:45 PM

Grinding the bulb seems too time and effort consuming without cracking the thing, just stick an ignitor in place of the bulb, and if the voltage isn't high enough add a nine volt to whatever battery type they use. -----------------"Friends don't let friends play with Nitrogen Triiodide"

Madog555

November 29th, 2001, 07:54 PM

Badass idea... i like it!

-----------------"True freedome is not without anarchy"

A-BOMB

November 29th, 2001, 08:01 PM

Ya isn't it. It just came to me while looking for a replacement bulb for the one in my gunsafe. -----------------live by the bomb die by the bomb -----------------And come to my not so done SITE HERE (http://paintball-and-stuff.freesevers.com)

nbk2000

November 29th, 2001, 08:39 PM

Just fill it up with AP. Why bother with ANFO and detonators when it can be so simple? How much do they cost in bulk anyways? $1 or less each? A little silicon sealant around the edges and it should be fairly waterproof. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Mr Cool

November 30th, 2001, 05:52 AM

If the ones you're thinking about are the same as the ones I'm thinking about you'll have to be bloody careful. They can be very sensitive... -----------------"Nothing makes a man fear much, more than to know little." - Francis Bacon.

A-BOMB

November 30th, 2001, 08:50 AM

Ya AP would work and you get them for about .50 cents each if you buy a shipping crate of 1000 and they sell them in stores for 6 for $19 USD! -----------------live by the bomb die by the bomb -----------------And come to my not so done SITE HERE (http://paintball-and-stuff.freesevers.com)

Agent Blak

December 6th, 2001, 02:38 PM

make it claymore style. 3 layers of 3/8 steel balls, on the doampaint the inside of the doam wih white paint so it hides what inside. Use AP putty in the bulb and NC/PeTN with some acetone to make it cast well. Great idea.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak">here</a> to download my files.

DaRkDwArF

December 20th, 2001, 06:19 AM

I found them for $3 AU (about $1.60 US) each today, I think I'll invest in 5 or so to do some testing, even a .12ga pointing stright up so it takes the foot off a target would be an idea -----------------Do or Do Not, there is no Try

NoltaiR

December 20th, 2001, 12:22 PM

Nice idea, but would it work well in the field? How long do you think these things would last (in place of a military landmine) setting in the ground before the dirt would corrode the casing? Possibly wrapping them in aluminum foil may solve this (or a hell of a lot of silicon sealant) for a while.. as long as the explosive you are using lasts a while... The great side to this is with a little work, they can be made to avoid metal detectors that the enemy would use normally to find the military grade mines (you may need to leave out the aluminum foil idea..) so long as you can make it work without a battery... this can be solved possibly by wireless transmission of energy (anyone heard of Nikola Tesla?) -----------------A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither. -Thomas Jefferson

A-BOMB

December 20th, 2001, 01:50 PM

Thats easy just go out it to hillbilly land and look in all the old stores till you find a store that has those old paper cased batteries and cut all but a little bit of the metal off the end (just anothe to get eletrical contact) and use very thin wires or carbon rods, to the igniter. -----------------live by the bomb die by the bomb -----------------And come to my not so done SITE HERE (http://paintball-and-stuff.freesevers.com)

PYRO500

December 20th, 2001, 01:58 PM

If you are looking to make this thing metal detector proof you are looking in the wrong directon, military mines don't use battery's not only for that reason but they have a shelf life, and they aren't as reliable as the impact and chemichal initiators they use, I don't think corrosion will be a problem with the thing unless it gets wet and the internals get destroyed witch a little plastic wrap could fix. the things are literally just plastic. if you are looking for a tesla solution to not need battery's you will never get that to work if Tesla couldn't (well, short of radiowaves) you cant. -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]

DaRkDwArF

December 21st, 2001, 07:33 AM

simple solution: make them the night before you use them, if it's a planned attack (all I'd use these things for) then you can plant them at all exits and on walls where doorknobs will hit, etc... -----------------Do or Do Not, there is no Try

Agent Blak

December 22nd, 2001, 01:37 AM

When the jack booted thugs come gunning for you you have to remember the tactics: BlitzKreige(Lighting War)-They use speed to over whelm you. This means that they will not be tippy-toeing around paying close attention to opening doors gently. One person here said that they are all just adreniline junkies. use this to your advantages; High stressif they utilize speed as a main weapon and they can't use if the bomb squad has to come in for every door = more time for you to give them the slip. Do or do not; there is no try. --Master Yoda of the grand jedi legancey nice choice DwArF. -----------------A wise man once said: "If You Dance With The Devil, The Devil Don't Change The devil will Change you" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak">here</a> to download my files.

vehemt

December 23rd, 2001, 02:53 AM

To decrease sensitivity you could replace the spring inside. To protect them, just seal all cracks with sealant (rubber cement, silicon sealant, whatever). The sealant between the dome switch and main body would also decrease sensitivity. As they are, they could easily explode from the weight of soil you use to hide them. Dont forget to be a responsible miner and mark the locations of the mines on a map for future removal.

TheShadow

December 28th, 2001, 11:45 AM

actually assuming this is a real light bulb you could inject a gas into it and when the light goes onit lights the gas, same premice but eisier, actually you can do that with real light bulbs, but you have to seal the hole you make cus it must be a vacuum (Enough with your KeWl nonsense, putting gasoline in a tiny taplight bulb will likely do nothing only in the Anarchist's KeWl Book do lightbulb "BoMbZ" explode in real life a lightbulb filled with "gasoline" will probably not have enough air to even burn. and with a vacuume it is more likely to do nothing, not a good first post)

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

[This message has been edited by PYRO500 (edited December 28, 2001).]

EP

March 16th, 2002, 07:03 PM

Sorry to bump an old topic, but for waterproofing you could skip all the silicone sealant stuff and just use a good sized ziplock bag or two. I've got a few lights, and once my supplies are replenished this summer I plan on testing this idea. Maybe I can find a RC car to run over it...

nbk2000

March 17th, 2002, 12:29 AM

I'd toss in a couple of dissicant capsules to prevent an moisture condensation inside of the bag from possibly shorting out the taplight.

frostfire

September 2nd, 2002, 04:19 PM

I believe most of us had touched the idea in the early days. I recalled trying the similar concept with R/C power panel, a simple glow plug and/or light bulb device and just about a tip of a spatula AP. It worked wonder with slightest finger press or foot press. I never go any further, but the simplicity had kept me wondering if an improvised "bouncing betty" can me made with such method.

A-BOMB

September 2nd, 2002, 10:02 PM

Well lets see, I just got some more taplights and a digital camera so fun time here again. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> 12ga Dart Gun

View Full Version : 12ga Dart Gun ST

Log in

June 26th, 2001, 03:50 AM

http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/dartgun.gif I did this to post within the "high velocity steel slug" or whatever thread before it was closed. The dart is made out of a 12ga wad with a nail pushed through it and epoxied in. This is used to reduce the recoil so that it can be used in a handgun but still provide good penetration. The guns pretty much the same as a design i posted before. -----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html)

ANTI-SYSTEM

June 26th, 2001, 01:51 PM

this can be made or bought? looks like a modified flare gun.

ST

June 26th, 2001, 04:46 PM

Made, its just two bits of pipe and endcaps welded together + firing pin/plunger/trigger. To fire, unscrew the barrel, insert cartridge, screw barrel back on, pull plunger back, pull trigger. -----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html)

Mexican Pizza

June 26th, 2001, 06:45 PM

You wouldn't happen to have any more detailed directions to make that would you?

BaDSeeD

June 26th, 2001, 07:13 PM

You don't need any more directions to make it, its right there in front of you. ST why would you make that into a dart pistol? First off.. Turning a wad upside down is going to make it sail all over the place, and second... its only going to penetrate the length of the nail. Therefore, nonlethal (unless you use a gutter spike...nah). Why not just leave the the shotshell alone and use it that way? The only use i could see for a dart, would be a Cap-chur type dart, filled with a tranquilizer.

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

Anthony

June 26th, 2001, 09:04 PM

The nail could be armour piercing, but a drill bit would be better. I like the design of the pistol though, do you reckon it be ok with a regular shot load? I suppose it could be simplified by not having the trigger and just pulling back and releasing the plunger to fire, but the trigger would obviously better for a little more work.

PYRO500

June 26th, 2001, 11:12 PM

I say it'd be better to get a brass chambered flare gun, saw off the end that is narrower than the shell andget a flanged pipe that fits on the barrel, then slip a piece of pipe bigger than the new barrel over the first half of the barrel and stuff the space with fiberglass insulation so it dosent get hot and you can hold it, if I have time I will draw a pic. that would be less likely to take off your hand, so long as you securely solder it together. BTW, do shotgun blanks have a wad? i've never disasemmbled one before.

ST

June 27th, 2001, 05:42 AM

Mexican Pizza, There is no point giving more detailed plans for a gun that has to be improvised out of what you can get, use the picture as a basic idea as you can bet that if you tried to make it, it wouldnt end up looking anything like the picture.

Badseed, The point was to lower recoil, obviously it isnt a long range weapon but i think it would fly strait enough for what it is meant, i was assuming the nail would come away from the plastic when it hit. You could also probably just use the primer as propellant, just to muck around with, and reusable. You say to use full load shotshells ... ive never shot a handgun but shurely it would have a lot of kick, especially in a dodgied up handgun. Could you use a wrist support, such as that found on some slingshots? -----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html) [This message has been edited by ST (edited June 27, 2001).]

imported_Sgt_Starr

June 27th, 2001, 11:58 AM

Depending on the size of the load and the position of the arm brace Im sure it would be possible to brake your arm dislocate elbow, big bruises any number of things I meen if you dont hold the gun right you can break your shoulder with a good shot gun and 00 buck

Anthony

June 27th, 2001, 05:44 PM

A 2" nail weighs practically nothing so recoil shouldn't be a problem. If you were to fire a hot load though, what I'd do is instead of the cocking plunger, have a bolt in side of the reciever. That would leave a nice flat surface at the rear of the gun (the end cap). Then I'd hold the pistol by the grip at arms length in my right hand, then lock my left

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

arm out straight and put the heel of my hand firmly up against the end cap. That way, when you fired the gun, it would push straight back along your left arm (which is locked so doesn't bend) rather than bending back your wrist on your right hand. I might give on of these 12ga pistols a go, .410 pistols were apparently popular self defense weapons years ago.

PYRO500

June 27th, 2001, 10:05 PM

what if you fired a rubber bouncy ball from it? would it sting like hell? or if it hit something solid would it bounce to great hieghts?

BaDSeeD

June 27th, 2001, 10:09 PM

When I was younger some friends and I got our hands on a double barreled twelve gauge (side by side). It was a cheap sears and roebuck (before it was just known as sears). Well we fired all kinds of shit outa this gun. We had no problem getting shotgun shells for it, as most of our fathers hunted. But we took shells apart and put nails in them, rock salt, even lengths of piano wire with split shot on the end. Anyhow, after all this abuse, our barrel was taking a beating. One of the barrels had started to swell near the choke, and the other split completely. Nearly looking like a peeled banana. Well seing as it wasnt really safe anymore, and looked like hell, out came the hack saw. We cut the barrels down to I'd have to guess here... never actually measured it, but they had to be around 6 - 8 inches. They were cut down to just a bit in front of the hand guard. And while we were at it, we also cut the stock into a crude pistol grip. We continued to shoot this thing for years, but only with factory ammo, none of the funky shit that had destroyed it in the first place. We fired slugs, buckshot, and birdshot, and many of them were even magnum loads. No broken wrists, no dislocated fingers or elbows, just ringing ears. The point is, that a short barrel is going to give you less recoil than a longer gun, simply because the powder dosn't all burn before the projectile exits the barrel. Shotguns use slow burning powder if you didn't know. Therefore less velocity, and less recoil. Regardless of whatever the projectile ways, it will always be lower with a smaller barrel. I can even remember firing a load of bird shot out of that gun at a snow man, at close range. I remember the big black mark that it left from the unburned powder. In conclusion, I'd say, that as long as your barrel and breech are strong enough to withstand the pressure, you shouldnt have any problems.

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

Anthony

June 27th, 2001, 10:55 PM

Yeah but if I made one I'd be using black powder as the propellant. Obvious for me to do would just start with a small amount of shot and gradually add more and observing the forces on my wrist. Interesting story BaDSeeDhttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

SawedOff8gaugeman

June 29th, 2001, 03:50 PM

Shooting a sawed-off is an art http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif As it could be shooting some kind of cannon-class pistol(I've never tried, but could mention .45-70s and 50BMGs http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif). Usually handcannons have longer barrel than your 6-8 inches. What I didn't know was that so short-barreled handcannon could be easily fired by kids (did I figure it out right ?? ) http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif Were the ammo maybe blackpowder ones, I've thought many shotshells have fast-burning powder? [This message has been edited by SawedOff8gaugeman (edited June 29, 2001).]

AR-15 Man

June 30th, 2001, 03:02 PM

If you have the knob straight back you arm not your wrist takes up a lot of the recoil. Your arm will slowly take up the recoil. That is the art of sawed of shotguns. As for Handcannons you just have to take it like a bitch and hope your first shot hits. I am talking like the 45-70 and Mountain Eagle pistol's in 30-06.

The_Coyote

August 2nd, 2001, 12:07 AM

I just am planning to make this gun. I am making it with galvanized steel tubing.. I was just wondering if anyone has made one of these (or something similer... ex:a slam bang)and if they can tell me approximatly how many times i could fire it before it "shoots out" the barrel. And instead of welding might I be able to use zinc solder?

BaDSeeD

August 2nd, 2001, 02:58 AM

I wouldn't solder, or braze anything on a gun. Its not safe. I would also prefer finding an alternative to welding (simply because i'm not that good at it). My advice for anything gun related... buy yourself a set of taps and dies. Threads are a hell of a lot stronger than welds in my oppinion. And you can always dismantle a treaded weapon. Not a welded one. About the shotgun I had mentioned previously. An interesting bit about how we nearly got busted. Nearby where i lived growing up was a very large public park (Deleware Park), anyhow, we used to sneak out there very early in the morning, or late at night and do some shooting. Most of the time we'd just pop off a few shots, and either no one knew what the noise was, or simply didn't care. Well our normal targets were beer cans, barbage cans, trees, the odd sea gull that flew by, etc. Well eventually in our travels we found a spot along the water that used to house a lot of rats. Not your garden variety squeakers, i'm talking BIG fuckin 20+ pound rats! We used to make it a weekly trip to go there and shoot as many of the bastards as we could. It got to the point that we would go through a whole box of birdshot (25 shells) and still have more "targets" than ammo. Anyhow we scrounged as much ammo as we could, and made almost a whole night of shooting. I think we had upwards of 200 shells that night. Anyhow, our normal 25 or so shells would usually go unnoticed by anyone (or so we thought). But that night, we had to make a run for it when two police cruisers showed up. They were covering the park pretty good, and sooner or later were going to find us if we didn't find a really good place to hide. We thought (geniuses that we were) to go up the huge sewage pipe at the one end of the park. I'm not even going to describe the smells. Well it never dawned on us that we were going to find MORE and BIGGER rats there. We were moving through the pipe kinda haunched over with only my friends pen light to see by, when a rat that was the size of a fucking beagle came down the tube towards us. Well my friend didn't think, or care about the consequences, and shot the thing at about 5 feet away. After a few minutes we could just about hear each other if we screamed in each others faces. And we ran the rest of the length of the pipe to the other side. By this time the cops, fire department, water authority, sewer authority, and gas company had several vehicles pulling up manhole covers, and blocking off the street because of a "methane gas explosion". Well with all the people around, that was the last time we saw the gun. One of the guys stuck the barrel in the mud, and then stood on it to make sure it was well burried. We didn't want to take a chance in getting caught with it. And that was the end of our fun. Ya know its a damned shame that I didnt know how to make anything stronger than a BP bomb back then. Could have made for some very interesting ways of exterminating ratshttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif Heh... that was a long and useless post. Hope it was entertaining at least.

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

Sako

August 3rd, 2001, 02:16 PM

Welding is supposed to be just as strong, if not stronger than the base metal. if you use a tap and die set, use fine threads instead of coarse, because fine thread is stronger, at lest that's what I heard

Anthony

August 3rd, 2001, 03:20 PM

I would have thought fine threads would have stripped easier? Welds are very strong, but under flexing loads they can crack and break.

Sako

August 3rd, 2001, 04:23 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I scanned this out of Machine Tool Operation EM-965....

REASONS FOR FINER PITCHES (NATIONAL FINE) Threads in automobile work are cut in hard tough materials and do not require to be so coarse as threads cut in cast iron. A screw or bolt a given size and of finer pitch has greater mirror diameter and consequently greater strength than a coarse-pitch screw of same size. A fine-pitch screw or nut may be set up tighter. And does not shake loose so readily as One Of Coarse Pitch

Ericm115

August 19th, 2001, 12:51 AM

I guess yall didnt realize what his gun is... It a paintball gun. Pull back the hammer and release it with the trigger... with a little modification, and cheap stingray could be made to fire shells

Energy84

August 19th, 2001, 03:11 AM

If anybody uses bolts, be sure to get high quality "Grade 8" bolts. They have a sort of golden color to them instead of the chrome color that regular bolts have. The "Grade 8" ones are waay stronger. I can't remember the figures off hand, but I've seen comparison sheets between regular and grade 8 bolts. I work at a hardware/agriculture store so I might be able to find those sheets and bring 'em home to scan if anybody's interested. -----------------why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?

Fingerless

September 3rd, 2001, 08:01 PM

A good weld should be stronger, and as flexible, as the base metal. Threads will NOT be as strong as a weld. Also, to the guy that said a shotgun will break your shoulder if you dont shoot it right-well, either you dont know much about guns, or your a 60 pound weakling. Shotguns kick is not that bad, even a 10 gauge, especially compared to other guns-toughen up! I have yet to see someone with a broken shoulder from a 12 gauge, even shooting heavy 2 ounce magnum turkey loads. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Gun Cane Log in

View Full Version : Gun Cane Zyklon_B

June 27th, 2002, 09:30 PM

Anyone know of how to m a k e a G u n C a n e ? A s i m p l e , e a s y t o m a k e c a n e t h a t h a s a b u i l t i n g u n ?

Tyler_Durden

June 27th, 2002, 10:20 PM

A built in gun? If you mean a one shot gun, then that would be pretty ea sy... Just embed a little pipe in the bottom , after ho llowing it out via drilling. T h e f a n c y a l u m inum canes wo uld probably be best for this. After you have the "barrel", you just have to rig up a firing m ech a n i s m . ...hmm ... probably som ething initiated from the other end of the cane (the top?) that fires out of the bottom / b a s e . Ideally, it wont be som ething that is held back all the tim e and is "released" when you want to fire, thus reducing risk of it goin g off at a... bad tim e. I a m trying to think o f a way to only use a short length of pipe, like under a foot, but it may be ea sier to have the pipe the entire length of the cane, with the firing mechanism on top. If you can't think of any way to make the firing m echanism in th is scenario, you don't nee d to be playing with this toy.

ST

June 28th, 2002, 12:32 PM

look at the first picture in m y sig. T h i s d e s i g n s h o u l d b e e a s y t o imbed into a cane/umbrella etc. just do away with the handle/trigger then just tie a string to the plun ger and run the string up to the handle where it could be pulled back and released wh en you want to fire. This design was actually m odelled off one of "Lowrys" guns in reference to this thread, i never saw it actually firing, nor the inner m oving parts but his had this same action.

jelly

June 28th, 2002, 02:22 PM

@Zykon-B... try to get a copy of david truby's b o o k " z i p s , p i p e s a n d p e n s - a r s e n a l o f i m p rovised weapons" and you'll fin d p h o t o s a n d e x p l o d e d d r a w i n g s o f a c a n e g u n ( a s a s i l e n c e d . 2 2 L R c a l . d e f e n s e w e a p o n : ) ) . but the nicest weapon in this book is ZAPPER - a z i p p o g u n : D

Harry

July 2nd, 2002, 11:50 AM

I have the book, Zips, Pipes, and Pens. Testament to human will. As for the canegun, ZAPPER, and othe Sardaukar Press shooters, I h ave the com plete set of p lans. Just gotta get them scanned. Trouble is, they're printe d on weird-sized paper that doesn't fit my scanne r. W hen I find a way to get them scanned, I'll upload to FTP (when I get acce ss). Harry

xoo1246

July 2nd, 2002, 12:09 PM

Great, I'm interested in that b o o k t o o . I h a v e m a d e m yself som e sim ple electrically fired pipe guns at several o ccasions, they are only propelled by m a t c h h e a d composition and sealed in the end with a centim eter hot glue. They can be quite powerfull actually. I have m a d e t h e m out o f everything from steel to plastic(plastic ones tend to explode, I always use cover so it's not a problem ). Electrical ign ition could be a solution since you can place the trigger anywhere if you have no need for reloading.

johnn 99

July 18th, 20 02, 01:1 1 AM

H A R R Y , D o y o u h a p p e n t o h a v e t h e s a rdaukar plans to convert an AR-7 to full auto? I ahve been looking for them for ages. plea se let me know. thanks!

Fl4P P4W0k

July 18th, 20 02, 05:2 6 AM

Ive uploaded som e o f my sketches of a Zip gun idea. I had it built, in a rather hacked up form - and it worked fine. Usin g .22 blanks and .22 air rifle pellets (6m m airsoft BBs in the prototype :p ) its got enuff power to hurt like hell. In the face. Ouch. http://www.blitzmillennium .net/rob/Guns/Other There are a few sketches there.... a little confusing (rea d : m a k e n o f u c k i n g s e n s e t o a n y o n e b u t m e) but theyre there... Also, check out http://www.blitzm illennium.net/rob/ for a few pics and stuff... l8r, rob

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter lac

July 18th, 20 02, 02:2 0 PM

a b o u t a w e e k a g o i w a s o n v a c a t i o n t o c o p e n h a g e n d e n m ark. and becouse the are a lot of hunters in m y fam ily (me,my d a d , h i s d a d , a n d m y two onkels) So we went to "jag og skovbrugs m u s e u m et"(hunting and forrest use m useum) there where s o m e very cool cane guns. there was even a 12 guage shotguns cane. the reason they wh e r e m a d e w a s b e c o u s e h u n t i n g u s e d to belong to the king. And if you breaked this law you would loose your head. :)

Harry

July 18th, 20 02, 02:3 5 PM

John 99, that's an affirmative. As I m entioned before, I don't yet have FTP access, nor ha v e I b e e n a b l e t o g e t a g o o d s c a n o f the plans--they're done full scale, so I want it done righ t. Harry

Eliteforum

July 18th, 20 02, 03:3 8 PM

Speaking of weapons, does anyone want me to post a breakdown of a HK SL8-1 trigger group breakdown? lac did you take any pictures on this visit? I would love to see some of those weapons.

lac

July 18th, 20 02, 04:2 8 PM

no i did not take pictures

Resident Evil

July 18th, 20 02, 05:3 1 PM

Eliteforum, im intrested in that takedown, I love HK wea p o n s .

angelo

July 21st, 2002, 09:31 AM

Has anyone thought of using electronic ignition for the gun cane? Unless of course your looking for m ore than a one shot cane electronic ignition would be alot easier for those of us that can't m ake the little pieces for a sp ring loaded pin hitting the prim er. And alot safer too. As since it is a cane it will suffer from knocks and will most probably get hit around alot. If it is set off by a spring it could easily dislodge and go off accidently when you least expect it to. It would probably take out your foot.

auzquad

July 21st, 2002, 11:07 AM

learn to spell <sm all>[ July 22, 2002, 07:17 AM: Me ssage edited by: Machiavelli ]

Anthony

July 21st, 2002, 08:45 PM

Dude, "electronic ignition" im plies an solely electrical solution. W hat you describe is a electro-m echanical system and wouldn 't b e m u c h l e s s c o m plex than a purely m echanical one. Basically, ele ctronic ignitor in place of the prim er, 9v battery and m omentary switch, nice, sim ple and reliable. Although I'd put a covered arm ing switch in too for safe ty. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Rocket Thrust Log in

View Full Version : Rocket Thrust Hercules

June 28th, 2002, 05:39 PM

Did anyone dream about how much the maximum ammount of explosives (In grams) a rocket, powered by a class C Estes engine can carry without disturbing flightbalance recently? I will not take the risk of the thing going off pre-takeoff, since the Al casing I am planning to use, produces quite a load of shrapnel upon detonation. And another thing, is there a law :confused: against making remote-controlled rockets? (the ones you can actually maneuver during flight)This looks like a hell of a project to me...

Mick

June 28th, 2002, 06:37 PM

the C class motors will produce anywhere from 5-10N(newton seconds) of thrust. you do the maths. if you looking for something thats going to lift heaps of HE - make your own motors. best site to look is www.nakka-rocketry.com as for making a remote controled rocket. it pointless trying make one if you going to be using estes motors, they don't last very long, and there expensive as all hell. on another note, you've made 2 new topics, both have been pretty simple questions that could have been answered quite quickly had you bothered to search the forum, and search the net. and seriously - change your fucking signature you tool. where did you find out about the The forum? totse.com or wierdpier.com <small>[ June 28, 2002, 05:39 PM: Message edited by: Mick ]

kingspaz

June 28th, 2002, 08:41 PM

hercules, why not do the experiment youself and post the results? you don;t need to use explosives to fill the rockets to find the maximum mass launchable. use sand and afterwards you can post the results. the site Mick has refered to is actually http://www.nakka-rocketry.net/ it will have everything you are looking for apart from specific answer such as how much explosive can be carried by a rocket of unspecified dimensions launched in an unspecified manner. change that signature NOW or be destroyed :mad: anarchy is an imposibility. society may be fucked and anarchy may seem like a solution but its not and i'm not going to get into it here. as far as i am aware this topic is over if any other mods disagree then reopen it. also no more new topics since your a newbie. read the rules and obey them. another violation such as this will result in HED.

MrSamosa

June 28th, 2002, 10:21 PM

I suppose this thread could still be salvaged... When you design a rocket, weight and amount of thrust are not the only two factors. You may have enough thrust, but the rocket could still be unstable. Generally, to ensure rocket stability, the center of gravity must be above the center of pressure. When I say "above", I mean closer to the nosecone, since that is the direction the rocket will be firing, right? I'm sure there are other factors to consider, but these are the big ones that Amateurs/Model Rocket Enthusiasts consider. Now, some definitions: Center of Gravity- This is the point where the rocket's weight is balanced. If this is not clear, try picking up a pencil and balancing it on one finger. The point at which it balances without tipping is the center of gravity. Center of Pressure- As a model rocket flies through the air, aerodynamic forces act on all parts of the rocket. In the same way that the weight of all the rocket components acts through the center of gravity (cg), the aerodynamic forces act through a single point called the center of pressure (cp). (definition taken from http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/rktcp.html ). It is possible to move the Center of Pressure up and down the rocket to ensure stability. This is achieved by increasing the area of the tailfins...i.e.: making the tailfins bigger. All very basic information, but necessary if you want your rockets to have any hope of flying. EDIT- In the United States, any guidance system on a rocket is illegal. Any rockets that fly over 1,000 feet require permission from the FAA to launch. Rockets that carry payloads that contain explosives, harmful chemicals, live animals (with the exception of insects), are also illegal. If you buy a C-class Estes engine, they come with a little pamphlet that talks about rocketry. It covers anything that is illegal. <small>[ June 28, 2002, 09:24 PM: Message edited by: MrSamosa ]

pyromaniac_guy

June 28th, 2002, 11:35 PM

why do you say guided model rockets are illegal? I looked in 14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 101 and a few other places and found no such refrence. Granted a 'model' (ie unregulated for the purposes of this post) rocket is going to have a very short burn time engine, making it rather impracticle to guide, but thats obviously not a legal issue...

MrSamosa

June 29th, 2002, 12:10 AM

I had heard somewhere that guidance systems in rockets were illegal. But that was just word-of-mouth. I will trust you, pyromaniac- they aren't illegal.

kingspaz

June 29th, 2002, 01:04 PM

shit, forgot to close the topic last night....good info MySamosa. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Improvised Munitions Log in

View Full Version : Improvised Munitions Eliteforum
July 4th, 2002, 03:48 PM

src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/002.JPG" src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/003.JPG" src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/004.JPG" src="http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/005.JPG"

alt=" alt=" alt=" alt="

-

" " " "

/> /> /> />

Now wouldn't this have it's uses in the world of improvised weapons? As the "head, or tip" of the "bullet" can be projectile, this mean's you can attach any number of screw in projectile. Or you can modify the screw already in it. Either by cutting an upside down V into it to make a sharp point in the screw, even little arrow's could be screwed/welded into it. If one would use these in a real gun, they would need to be cut down in size to fit into the mag of the gun. But these would have great use in improvised rifle's/handguns. You don't have to worry about wonky flight of the projectile, as they can be perfectly centered, if it's too much weight on the backend, simply unscrew the screw part a little until it's centered, too heavy on the tip? simple screw in a little more till it's centered. The possibility's are endless! More to come. Including pictures of a test fire with the modified munitions.

DBSP

July 4th, 2002, 08:01 PM

Would you mind telling me what tha fuck this is.

Eliteforum

July 4th, 2002, 08:04 PM

Erm.. a topic on improvised munitions?

DBSP

July 4th, 2002, 08:05 PM

Look even I understand that, but how is it suposed to work? <small>[ July 04, 2002, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: DBSP ]

MrSamosa

July 4th, 2002, 08:13 PM

I think these people mean, what are these pictures of? You can show us pictures, but if you don't explain them we're just as lost as if you didn't have pictures at all.

Eliteforum

July 4th, 2002, 08:14 PM

Ok, well basically you can use it however you want, it's just a projectile. I assume you could pack it into a pipe with a black powder charge to propel it in a somewhat basic "zip gun". I just thought it make spark some interest, as it's 9mm, and can be modified in a number of different ways, and also has the option of being able to change the "tip" or "lead projectile". Perhaps your an assassin, and need to change a round of high explosive, to a silent poison. It's quick, easy, silent, and just screws in. How you would do this I leave to you, I'm not a gun smith. A quick edit, I put it into a PDF as this explains it better, as I can't do an ALT tag (image description in HTML form) here's the link: http://www.boomspeed.com/eliteforum/Improvised_Munitions.pdf.jpg You need to delete the *.jpg extension for the PDF to open. (host only allows image format) <small>[ July 04, 2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: Eliteforum ]

DBSP

July 4th, 2002, 08:15 PM

I'm not in the mood for this kind of shit. What excactly do you mean to accomplish by adding a heavy metal cylinder at the back of the case?

Eliteforum

July 4th, 2002, 08:30 PM

Maybe this should explain what I mean, as it's more simplistic. And DBSP, just because it's that time of a month for you doesn't mean you have to get pissy. Where the projectile is, you simple put your modified screw in projectile.

DBSP

July 4th, 2002, 08:42 PM

Ok now I get it. The "projectile" will be to heavy when using this design. And at that there will be absolutely nothing that can prevent the gases from escaping at the sides of the projectile. And why shooting the case along with the bullet, it would be much better to use the bullet as it is and use a pipe that is just a bit over 9mm, that way you would have a much better seal between the bullet and the pipe. And the velocity of the projectile would be far to low using "safe" ammounts of propellant simply becase it is to heavy. Sorry if I'm very pessemistic about this but I really don't see any use for it. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Small straight razor? Log in

View Full Version : Small straight razor? mark

July 6th, 2002, 02:12 AM

Ive been looking for a smallish straight razor, about 2 1/2" 3" blade. Does anyone know any American websights that sell them? Are they a good knife to carry, or should I stick with my S&W tanto neck knife for protection? Thanks

MrSamosa

July 6th, 2002, 02:16 AM

I like to use eBay...lots of good stuff for cheap...usually. Just make sure to buy new/packaged/unopened stuff. There's a guy on eBay, can't remember his login name, he's selling your straight razors, KA-BAR knives, Rapiers, Shamshir Scimitars, Battle Axes, War Hammers, Grapplens, Ninja Equipment, etc.

Machiavelli

July 6th, 2002, 08:09 AM

I think you'd better stick to your tanto. Razors can make a real mess out of someones face but they are rarely lethal. So if you pull out your razor you'll either scare them away (which most other knives would have done, too) or you'll bloody them up a bit and make them more willing to wipe you out. With a tanto or a dagger you can stab vital areas and then it's game over. And at least my Applegate-Fairbairn folder from Gerber is sharp enough for shaving :)

Eliteforum

July 6th, 2002, 09:11 AM

Not really a razor, but something I've made time and time again for friends whom live in area's where you need a knife. It's a simple design. Two stanly knife blades with a penny in between the two blades, then just bolted/screwed to a wooden "handle". The point of having the penny in between the two blades is, in the hospital the doc's can't stitch the gash closed, they have to use some other method. [I never really paid much attention to that aspect] Here's a picture:

mongo blongo

July 6th, 2002, 01:45 PM

Yes, that is used by a lot of people in my area but they put a match stick in between the blades and put them in between their fingers. It's true that the doctor can't stitch the gash closed. Very nasty! <small>[ July 06, 2002, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: mongo blongo ]

Arkangel

July 7th, 2002, 08:30 PM

Not entirely true - they can rebuild a whole face if they want. The fact is that you'll have a stitched up face, but a huge scar afterwards.

jelly

July 9th, 2002, 10:12 AM

if you don't want to use a claw [the EMERSON lagriffe, the CRKT bear claw and the MOD (Masters Of Defense) lady hawk (a springer) are the best] take a look at the SPYDERCO SpyderCard. this incredible folder is razor-sharp, has the form and size of a credit card and fits in any purse, wallet or pocket. http://store5.yimg.com/I/bestknives_1697_12006277 http://www.selfdefenseproducts.com/rigidstainless.htm <small>[ July 09, 2002, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: jelly ]

jelly

July 9th, 2002, 10:33 AM

quote:

---

And at least my ApplegateFairbairn folder from Gerber is sharp enough for shaving

---

it's good to have both of them, the folder for shaving and the Applegate-Fairbairn boot knife from boker for fighting (stabbing) :D <small>[ July 09, 2002, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: jelly ]

Eliteforum

July 9th, 2002, 10:41 AM

They sell those on SpyTech as well. Spy Tech Some things are cheap, and somethings are way overpriced, strange site, but some good stuff in stock. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Arming yourself via Radio Shack? Log in

View Full Version : Arming yourself via Radio Shack? Nico

July 8th, 2002, 03:57 AM

Here's a brain storming exercise ... You have to equip yourself for self-defense and/or -offense by using only what is available at the local Radio Shack. Let's say you have like $50 to spend, but no lab or anything to work at, so everything would have to be from scratch. Myself, I'd probably just have to buy a megaphone or something and use it as a club, but I'm sure you folks will be much more creative. :)

PYRO500

July 8th, 2002, 05:18 AM

I could think of better places to buy things with 50$ than radiao shack of course you could get high power flashlights, and clubbing instruments ( a waste of money and cheap plastic). If I were desprate and needed some tools of the trade badly then I'd take that 50$ and go nextdoors in the mall to sears and buy a pair of bolt cutters and steal something more worth while like stealing a gun at one of those shitty ungarded fleamarkets. with a gun a clip of ammo and some wits along with luck that most seem to push too far you could concevably build yourself back up from the slums also you could spen that 50$ at a secondhand store and get some clean clothes and get yourself a real job and from there on your pretty much set.

Jhonbus

July 8th, 2002, 08:13 AM

My guess is that $50 would be plenty to build some sort of taser. An ergonomic shaped one like the commercial ones would be difficult, so building it into a long plastic pole would be the best bet. AFAIK, some police forces use just such a device - it looks like the usual "nightstick" but has two prongs on the end for the discharge.

J

July 8th, 2002, 02:08 PM

Or you could go into all the camera shops in town and ask for used disposable cameras. Take out the flash units, modify them by wiring several caps in parralel, add probes and a case, and you have a potentially lethal electric shock weapon. All for absolutely nothing, including free batteries :) But if you're prepared to be lethal, I'd personally just buy a knife.

Anthony

July 8th, 2002, 03:24 PM

I think the baton like tazer is most likely a cattle-prod.

pyromaniac_guy

July 8th, 2002, 04:21 PM

J, I dont know about other vendors, but at least for kodak, they require photo shops to return the disposable cameras back to them. they arent really ment to be disposable, just cheap enough that you dont worry if you loose one... The OEM's try to recylce them things as much as possible. HOWEVER, there really isnt a need to get alot of them together, just get one, all you need is one charging circuit. Add a few extra electrolytic caps from radioshack and thats all you need. Only problem with such a device however is that most likely you will need direct skin contact for it to work, as it doesnt take alot to insulat a few hundred volts. I dont know if these things use series injection triggering, or if there is an extrenal trigger wire on the flashlamp. (or is triggering is uesd at all, however I assume it is) if you could find a charger with series injection triggering this would be best, so that you would get a nice higher voltage spike to start conduction in cases where the target provides an unsuitably high resistance. (no pun intended)

dragon

July 8th, 2002, 05:19 PM

This is a tad off topic, but dose anyone know of a way to wind a pulse transformer. As used for the output of a stun gun. I.e. most are wound and potted in a vacuum for insulation. I did have a file for one. Wound buy dipping it in wax after each winding. i.e. any way to improvised a way to pot it under a vacuum at home.

pyromaniac_guy

July 8th, 2002, 05:44 PM

it's a little less convinient than a solid potting, but you could always build the transformer in an acrylic container and then pot under liquid, such as mineral oil. Then seal up the acrylic (so long as this isnt for a high duty cycle aplication where you will be generating heat)

dragon

July 8th, 2002, 09:15 PM

Yep oil sounds a good idear, I could pot them in in oil in a small potting box and seal it with epoxy. It wont be under a high duty cycle as its for a stun gun. failling that. I thort of nipping over to france, one day picking up some duty free and a load of stunguns. then stiping them dumping the cases and posting the pcbs and pulse transformers in different pakages to my self in the uk. im sure they would clear customs then.

PYRO500

July 8th, 2002, 10:22 PM

Hand held stun guns in general aren't a whole lot more efective than a blade. as far as radio shack goes most of the electronics stuff I really want they don't carry anymore they now sell alot of hi-teck shit like cell phones but when you need a special mosfet transistor, no you have to order it to your house. also they do not carry the types of caps you need to charge witha disposable camera flash those aren't really avalable at many places. as far as making a stun gun from scratch sure it's possible but considering you need to have a case a circuit schematic (or knowledge of electronics, enough to make your circuit from scratch) and a few select parts that you won't find at radio shack and you'll never build anything that can meet commercial grade beacuse all your likely to do from radio shack is build a little shocker device that will make an enemy laugh.

dragon

July 8th, 2002, 10:46 PM

true but i can wind the first sep up transformer on a core kit and you can get hv cap from rs in the uk easy. you can often find hv caps in old tv`s and monitors too. but i must admit not much down tandys(radio shack in the uk) now as theye stoped stoking many parts here too. making te efective is more to do with get the pulse right and not the votage.

Nico

July 9th, 2002, 02:00 AM

True, there are a lot of places with more 'bang for your buck' than Radio Shack. I was just wondering if there was something I was missing. PYRO500, I like your Sears idea. Sort of like laddering up when buying a home. :)

J

July 9th, 2002, 02:40 PM

Different shops have different policies on recycling. My local one just throws them away, I've got them to save the cameras for me :-) Current new price on a 120uF 330V cap is about £1.50, so you're saving a lot of cash when building up a medium sized bank (as I'm currently doing). On this note, I've just modified a flash unit to make an effective blasting box, using a thyristor to switch the high current. This will reliably make thin copper wire explode, full details and video will be up soon. Yes, the flash units have a trigger transformer, which pulses at a few KV to ionize the gas in the flash tube. But if you used sharp electrodes this isn't necessary. Dragon, check out my website for info on winding a pulse transformer, and full details (minus the case) for a homemade stungun. Vacuum potting isn't required if you're careful, and the voltage is kept to 50kv or so. I used silicone sealant for mine. Oil should be better, but very messy. The containment vessel will add size to your coil too.

xoo1246

July 9th, 2002, 04:21 PM

I have a cirucit from a flash-unit, it operates at around 300 volts and is good enough to make thin iron strands explode with a sharp crack. The cables I use aren't exactly isulated to take 300 volts so I keep chocking myself. One gets a little bit stiff in the arms.

xyz

July 19th, 2002, 07:40 AM

You have to get quite a lot of caps on a camera flash charger circuit to get any decent shock out of it (unless you use pulse caps or very large caps). I have been shocked with 5 of the standard 330volt 120uf caps in parallel and it burned two small marks into my hand but other than making me drop the caps and hurting like @#$% for less than a second it was no big deal. I would use at least 10 flash caps and connect them in series (wiring caps in series increases voltage, wiring them in parallel increases capacitance, and a combination of the two can be made to get some of both increased)

PYRO500

July 19th, 2002, 10:47 AM

while 330-350V may not hurt excruciatingly bad at a glancing touch, if you get stuck on one of those little caps you will have some pain on your hands. more capacitance the more energy the device can put out. the main problem with these little caps is the low voltage causes the skin resistance to block the fairly large amount of energy (for energy absorbed into the body 30J is usually lethal) in these caps (anywhere from 2J to 10J depending on the size of the flash) I think the easyest way to overcome skin resistance is to use sharp needle probes on the end, that will really hurt I can gurante. <small>[ July 20, 2002, 08:15 AM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

Jumala Hallo xyz,

July 19th, 2002, 11:30 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

be careful with those capacitors. It is said that currents higher than 30 mA through your body crossing your hard can be lethal. I think you have felt that the shock had several ampere but only from one finger to another. (your luck)If it had passed the hard you would need some subterran furniture. The skin resistance is not the biggest problem for the 350 V but some cloth can be. But pyro500 is right, using needle electrodes gives a pain like hell at 350V. Another problem is that a weapon buildt in that way gives only one shock. Then the cap must be reloaded for the next.

xyz

July 19th, 2002, 11:57 PM

Sure, 30mA can kill if the electodes are stuck either side of your heart inside your chest but it takes a lot more than that to kill someone usually. Pyro, the current from 5 of them in parallel burns tiny cauterized holes through the skin instantaneously and overcomes skin resistance. I have emptied the entire charge from a single one deliberately into my hand (took about 3 seconds) which hurt a lot and gave me pins and needles in my hand for 30 seconds afterward but had no other effects. I also know someone else who deliberately put a finger from each hand on the terminal of a camera flash cap (current passes through both arms, chest, and heart) and said it hurt more than normal but no other effect. Camera flash caps are no danger to people as I know many people from our school who have shocked themselves or others on the face, neck, ears, etc. You have to remember that the only parts of the body which are greatly effected by electricity are the heart and brain and that a shock from a cap is delivered only on the skin and flesh between the terminals (usually about 1cm apart). Edit: Jumala, a capacitor weapon can charge quickly with a good charger and battery, my 3 volt charger has a 3.5 volt 8 amp NiCd battery that I got out of a cordless electric toothbrush and this charger can charge a standard photo flash cap in about 1-2 seconds. A 6 volt charger( from the flash attachments that you put on cameras) and a 6 volt lantern battery would make a good one but I have yet to get hold of a 6 volt charger. <small>[ July 19, 2002, 11:01 PM: Message edited by: xyz ]

PYRO500

July 20th, 2002, 12:22 AM

all capacitors that store a charge can be lethal! geting in the habit of touching them is like playing russian roulette, if you want to do anything besides digital electronics get in the habit of NEVER touching any capacitor's terminals.

xyz

July 20th, 2002, 12:37 AM

I'm not talking big caps here Pyro, I would never touch anything larger than a 330v 120uf photo flash cap and even then I know what they feel like know and probably won't do it again :) . I did all this stuff several months ago and haven't touched a cap since. Also, I'm not the one who put a finger from each hand on one and If I was going to touch any cap at all I would make sure that it was a 330v 120uf photo flash or smaller and that I was only shocking a hand or a finger. I have only ever put a cap on a finger or a hand and nowhere else and I am not trying to encourage people to go and start touching charged capacitors, just saying that you need 5-10 or so photo flash caps for any kind of shocker if you want good results. Edit: I would also like to add that I am definitely NOT in the habit of touching cap terminals no matter what size the cap is (I would have thought that the fact I own a coke can sized cap for my coil driver and I am still alive means that I have obviously not tried touching it). I avoid the terminals when doing electronic work. The only reason that I shocked myself deliberately a few times was to see what worked best for a shocker and what they felt like (rest assured, I had shocked someone else before I tryed it on myself). <small>[ July 19, 2002, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: xyz ]

PYRO500

July 20th, 2002, 01:41 AM

It is never a good idea to touch any capacitor especially any over half a joule, anything more than a quartar joule is not gonna feel good if it can overcome skin resistance. I don't think everyone that meses with capacitors truly realizes the dangers involved in them. Capacitors are usually much more dangerous than direct current beacuse of the current that can run through you in the short time. anything over 50-75 volts has the power to easily overcome skin resistance and either burn or kill you. in the case with capacitors the high currents discharging through your skin is sometimes possible to explode flesh and amputate limbs now this is at high power but smaller caps can do so at a smaller scale. I have my 2 capacitor 2,000J electrolytic bank and I can tell you if your fingers touched the electrodes they'd probobly be missing some flesh and look like they had a firecracker go off in them. I think I should say that any touch to any power capacitor (not digital circuit ones) should be considered a severe risk of injury.

xyz

July 20th, 2002, 01:47 AM

That's why I don't do it anymore :) , other people age 14 like me usually do far more dangerous things than touch caps, like some idiot who found a detonator at a quarry and stuck a bit of burning paper in the fuse hole to see what would happen (true story, honest!) Edit: Also, is there much advantage to pulse caps as opposed to electrolytics for shockers? If yes then are the homemade kind any good? (the oil filled ones with aluminium sheet or foil for the plates and polyethylene as a dielectric) <small>[ July 20, 2002, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: xyz ]

PYRO500

July 20th, 2002, 03:21 AM

Yes, pulse caps generally discharge alot faster than electrolytics, it is due to a number of things i'm not gonna get into here. Those home made tesla coil capacitors usually have small energy density for their size due to manufacturing problems. in the pulse capacitor manufacturing plants they have rolls of special dielectric film made especially for precision thinkness and is rolled very flat in nearly sterile enviroments with metal foil. there are really no ways around buying large energy storage capacitors. any capacitor you'll make will be at best unpredictable and not very dense in it's energy storage, let alone the fact that the ESR will be alot higher meaning slower pulse. For shocker applications electrolytic capacitors will usually work fine. in fact photoflash capacitors are precise electrolytic capacitors and they work well. As far as types of electrolytics go there are 3 main grades of electrolytic capacitors. The types are computer grade, inverter grade, and pulse rated capacitors. The computer grade should do fine for your shocker applications but beware they are not designed for use where they will be rapidly shorted and will suffer reduced lives if they are although some can last a fair number of discharges I guess it's up to you how long you want your caps to last. I think that you should be able to find or order either photoflash capacitors or electrolythic ones that would be sutible for a shock wand. it you hooked several in paralell you could increase the voltage untill a fair amount of current would flow through the skin (more painful). As for chargers you will probobly learn quickly that the camera flash inverters are slow even when pumped with alot more voltage and curent. I recomend an oscilator circuit that is more powerful than the camera's circuit and will drive a transformer at a high enough voltage to charge your caps. Alternatively you coulf build a voltage multiplyer out of capacitors and diodes for higher voltage apps where you can't find a small enough transformer. Voltage multipliers are kind of simple to build and when constructed properly can be very reliable and take in ac and conveniently output dc perfect for charging capacitors.

pyromaniac_guy

July 20th, 2002, 04:25 AM

I have to most strenuously agree with pyro500 here. one should never get into the habit of touching charged caps. your 330v at 120uf contains 6.5j of energy at full charge. 3j discharged acrost your chest can cause arrythmia of the heart. granted a strong, healthy person can do this more safely than a 80 year old geriatric without their nitro pills, it is none the less foolish to unnecisarily put one's self at risk....

xyz

July 20th, 2002, 04:38 AM

Ok, though the reason I like using camera chargers is that they stop charging when the cap is full and don't charge the cap till it heats up and ruptures from the pressure. I have measured that camera flash cap chargers put out about 300v so my cascade will have to have 6 stages to get 3v to around 200v and a 7th stage will make it 400v right? They double the voltage with each stage don't they? But I can't add 6.5 stages to get 300v, do I need to do anything special or will it end up about 300v anyway from resistance and the like? Edit: Pyromaniac_guy, I have already explained that I DON'T have a habit of touching them and I did it on my hand and not across my chest, please read the whole topic before you post <small>[ July 20, 2002, 03:41 AM: Message edited by: xyz ]

PYRO500

July 20th, 2002, 09:53 AM

no, sorry it dosen't quite work like that when you have multiple stages you multiply the voltage that you start with by the number of stages, for example I have 120V in, I put it through a 5 stage multiplier and I get 600V now charging your capacitors with a higher voltage than their max voltage is ok, but you do need to watch the voltage and switch it off before it covercharges. Also you have to be sure that it won't charge too fast either. what you could do is build an oscilator circuit like this one http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/untitled.jpg (copy and paste link into browser) the part that's the oscilator is the part before the transformer(ignore the rest), the output of the transformer is what drives the voltage multiplier, when using a voltage multiplier in this case you would get the highest step up transformer you could find and then add that voltage multiplier directly to the output of the transformer (ignore the diode and the capacitors after the transformer there for something else and won't work with a voltage multiplier) now assuming you got 100V out of the transformer (likely the circuit would give around 300V max) you would then add the appropriate amount of stages in your voltage multiplier to get 300V, in this case that'd be 3 stages. just a note here but the trnasformers won't always step up the voltage porportionally to their turns beacuse of the effect pulsing has on them, kep that in mind when looking at this circuit. <small>[ July 20, 2002, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

pyromaniac_guy

July 20th, 2002, 07:21 PM

xyz... I DID read the whole post, and you said you deliberatly shocked yourself with more than 10 times the energy required to stop the heart, should you have fucked up in some way, and conducted hand to hand. My post was not ment to admonish you for doing this, you were warned once by someone else, if you hurt yourself doing anything similar, you win yourself a darwin award. The reason for my post was to warn (again) any other 14 yr old kids out there like yourself that what you did was quite foolish.

xyz

July 20th, 2002, 08:17 PM

Obviously you didn't read it properly then. I said it was NOT me who shocked themself from arm to arm and that I did NOT deliberately shock myself with the 5 caps in parallel. It takes 30J to stop the heart and a photo flash cap is between 2J to 7J. Pyro500, your page is down (damn geoshitties), it says that the owner needs to go to their help page. I have a small 240v to 9v step down transformer which I can use backwards (probably get a lot lower than 240v though) and then make a multiplier to get whatever power comes out of the transformer to around 300v. <small>[ July 20, 2002, 07:26 PM: Message edited by: xyz ]

PYRO500

July 20th, 2002, 10:29 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

My geocities page is not down, I said next to the link that you needed to cut and paste the link into your browser or it won't work. as for 30J being lethal, that's kink=d of like the LD50 on electric shocks during most circumstances, getting zapped by anything is a bad idea and people have been killed by alot less than 30J. Anything that shocks you is potentially very dangerous and there is not really any way of determining how much shock will kill you untill all the circumstances are at their worst and not shocking youself from arm to arm is not a safe way of not shocking your heart. <small>[ July 20, 2002, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

xyz

July 21st, 2002, 06:25 AM

Yeah, I've kind of got the picture now, don't zap yourself. Sorry about forgetting to cut and paste with geocities. What rate does that oscillator pulse things at?

PYRO500

July 21st, 2002, 05:14 PM

That oscillator will work at difrent frequency's depending on the resistance in the circuit. That't the reason for the whine in camera flashes. The frequency the transformer is running at gets lower and lower untill the capacitors are charged and the circuit can't produce enough voltage to charge them any more. <small>[ July 21, 2002, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

xyz

July 22nd, 2002, 05:11 AM

By "the resistance in the circuit", do you mean how charged the caps are or what the value of the resistor is? If I was not using it to charge caps, how high would the frequency be and what could I do to make it higher?

PYRO500

July 22nd, 2002, 05:52 AM

by the resistance in the circuit I mean everything after the transformer, when the capacitors charge (in normal operation as a flash) the resistance rises as the capacitor(s) charge. it is hard to say how fast it would oscilate with a voltage miltiplier but it would charge up like a capacitor and give you DC from AC but at a high voltage.

xyz

July 23rd, 2002, 06:31 AM

If I used a 9 volt battery and some transistors that are designed for 9 volts, and then replaced the transformer with a relay, how many times a second would this circuit switch the relay?

PYRO500

July 23rd, 2002, 06:40 AM

you can't replace the transformer with a relay, that would not do anything worthwile, it would cause your voltage to stay the same as the input of the buzzing relay (why?) I can't really say the frequency you have to find out what it is using your components.

xyz

July 24th, 2002, 04:59 AM

The purpose I was going to use it for was pulsing the power in a second circuit.

PYRO500

July 24th, 2002, 05:35 AM

There are beter ways of pulsing a relay, or even better a transistor. for a relay an IC 555 timer would do fine.

Boob Raider

August 23rd, 2002, 09:53 PM

Fellow Zappers. U can get about 1kV or even more from (I have tried upto 1kV) photoflash chargers by connecting the outputs in series . I use the set up to operate a cold cathode florescent tube salvaged from a Photocopier. Speaking of photocopiers ... they have drum charging circuits (3"X1.5"X.75") capable of generating upto 12kV DC @ about 200 uA. I have one by TDK, it generates 7kV @ 600uA (24 VDC input) which I used for my table top N2 Laser and making O3. IF one can get there hands on enough photoflash caps that the voltage ratings would add upto 7kV with a safety margin of atleast 0.5kV then that would make one hell of a Pulsed Laser PSU (*wack*) I mean Shocker. :D Dont try making HV caps at home with Al foil and any Dielectric and transformer oil. It aint worth it. Its like "fishing in a piss pond" (By Me). Success is very rare as far as that goes and those who do have to go through the bitching phase as the caps spray hot oil, smoke the garage, and waste a lot of money, effort and time :mad: . Air bubbles r to be blamed. So IF u r a very patient person and can work each and every air bubble out ... go for it, otherwise stick to reletavely low V caps in series. Actually e-Bay is a good place to fish for caps. I got a lot of em from there. 40kV Ceramite Doorknob caps etc. I had lots to say on this topic .... but I forgot. Ask me or I'll put it up when I get reminded by a post.

PYRO500

August 23rd, 2002, 11:14 PM

The problem with a bunch of caps in series is that the ESR is multiplied among them making the pulse that you normally had alot longer with less peak current. As far as having a ton of photoflash capacitors goes, it's only worth it for small projects that don't require a very fast high current pulse. For example I just bought a pulse cap that I have yet to calculate the esr for but typicly speaking thse capacitors are made to have low esr's for pulse duty. I am going to use this capacitor for a few experimental electronic weapons including a disk launcher that will launch an ancient 14 inch hard drive platter. I also am designing a plasma armature rail gun witch will possibly run with two more of these suckers if I can get 250$ anytime soon. The capacitor is 4,200V and 298 UF witch is 2628J and considering 30 is considered lethal, this sucker will explode flesh like a firecracker in a tomatoe. Think back to NBK's idea of a super tazer that would do that, except this sucker is very huge and is sitting in an office chair in the pics and probobly weighs over 90 pounds. you have to cut and paste thes pics into your browser http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/cap/cap1.jpg http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/cap/cap2.jpg http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/cap/cap3.jpg http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/cap/cap4.jpg

xyz

September 1st, 2002, 02:42 AM

Does anyone have a circuit diagram for a good circuit to pulse a relay with? There is one on powerlabs which turns a relay on and off 3000 times a second, I emailed Sam Barros asking for the diagram but did not get a reply.

J

September 1st, 2002, 06:21 AM

You ought to be able to work out how to make a relay pulse itself! If you want a faster pulse rate than it can manage this way, you might as well use an SCR based circuit.

xyz

September 1st, 2002, 09:17 AM

I am rather annoyed at myself for overlooking the obvious like that :mad: , It never occured to me that you could make a relay pulse itself but now that you say it I can see exactly how it would work, thanks.

kanbayat

September 21st, 2002, 11:50 PM

ok..after reading all youre posts..I wonder if anyone has come up with a definitive wepon that can be made at radio shack with 50 bucks? I know very little about electrical shit..so spill it guys. personally if I had the same 50 bucks..i'd go to walmart..and no one would stop me..lol..but to the rest of us who know hardly any thing about what radio shack has to offer..what is the consensus of opinion here? ..what type of lethal wepon can be made for self defense using 50 bucks at radio shack?..nico and I want to knoww peace ppl vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> self defence lighter Log in

View Full Version : self defence lighter Purple Fire

July 9th, 2002, 06:39 AM

I have uploaded 2 pics named "self defence lighter", and "self defence lighter fuel" to the FTP. They are part of a project I am w orking on in light of the "w hat can I do to stop my ass getting kicked in a dark alley" posts. Its small: fits in a the palm of your hand, light: 49.84g when empty (I have new scales and I'll be damned if I'm not gonna flaunt it), cheap to run: $5 for a can of fuel that would last about 20 fillings, and would scare the living shit outa sum little punk, w hile doing no permnent damage (save from a bit of singed facial hair). I am still w orking on building an ignitor system and have yet to neaten it all up ie. remove the jagged bits of wire etc. but i thought I'd chuck it on the ftp to get some feedback. Basically, you point and pull the "trigger", and a get a jet of flame about 1.5m long, when the trigger is released, you get a fireball about 0.5m square (not intentional, but I'm not complaining). You can get about 5 short bursts from one tank, more that enough to startle someone enough for you to turn and run your little ass off. The idea was to scare them and provide a chance for escape, rather than hurt them, but I think a full tank full to the face would probably hurt like a bitch all the same. I w as impressed by what it did in daylight, and have yet to see what it will look like at night :D Its basically made from a small BB gun CO2 cannister and the useful bits from a disposable lighter: the needle valve and the "trigger" thingy. The lighter was carved up and the regulator removed from the valve. The CO2 cannister then had the hole in the top drilled out to fit the needle valve. The trigger thingy was re-attatched to the valve, minus loads of unimportant stuff like the flint mechanism etc. A small "gaskett" was made from plumbers thread tape and helps to keep the join betw een the rough cannister edge and the valve gas-tight. 2 ajustable matal hose clips were linked together and tightened round the end of the cannister till they wouldnt slip. Then stainless stell wire w as used to pull the valve assembly dow n onto the cannister and twisted w ith pliers till it w as firmly squashed against the gaskett. Nice and simple at the moment, but as I said I have yet to build a relyable ignitor and make it a little more ergonomic. At the moment its also a bit of a bitch to fill, a process involving levering with screwdrivers, bracing aginst the floor etc. When I have ploished up the design and made some improvements like widening the valve and adding a proper trigger I w ill probably upload another pic. Well there you go, that w as my weekends contribution. Any feedback would be great, has anyone made something similar before? Any ideas for further improvements would be apreciated. (This has all been repeated in a text file that accompanies the pictures on the FTP) edit: the pics and the text file have all gone into the "Uploads" folder as thats all I can get to at the moment (I have a passw ord but the internet hates me) :( they are: self defence lighter.jpg self defence lighter fuel.jpg self defence lighter.doc <small>[ July 09, 2002, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: Purple Fire ]

Eliteforum

July 9th, 2002, 06:47 AM

It'd be a nice idea if you told us what the picture name WAS and WHERE they were. However, sounds simplistic enough.

mark

July 9th, 2002, 02:24 PM

Could some one w ho knows how to use the FTP(I dont) please post the picture in this thread?

kingspaz

July 9th, 2002, 07:00 PM

looks a pretty decent idea. well done...i shrunk (sp?!) the pictures down lots because they where unnecessarily huge. <small>[ July 09, 2002, 06:01 PM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]< /small>

Purple Fire

July 9th, 2002, 07:43 PM

Shit, they were huge w ernt they! Sorry, thats just how my scanner scanned them, I dont have a digital camera :( I thought I'd just clarify, those really mankey wires down the sides, are infact incredibly tight, its just they are seriously full of twists from being constantly re-hashed till I got the thing to work. Ran out of light fuel today so Im not sure how long till I can get back to the modifications. Just been sitting here and sketching up various ideas. So far, Im planning on destroying another disposably lighter to keep a pilot flame infront of the nozzle, and trying to work out a better way of holding the top (valve assembly) onto the cannister cos damn those wires are sharp!!! edit: I'm also tossing around the idea of making it more like a "real" flamethrower, and using the butane to propel a chamber of liquid fuel. Napalm in the face could do some SERIOUS damage :D but then again, thats defeating the purpose of making it more or less harmless. Maybe an attatchment so you could either carry it as a napalm launcher OR has a harmless scaring people away device? One that you could switch to quickly if the guy does decide to chase you? Hmmm, I think more sketching is called for! <small>[ July 09, 2002, 06:54 PM: Message edited by: Purple Fire ]

Zero

July 9th, 2002, 07:44 PM

You sir, think too much. Consider the following: A standard adjustable Bic or nearest clone is drained of its fuel and dismantled. First remove that useless metal thing surrounding the nozzle, then the flint w heel, flint, and spring. Pry the button off (it's usually held onto the nozzle/valve w ith two little finger type things), then remove the adjusting ring. Take a small pair of pliers (I use hemostats) and unscrew the valve assembly. The nozzle/valve itself is mounted in a white plug type thing that the adjusting ring engages, and the whole shebang will easily unscrew. If you haven't vented the lighter yet it w ill do so in your face at this point. Whack the lighter against something until the regulator (white thing w ith a little tiny metal disk on it) and the siphon tube pop out. Discard them. screw the nozzle assembly back on all the way (there will be no restance now that the regulator is gone), and affix the button. You can refil this contraption by holding the button down and filling it right through the nozzle. Without the regulator in place the thing w ill fill with liquid fuel from the can in a matter of seconds. Now light another lighter, aim your modified one at the flame, and tap the button. Woosh. No CO2 carts, homemade seals, or jury rigging to leak in your pocket. Looks like a plain old Bic, too, unless you inspect it closely. ~Zero the Inestimable

Purple Fire

July 9th, 2002, 08:06 PM

But zero, w heres the style? the class? Yeah, supose that w ould do the job, but...the CO2 cannister has a much greater capacity that the lighter = more fire to scare him with. There is the possibility of upgrading it to an all-metal assembly if I can find a small enough valve, making it durable enough to take a moderate beating, and you could probably hit him with it :D . And as in the post above, I think it would be MUCH easier to make this into a liquid fuel one, with the butane as a propellant only. Depends how far you want to develop it I supose, I personally think that 90% the fun is in hashing up something more complicated, to do a simpler job :p edit: and the CO2 cannister has the potentioal to hold a more compressed fuel, ie more pressure, more fuel in the same space etc. <small>[ July 09, 2002, 07:08 PM: Message edited by: Purple Fire ]

Tyler_Durden zero... that's so simple it's almost kewl. i w ill try it as soon as i can pick up a few bic's to play with the only thing i don't like is having to hold the non-modified lighter in a manner that could easily burn you. a grill lighter would be perfect for this.

July 9th, 2002, 08:28 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter xoo1246

July 10th, 2002, 07:14 AM

I remember some pictures from a protest in some asian country w here a guy had a huge propane tank w ich he had opened and ignited the stream of fuel. You should see the faces of those polices, like 10 of them against this guy. They looked scared.

Purple Fire

July 10th, 2002, 09:03 AM

I was thinking, to keep it simple, that if I use simple w ire clamps to hold the valve against the thread tape, then I could fill it 3/4 with petrol, then clamp the valve on and fill the rest w ith the butane. As all its doing at the moment is pumping the liquid butane out, it might as well throw some petrol out instead! Much cheaper, and probably more effective. Hve more butane now, but the valve died instead :( it was an old lighter, and it had some tough trialing. I think the constant freezing from the butane, then rapid heating w ith the flame did for it. Now I have to go and buy more lighters (a nice big stack :D ) before the experimenting can continue. Does anyone know a good source of the wire clamp things? like the ones they use on guitar cases and, ummm, cant think of any more :( Wait, got it! Airtight coffee container has just w hat I need :D think im off to buy a few of them while I'm at it (mmmmmm, coffee). I think the plastic "trigger" may need to be replaced with a bit of metal, I really dont think lighter plastic is up to this sort of thing...

FragmentedSanity

July 10th, 2002, 10:08 AM

Lo all :) First a quick idea - but whats stopping you simply hooking up a piezo ignighter from a cheap lighter to the trigger? It w orks on normal lighters - so it should work. Those cheap BBQ lighters (refillable butane lighters with a long pipe the flame comes out) have a few interesting bits in them that may be of use. For one you could dismantle it and use the whole thing complete as an ignition source. you can use the piezo ignighter as described - the best thing is that the lighter inside looks like a normal bic - and w orks the same, except that the internals are easier to get to, but the advantage is that thay have a valve for refilling built into the bottom of the lighter. It might be possible to put said valve in the bottom of the CO2 canister making filling much simpler. but for $2 id suggest you grab one and pull it to bits and see if you get inspired. Have you tried any different fuels? engine strting fluid (25% ether) could be interesting and Im sure you could think of others (WD-40 and such like) I think you would find that if you used say WD-40 you w ould get more flame, or more distance from the flame - but there may not be enough pressure to pump it out - so possibly mixing it w ith butane would add the pressure required. But your concept is a very nice idea. To turn it into a more serious weapon you could simply use a bigger CO2 cartridge (like the ones you get in a Soda Stream) these are about 13-14 inches long from memory and a fairly solid construction. Not only w ould it hold more fuel but w ould also act as a servicable club if they werent detered (much like a big mag light). While this probably isnt practicle for self defence purposes its always fun to scale things up. **just came to mind** build on of these and put it in the bottom of maglight (sacrifice a couple of batteries for the space) Not only do you get the advantages of the torch as a weapon, which have been discussed in detail elsw here - but you have a neat flamethrow er as w ell. Blind the mugger - flame the mugger - beat the mugger senseless. Or whatever you choose :p But I think that would be a fairly good self defence w eapon that would look inconspicuous - if you did a neat job of it even if a cop looked at it they probably wouldnt notice anything. Thats a real consideration here in Australia given our laws about carrying a weapon. In that sence it w ould beat a knife hands down - as you would have to get caught using it, rather than falling victim to a random search and them turning up a knife (go to jail go directly to jail do not pass go do not collect $200) whereas a torch is just a torch. OH one more thing - to get the butane into the tank easier - cool the tank and warm the can thats filling it. Later FS

Spudgunner

July 10th, 2002, 03:43 PM

That is a good idea! In a 4 D cell maglite, you could use 3 D cells (make sure the bottom one can still contact the bare metal on the cap somehow) and a 3 D cell bulb. You still have a working flashlight, sure, it is only as bright as a 3 D cell instead of a 4 D cell, but you can modify it now too! You could easily drill a hole in the endcap and put stuff in there, but I don't know that you could fit it in the space of 1 D cell. So, you only put 2 in there, put in a 2 cell bulb, and you now have LOTS of room for all your crap. You even have enough room for the circuit off of a small stungun (or home built transformer/stepup thing) that would VERY reliably ignite your stuff (just like piezo but w ith an inch or more spark). A question though, how w ould you be able to press the button or whatever for the gas to come out if it were on the inside of the flashlight/torch? I cannot think of any ideas right now, but you can be sure I am gonna try. I really like this idea. Spud

Purple Fire

July 10th, 2002, 08:50 PM

Hmmm, flamethrower maglight eh...I love it!!! Blind them, toast them, beat them and leave them for dead :D While we're listing fuels, which of these are likely to attack the plastic parts of the valve? the o-rings etc. I have a feeling that petrol is going to fuck up the valve, w ould ether? Im trying it out this afternoon with meths and some kero. The clips from the coffee container are PERFECT! I'll scan a pic to show you w hat I'm talking about. Basically, you can now just take the top off, fill it w ith liquid, clip the top back on, pressurise and go, all in about 2-3 minutes. It is soooo much faster than twisting those bloody bits of wire!!!

randomquestion

July 10th, 2002, 11:36 PM

I'm loving this idea. For the "fuel release trigger", I'm guessing all you'll need to do is extend the plastic piece that is already on top, by melting on some additional plastic. Then slide that through a hole cut in the side of the flashlight. Please post pictures of your progress.

Purple Fire

July 12th, 2002, 10:54 PM

Here is the clip that w ill hopefully enable me to use liquid fuel. I am waiting till I can get another one before I fit them on. As a consequence of severe boredom, there will be a website with some of my progress on it, I'm not sure how long I w ill keep updating it, w e shall see... I have failed to get the image to link to here, so here is the site I'm writing up my progress on: ww w.geocities.com/purple_fire_51/self_defence_lighter.html You may need to copy and paste, I'm not sure.

xyz

July 18th, 2002, 10:46 PM

Purple Fire, Kerosene is simply a heavier grade of petrol (in betw een petrol and diesel if I remember correctly), I would use metho as a fuel like you suggested as that evaporates and ignites easily but doesn't eat at plastic like petrol does.

Harry

July 29th, 2002, 12:32 PM

Purple fire, you might try using one of the many CO2-pow ered gadgets that seemed to proliferate about 3-4 years ago--I think it was Reebok that had a CO2-inflated shoe, with a handheld tank. Also, I have a CO2 "spritzer" for disk drives that uses a CO2 cartridge. I've seen a bicycle tire repair kit that uses a CO2 cartridge. They all work on the same mechanism, with trigger, &c. Harry

Harry

August 12th, 2002, 04:28 PM

Alright, I've been scoping the local hardware shops, came up with: 1)much compressed air fittings, including air chucks, have 1/4" pipe threads. 2)An adapter is available to connect a disposeable propane bottle to 1/4" pipe fittings. 3)screw-in inflation valves are readily available. Now, let's add 23+ 23+ 23 and get 69. Drill hole into 12g CO2 cartridge. Tap for valve threads. Install inflation valve; some epxy might be good. Combine air chuck with propane adapter, screw onto propane bottle. Use to pressurize 12g CO2 cartrige installed in handheld CO2 device. Ignition handled by disposeable piezo lighter element. This is my current project. I'll post photos ASAP. Harry

BoB-

August 12th, 2002, 08:03 PM

Wouldnt it be a w hole hell of a lot easier to just use a brass or steel nipple to hold the pressurized propane? Then no threading tools would be needed, just a few more dollars for reduction fittings. I also think that pyrotechnic ignition would be more reliable than piezo-electric. You know Rat-Shack (Radio Shack) sells butane cartridges the same size as 12gr. CO2 cartridges.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Harry

August 13th, 2002, 07:03 PM

I dimly recall the 12g butane cartridges @ RadioCrap. One memory that won't be repressed. However, those would be rather expensive a solution. We are going for pocket size in this topic, if I'm not mistaken. Using brass/steel nipple a good idea. I considered it, but bypassed due to...crap, I gotta keep better notes on my thought processes. Perhaps a compressed air blowgun for the valve? (Speaking of blow guns... <sound of slapping across face> "Back on topic!!!" "Yes sir!") I managed to obtain, some years ago, a pressure bottle about 1/3 the size of a propane torch bottle. Soon as I can work up an adapter for it, it's next in line for the butane treatment. BTW, the bottle was pressurized with O2/N2/N2O mix for testing and calibrating medical equipment. Technically pocket-sized. A bit off topic: Boy Scouts come up w ith the darndest things: met a leader w hose troop pumped a full camp stove tank, then sprayed through the campfire--flamethrower. Harry <small>[ August 13, 2002, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: Harry ]

Boob Raider

August 23rd, 2002, 03:25 AM

I don't think u can fit more butane in a cylinder than its volume no matter how much u increase the pressure. Once the butane is liquified it will only compress very, very little. So the use of CO2 carts. for having more C4H10 because the cart. can take more pressure doesn't seem logical to me. Although the CO2 cart. could contain C3H8 which means that the fire cloud will be a lot scary as C3H8 will exit with a greater pressure which can be also utilized to propell a liquid fuel conventional push style (squirt) or what I think will be more suitable (non/less-scaring) is to have another tank w ith the fuel of choice (mine would probably be Naptha) and use propane/butane to atomize the liquid fuel. If just using gas, standard ignition techniques won't w ork (my experience)as the high exit pressure and lowered temprature doesn't allow piezo spark or flint spark to ignite the gas. I was thinking ... that maybe a small continious AC arc w ould do the job or a small capacitor (that spark I think would provide sufficient ignition temp.) But If u make the atomizer design (I am working on it) I think the piezo-electric ignition should work. :cool:

Cricket

August 25th, 2002, 01:22 AM

I made that lighter. Badass little gizmo. Just thought I would say be careful and try not to cary it in your pocket! If you hold it upside down then it w ill spray the liquid butane out, much bigger fireball! I only did once (lack of butane) and it looked like it went close to the floor (about 3 feet). Can't be sure though, I couldn't see through the flame. I am working on a new one, but it is pretty much just a toy because it is too big to fit in a pocket. But it makes a flame that is large, relatively cheap, and sustainable for a much longer than a lighter.

Boob Raider

August 25th, 2002, 02:41 AM

How r u igniting the gas stream ? Is it something that can be operated w ith one hand and instantaneously or ur using a second lighter ?

kanbayat

September 22nd, 2002, 12:14 AM

although this wouldnt qualify as a pocket flame throw er..A few years ago I bought one of those simple metal oil cans w ith the pump trigger underneath..about the size of a juice can..pretty small..took off the nozzel and made a burner cage that had holes in it to fit over the end of the tube of the spray end..I used light fluid.like charcoal lighter fluid..filled the can..tipped it a little till the nozzel I had made and a piece of cotton stuffed in it w ere damp..and lit it on fire..everytime I squeezed the trigger on this it shot a flaming stream of lighter fluid about 20 feet and lit shit on fire at that distance..the cotton never went out until I extinquished it. these oil cans can be bought at any auto parts store. It isnt that high tech..but you can keep one in youre car..you never know ..however..it is no small lighter type device..but man..it w ill burn shit up at that distance(20 feet or so) and if a little motor oil is mixed with the cahrcoal lighter it will stick to the target much better . peace ppl vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Yo-yo

View Full Version : Yo-yo Harry

Log in

July 12th, 20 02, 01:1 1 PM

Let m e share m y own IW: the Yo-yo. I was working a shortie contract in Murderapolis, got off work about 11:30P. Had to walk 6 blocks to my car. Sure, I carried a Spyderco Endura, but I don't feel like getting that close to a germ . I had been practicing on breaks (at age 26, I ha d m y first real yo-yo) with m y Duncan Butterfly (that sucker can HURT with those 2 sharp rim s!) I just walked to the car flipping a highvelocity, tethered weight around. I kno w, I know, a yo-yo is not the weapon of choice, but use wha'cha got, right? Let's see, a Duncan Butterfly: 1/4 lb. of hard plastic with narrow edges, a 3 foot string, capability for tricks, and _what_cop_is_gonna_accuse_you_of_ca rrying_an_assau lt_yo-yo_? Most m o d e l s a r e l i k e f l i p p i n g a b a s e b a l l a r o u n d , b u t t h e butterfly has thos sharp rim s for better impact. Be safe! Harry PS: I know I don't have many posts to m y nam e, but at least I'm n o t a s k i n g a q u e s t i o n ; - P

Madog555

July 12th, 20 02, 01:4 8 PM

originialy, in ancient tim es the yo-yo was a wea p o n

Eliteforum

July 12th, 20 02, 01:5 9 PM

Harry wtf? I can't m ak e ou t a wo r d o f w h a t y ou r b a bbl i ng o n a bo ut ! Ca n s o meo ne c l ea r t hi s up?

mongo blongo

July 12th, 20 02, 04:3 6 PM

Madog555- That's correct! I can't rem ember wh o used it. Was it the Vikings? Harry- I can't m a k e o ut much of it eith er. W hat's_all_of_this_un der_scrolling? <sm all>[ July 12, 2002, 03:37 PM: Me s s a g e e d i t e d b y : m o n g o b l o n g o ] < / s m a l l >

Tyler_Durden

July 12th, 20 02, 06:0 3 PM

_this_means_there_is_em phasis_on_that_part_ ...and i can understand him fine... oh well. I think I recall the yo-yo being an ancient weapon. I am thinking it was of eastern decent... As far as *im proving* the yo-yo's attack capabilities, there is little that you can do, because if there is som ething sharp or poin ty, it still has to come back. :D You could we ight it, but thats about it. If its really easy to tell by looking at it that weights have been stuffed in it, you can easily say its so that you can do tricks better. I a m a form er yo-yo-ist(?) m yself, there is a lo t of nifty stuff you can do... unfortunately, none of the advanced tricks help m uch in the way of combat. =/

kingspaz

July 12th, 20 02, 07:0 9 PM

'In the Philippines, th e yo-yo was a weapon for over 400 hundred years. Their version was large with sharp edges and studs and attached to thick twenty-foot ropes for flinging at enem ies or prey' http://inventors.about.com /library/ weekly/aa120297.htm

rikkitikkitavi

July 12th, 20 02, 07:3 6 PM

i can assure that the yo-yo wa s not a prefered weapon of the vikings...(m y great_great_great_great_great_great_etc_grand daddy was one) they where m ore into heavy battle axe s, archery, swords and other m ore "manly" weapons. sim ply not their style :D However the principle of the yo-yo was known by the vikings, as a toy. however , I wouldnt be surprised if the yo-yo has been used as close-up com bat weapon, especially for destraction, like the ninja´s trowing star. /rick ard

Zero

July 12th, 20 02, 09:1 0 PM

Sure you can use a yo-yo for a weapon. Everyone saw Ninja Turtles 2, didn't they? ~Zero the Inestim a b l e

Tyler_Durden

July 13th, 20 02, 01:2 7 AM

the philipino version isnt any good for our purposes. the point of carrying a yo-yo as a weapon is not to have a great, effective weapon, but som ething that d o e s n t ' a p p e a r ' t o b e a w e a p o n .

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

if nothing else, a forward shot w/ the yo-yo would at least m a k e s o m e o n e f l i n c h f o r a s e c o n d u n t i l t o g i v e y o u a h e a d s t a r t running away.

E7

July 13th, 20 02, 04:1 6 AM

not to m ention you could swing it above your head once and pop them on the sid e of the head. this m ight give them a hinm t of whats com eing, but as poin ted out in the self defence thread, if someone comes up to you with intent to m ug you , pulling out a weighted yo-yo and swinging it above your head would not only confuse the shit out of them , but m ig h t m a k e t h e m reconsider you as a target vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Commercial Stun Guns Log in

View Full Version : Commercial Stun Guns endotherm

July 13th, 2002, 01:17 PM

I was thinking about purchasing a 500k volt commercial stun gun. These things are cheap these days, i have found good 400K ^ stun guns for under $30.00 US. I can't find much information on the w eb about them, and i'm sure you guys know quite a bit. What is there real-life effectivenss? -SCENARIO a medium sized tough gangster w alking down the straight, after scoring a 5,000K drug deal, the drug money is in his front right pocket, you move in, shock him on the back of the neck with a commerical 500k stun gun, and as he stumbles and falls dazed, you can easily just grab the money, and run aw ay with nothig to w orry about becuase he is going to be fucked for the next few minutes. Is the stun-gun your w eapon for this? Or is the gangster just going to turn around, rub the back of his neck saying "OUCH", while laughing as he grabs his Beretta 92 from his hip? Also, i sort of understand that a stung gun uses high voltage, low amperage oscilatting current. This current supposedly mimics electronic nerve impulses, and replaces them with this mush, effectively confusing the hell out of your body, and leaving you helpless. Is this stuff true, or does it just shock the living shit out of a person?

xoo1246

July 13th, 2002, 03:14 PM

I read about persons trying to rob a store using a stun gun(don't know what type). The persons trying to rob the store asked about something and when the ow ner turned around they used a stun gun. He felt pain in his back but wasn't knocked out as the robber w as hoping. They fled the sceen. As I said, don't know what stun gun they used. Buy one and try it on yourself. From < a href="http://ww w.guns2u.com" target="_blank">http://www .guns2u.com

quote:< /font>< hr /> Stun Gun Info Stun Guns use high voltage and low amperage to temporarily disable an attacker for several minutes. The stun gun does not rely on pain for results. The energy stored in the gun is transferred into the attacker's muscles, placing a tremendous demand on the muscles. This demand instantly depletes the attacker's blood sugar by converting it to lactic acid. In short, he is unable to produce energy for his muscles, and his body is unable to function properly. The stun gun also interrupts the tiny neurological impulses that control and direct voluntary muscle movement. When the attacker's neuromuscular system is overw helmed and controlled by the stun gun, he loses his balance. Should the attacker touch you, the current w ill NOT pass to your body!

---

Also, check this one out: http://www .guns2u.com/products/stun_guns/bestex_dds.htm< /a> Those cassets could be manufactured by someone with some technical know ledge. And used with and inexpensive model. <small>[ July 13, 2002, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]< /small>

PYRO500

July 13th, 2002, 10:04 PM

One thing people seem to get wrong about stun guns is that they do NOT create the voltages that they claim to be able to create. IIRC the breakdown voltage of air is 1.1KV per mm now if you had a 200KV stun gun and insulated the hell out of some leads and tried seeing how far you should be able to seperate them you should get a 91mm spark witch from what I have seen is total bs, if you could get such high voltages then you would have the ability to create very big sparks. also with the 500KV stun guns you should be able to get about 454 mm sparks through air, witch I hope you see is hopeless to acheive in such a small package. I believe the 2 stun guns I tested were somewhere around 30KV by calculating the spark length. Also I don't know quite what the manufactures are trying to sell you when they mention all this "T" wave bullshit and how it kills/ disrupts/halts your nervous system, all these do is cause a bit of pain at the location of it touching you and can cause muscles nearby to contract rapidly. I had my brother try the professional 200KV stun gun that cost me about 40 bucks on me and it hurt kind of bad but in no way rendered helpless I had it held to me for around 30 seconds. I had a little stinging in the area and not much of an after effect if you knew what a stun gun felt like before hand the effect is very much diminished. I also got shocked for something like 25 seconds w ith the cheapo 25 buck panther 200KV stun gun witch hurt a bit less but still was kind of painful but my brother who thought he'd pull a fast one on me gabbed me and tried to shock me for a good long time got shocked through the battery compartment of the cheap stun gun presumably through the battery's ground. I also got shocked once for a second or two with an expensive stun gun (muscle man brand) that was something like 120$ and was being sold at security world now I think this one used tw o 9V batterys and it was the most painful shock from the three of them and it was a very rapid "hot" spark. I experimented with several kinds of batteries w ith the two stun guns I had and I found that with around 18V the inverter circuit can charge a whole lot faster and deliver a higer frequency spark than they looked alot more ferce than they did with just one 9V alone. I did not take apart any of the higher class stun guns but I am also assuming they have a bigger pulse capacitor in the primary circut I may have found a place w here I can get these 1000V capacitors fairly cheap. I am going to see if I can make a decent shock w and from parts I can buy,m something that goes in my standards of severe pain. I believe another source of energy drain in these cheap devices are the internal spark gap that discharges the capacitor. while the spark gap adds to the simplicity of the device it causes it to loose a fair amount of energy that could be conserved otherwise. I am in the designing phase of an entirely new breed of a stun gun, the one I am trying to design will have at least 4 times the capacitance of a conventional stun gun and will have no spark gap. instead I w ill use a small high voltage stud SCR and diode protection netw ork it will have atleast the same frequency of sparking as conventional stun guns but with alot more power. I will also have the major change of adding possibly a high rate of discharge NiMh battery designed for hand held radios. With the addition of all that stuff to increase the current and frequency I will look into a higher current more usable transformer, possibly a small epoxy potted igniton coil core.

McGuyver

July 14th, 2002, 02:02 AM

I built a pretty nasty stun gun that put out about 110K volts- it w as measured. It used two 2 magnetos for step-up transformers, the problem w as its size otherwise it was perfect. The nice thing about commercial stun guns is their size, they're quite compact. The reason for the spark gap is so that the attacker will get shocked though his cloths- with no spark gap you have to find some skin which you may not have time to think about. The need is higher current- which when combined w ith about 10K volts will definitely put Mr. Hardass on the ground :) . Your right about the 500K volts bullshit though, that w ould be quite hard to achieve with those little w ienny things.

PYRO500

July 14th, 2002, 03:48 AM

No, the spark gap does not make it so you can arc the thing through clothes, there are actually two spark gaps in stun guns, I w as referring to the one in series with the primary of the transformer of the stun gun. When you press the button on a stun gun dow n a few things happen that add up to a capacitor on the main circuit board charging to somew here around 1000V IIRC and w hen the electricity arcs across tw o strips of metal on the circuit board witch is in series with the main step up transformer witch takes the pulse and steps up the voltage and is discharged through the output. The arc on the top could have two uses but is not arcing to the person while the device is on. One of the main reasons for the arc is intimidation, the first commercially avalable stun guns with these weren't exactly toys like the ones today, they gave a very loud rapid snap that was usually fierce, but ever since people started mass producing them they have gotten really really shitty. the other possible reason for the test arc it to keep the HV from the transformer from finding a path through the epoxy insuation and effectively ruining the device. However That might not be necessary beacuse I had the thing running for quite a while w ith the electrodes far apart and no spark between them. it is possible earlier stun guns could be destroyed with inferrior insulation. I plan on making my custum stun gun about the size of one of those busnuess radios with everything tw eaked for maximum perfomance and insulated to protect from getting shocked through the battery compartment while touching the victim. If you ever rip apart a stun gun you'll see that the internals are very tiny compared to the size of the case. the largest part is the main step up transformer witch probobly could bve reduced in size by about half. Also w ith all stun guns in general I don't think many of them exceen 20-30 KV w ith possibly the mx being 50 Kv. If I can ever get the parts to make this sucker expect schematics so you can build your own. Edit:another thing you need to know about stun guns is that they are not really designed to knock you out. In fact I have never herd a first person report of anyone being knocked out under further searching for any proof of people being knocked out by a stun gun I found info about the Ramsey trial. I found the follow ing quote "the Air Taser does not render people unconscious and zapped himself on camera to prove it." and the link to that page is here: < a href="http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html" target= "_blank">http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html< /a> I have also found a w eb site backing my observations that stun guns don't put out half of what they say they do although their method of measuring voltage is flaw ed, they need to find the maximum distance that the device w ill spark at but non the less there on the right track. http://w ww.taser.com/Tech/Voltage2.htm< /a> <small>[ July 14, 2002, 03:13 AM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]< /small>

Bitter

July 14th, 2002, 01:41 PM

Reminds me of that episode of jackass when they shocked some guy with a stun gun, a pepper spray and a tazer. It w as crap; the guy fell over after being shocked and got up again five seconds later as if nothing had happened. That's more than enough time for the victim to retalliate, give chase or whatever.

Anthony

July 14th, 2002, 09:03 PM

The main limiting factor even in the little 50Kv stungun I have is the battery's max discharge current. Connected to a bench PSU, even at voltages lower than 9v, it gave a far hotter spark. In fact it gave a "bunch" of 4 or 5 seperate sparks rather than just the one. I destroyed one by putting a sheet of 1mm thick plastic btween the electrodes and w atching the purple "feelers" (streamers?). I presume the insultation broke down inside as the unit just buzzed when "fired". Took it back and said "tried it out at home and it don't work!", got a straight swap for another one :)

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

How good are those air tazers that the cops use? All the video footage of tests I've seen, all the test subjects didn't manage to stay standing. Some literature (sales crap) claims better knock down statistics than a handgun (I presume 9mm). They've introduced them as a non-lethal weapon for cops here in the UK, the nice thing is that before being allowed to have one, the cops have to be "trained" w ith them, w hich involves each being shot with one :D

E7

July 15th, 2002, 12:30 AM

a coulpe of years ago i had to go to one of those dumb ass "scared straight" things (a waste of time) and at the end the prison guard had about 7 of us touch fingers and two people put their fingers on the little elestrode things, (his stun gun was about the size of a video casette) and zapped us, all it did was tingle my fingers, but when i tried to pull my fingers away, they felt like they didn't want to move untill he let go of the trigger i don't know if this was the type of stun gun he used or how powerful it was, but i imagine if one person w as takeing the full charge it would completely immobilize you, untill the thing was removed. but these are prisons remind you w here they are only trying to subdue you untill thay can cuff you.

PYRO500

July 15th, 2002, 01:41 AM

The problem w ith stun guns is that they don't totally immobilize you. Stun guns in reality cause pain witch may very in severity depending on some factors such as the power of the stun gun area contacted etc. they will cause a muscle to flex rapidly and this is very surprising and strange in feeling. I never really felt any pain in any area other than the are applied I tried it on my leg and my arm and several areas that had no muscle in them and it seems to have a diffrent more stinging effect. As for a stun gun the size of a video casette tape, I kind of doubt that, among the biggest stun guns I have seen are these ones for cop issue in law enforcement catalogs that have 2 9V batterys and even a very high pow er one w ouldn't need that size case to hold the electronics. The main factor I am going to try to overcome is th max current I can draw from the battery. Surplus NiMh battery packs have fairly high max amount of current for their size and I always considered a stun gun like radios, something that needs one of those desktop chargers to charge internal or connected batteries for max performance. If I can't get a sutable NiMh battery I w ill probobly result to a few nicad cells that are steped up in voltage via a dc-dc converter. I think the design will be similar to the scr driven ignition coil drivers except If I don't use an ignition coil the circuit will be tweaked for the alternate frequency's.

McGuyver

July 15th, 2002, 01:17 PM

The hottest spark (high amps) and the highest frequency will make the loudest sound, if that’s w hat your looking for. My homebuilt stun gun uses no internal spark gap. It's merely a switching (TRANSISTORS) 1,200 volts AC power supply which is fed into 2 magnetos. It is built so that they have opposite charges so one output jumps to the other output. A battery-powered power supply is quite easy to make. I doubt highly they use sparking voltage just for intimidation, also having a smaller spark gap ( on the outside of a commercial stun gun) isn't as hard on the transformer. The prongs sticking out ( the ones meant to shock) will only arc when that path has less resistance (into a body). The large arc allows for the voltage to pass through clothing and to the body. How do you expect to shock someone if they have, say a leather coat on- you could go for the face :) , but they would most likely stop you before you did that. Believe me when I say my stun gun puts out 110,000 volts, I've measured it making sparks over 11 cm long. It is also quite large, 11 in. long and about 3 in. in diameter- its a cylinder like container. That’s all you need to put yours in too - to keep from getting shocked by the battery compartment. I also never said anyone could get knocked out by a stun gun- just put on the ground from the inability to control muscles or whatever happens. I can give you the schematic for the power supply if you want it. You can use ignition coils or magnetos, I just used magnetos because they are smaller and that’s w hat I was looking for. Ignition coils are better to use though because they are usually filled w ith oil w hich makes them less susceptible to high voltage breakdown.

Anthony

July 15th, 2002, 04:48 PM

I've always wonder w hat w ould happen if you ran a wire from one electrode of a comercial stungun to the base of someone's spine and another to the base of their skull. Or sticking your eyeball betw een the electrodes... Feeling brave pyro? :) The shocking through the battery compartment is an odd thing. I found that if you touch one electrode to a grounded object (an earthed electrical appliance in this case), the stungun w ould operate as normal, sparking accross it's gap, or to the appliance casing if close enough, but I'd always get a shock through the battery compartment, regardless of whether I was earthed too, or not.

PYRO500

July 15th, 2002, 06:09 PM

I'm not gonna take my stun gun and zap my eyeball with it, the probable result of something like that is having a corneal tear or a spot on your cornea that develops a scab or welt irritating the fuck outta your eye. As for taking a wire from the base of the spine and the top of the neck I tried that and I felt a few of my back and neck muscles contract, not really painful. I did try once shocking a pulsed flyback transformer throuhg my temples it caused me to see a a w hite flash in my vision. it was strange kind of like seeing stars w hen yoiu get hit in the head albeit only for an instand during the relitively low pow er pulse from the transformer. (the pulse w as only from the saturated magnetic core witch w as energised by a 9V battery and disconnected.

Whitey

July 15th, 2002, 10:08 PM

Oddly enough after reading this thread, someone I work with mentioned getting a stun gun for his girlfriend. He tested it on himself and it "hurt like a bitch but not that bad". I think the effectiveness of a stun gun rests partially on surprise. Someone w ho expects to be shocked will be less affected than someone w ho is shocked totally out of the blue. This is similiar to mace, people who are maced during a test remain standing and are still able to fight (some what), probably due to the fact that they would naturally be squinting and would try to avoid breathing in the gas. Others I have talked to who have been maced in a real world situation found it totally disabling because they did not expect to be sprayed.

PYRO500

July 16th, 2002, 08:40 AM

McGuyver, what exactly are yow talking about w hen you mention magnetoes? The only magnetos I have herd of are generators usally for high voltage that are often found in small engines for ignition? did you remove the magneto coils and use the inductance in them to make HV ? How do you pulse the power to the coils? I am assuming you pulse them w ith a capacitor right? I know that pulsing thw transformer w thout anything for it to arc through is possibly going to create a conductive path in the epoxy but after much abuse (not a severe anough w ord) my el cheapo stun gun transformer is still alive. I think the original designers intent of the spark electrodes w as for intimidation, the engineering team must have taken protecting the transformer and intimidation into account or else the spark gap would probobly be on the inside. If you don't think a stun gun has an intimidating sound, go to a security world store or whatever and ask them to demonstrate an intimidator dual 9V battery stun gun, they are almost always fitted with fresh batteries for demonstration and the dual 9V battery ones are often ferce.

nbk2000

July 16th, 2002, 09:09 AM

Since you're building them yourselves, there's no reason not to build in the option of lethality. Punk fucks with you, stun him. He pulls out a knife or gets 4 buddies...time to die! All at the flick of a sw itch. An idea I got from watching a show about Less-Lethals was a stunner unit that, instead of launching (complicated), w ould instead be stuck on the target using a baton. The baton would have several such stunner units in the end, so you could stick several people. The stunners remain attached to the victim w ith rat-trap type glue, or barbs. You don't have to remain in close proximity to the target to keep them stunned, and you're not restricted to dealing with one target at a time as you would be with conventional stunners.

PYRO500

July 17th, 2002, 03:13 AM

That just gave me an idea, have a club like device w ith some little sticky firecrackers with metal barbs on them, they are alot of them and when they are stuck to your prey they explode a little w hile afer being seperated from the club :) .

nbk2000

July 17th, 2002, 08:07 AM

I like that idea! A barbed string of firecrackers, each larger than the last, stuck on a punk and exploding about every 1/2 second for at least 15 seconds. By the time the last one goes off, it's like an M-80. This would draw attention, naturally, but would keep the punk occupied w ith other things while you run away. In the end, he's dazed but unharmed. Unless, in a panic, he runs onto an expressw ay or off a bridge. :D

PYRO500

July 17th, 2002, 08:24 PM

What about a more harmful version of that kind of device? w hat about a stick covered in m-80 sized firecrackers that are individual, they have straightened out fishhooks for attachment barbs and take out little chunks of flesh when they explode! of course if you had your string of firecrackers out of flash they might do the same thing. also what is keeping you from making some kind of rocket propelled launcher that launches a few tiny firecrackers w ith barbs. I am tinking something like flash tipped exploding bottle rockets with straightened out fishhooks in the end (they really can get a hold on skin. these would be electronicly wired in a series of small tubes to give them more speed and would only be used short range due to the bottle rocket's tendency top spin without a stick.

endotherm

July 17th, 2002, 08:49 PM

A bunch of firecrackers coated in sticky trap glue kind of like < a href="http://ww w.coburnco.com/mrsticky/New Files/mouseandrat.html" target= "_blank">THIS STUFF ,

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

not necessarily that brand but that kind of trap. The glue on those fuckers is very sticky, it is sticky like goo so if you try to pull it off it w ill just get stuck on your hand, and if you try to shake it off it won't fall off. Vegetable oil is apparently the "solvent", it isn't a solvent, it just makes it unsticky.

PYRO500

July 17th, 2002, 10:55 PM

as much as glue w ould be effective here you also have to consider concealment and storage, that's w hy I think methal barbs w ould be most effective, not only do they not make a mess but they wount stick to something like a table or an inanimate object but they will stick easily to clothes or skin.

W_S

August 4th, 2002, 08:08 PM

Well, this isn't a commercial stun gun, but i couldn't think of anyw here else to put it. I was at a friends house earlier today and saw a lighter on a shelf. I picked it up and tried to light it it shocked me, this was not a malfunction, but it was a trick lighter. it w asn't very painful, but it scared the hell out oe me and as an almost reflex, i threw the lighter accross the room. when someone else tried it, and they were expecting to get shocked they still threy it down almost automaticly. when he threw it it stoped w orking. I took it apart and all it was was a AAA battery, and a coil of w ire. i do not know anything about electronics so i don't know w hat this was called, but it looked like a coil of copper w ire. when you touched the buttom of the lighter and the base in the same hand it would shock you slightly. Now, i was just thinking w hat if you could use a larger power source, like one of those 3v lithium batterys and a capacitor(sp) from a disposible camera, you might be able to rig a lighter with the contacts comeing out the bottom of the lighter. it wouldn't be very powerful at all, i know, but it would be very discreet and still have some power to it. I'll try and take some pictures of the inside on the lighter and post them to the FTP.

shrek

August 5th, 2002, 12:18 AM

If you take apart the clicky button type butane lighter (About 6 inches long), and take out the crystal that creates the electricity, you can just press the wires up against someone and click it... hurts bad on the spine, etc. Also I made a stun gun one time. (Well a kill gun :) ) It was a PG&E pole capacitor, 15Kv or so, and I had it charge off of a neon sign transformer. The unit was in a backpack, and I had a PVC pipe with the wires coming out and attaching to rods. So all I do is press the rods against something... BANG! I was going to get a switch, but could not find anything to take the current, that was cheap. It w as cool. shrek

PYRO500

August 5th, 2002, 01:11 AM

A piezoelectric lighter unit? please, that w ouldn't kill an ant a fly or any small insect you could find (believe me I've tried) and a PG&e capacitor? you give no information about. as for charging the capacitor w ith a NST that is w asteful at it is discharging at every AC cycle and unless it arcs over at a specific voltage should at least have a HV diode to rectify the ac.

shrek

August 5th, 2002, 02:07 AM

The piezoelectric lighter unit, I thought it stung when I did it on my spine... and a PG&E capacitor, I gave no info about it because I do not have the info off hand. I'll go check it, it is stored at my grandparents house, and come back with the info... if you really want it. And the output w as rectified, the unit was constructed back in the day, w hen my dad was a kid. The charger and cap w ere his old toys. shrek

Ron McDonald

August 8th, 2002, 04:55 AM

A stun gun will only produced the knock down effects if the contacts are kept very close to the attack for close to three seconds. On another interesting note, if they have a pacemaker they w ill die almost instantly. There are people of all ages out there w ith pacemakers, and if you drop one of these people you will be charged will no less than Manslaughter One. Have fun and don't kill anyone on accident vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Claymore version alfa 0.1 Log in

View Full Version : Claymore version alfa 0.1 xoo1246

July 16th, 2002, 04:13 PM

Someone built and tried a claymore(few weeks ago), constructed of around 365 8mm steel balls and 410 grams of ANNM(25%NM,75%AN). By using a cone with a flat bottom, the builder intended to give some extra velocity to the steel balls by munroe effect(explosives beind and on the sides of 1mm steel cone). Somehow everything fucked up and the few balls that hit the target had a very low velocity(propably most of them hit before the target since the builder only found one tree hit behind the target). Targets were 5mm steel plate(optimistic), and around 2cm wooden plate. Atleast the builder didn't kill himself. Now please, evalutate. The picture sais it all. Pictures are no longer avalible. Pictures are no longer avalible. Pictures are no longer avalible. The images showing the construction are the first numbers, then scenery, then detonation, then target images. <small>[ July 17, 2002, 01:13 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

kingspaz

July 16th, 2002, 07:23 PM

i'd put it down to the shape of the charge. theres a relatively small area of explosive in contact with the balls. note the shape of real claymores. thin plate of explosive with large area of explosive in contact with the balls. the explosive more than 2cm behind the balls is goind to have little additional effect if any since the explosive well detonate a roughly uniform rate thus propelling the balls at a speed which cannot be added too greatly by a explosive further behind the balls detonating at a simliar speed. so basically what you need is a tin box 250*150mm and about 40mm deep. 10mm of space for ball bearings and 30mm for the explosive behind it.

Eliteforum

July 16th, 2002, 10:45 PM

Whats the stand? It looks like a small camera stand or something?

endotherm

July 16th, 2002, 11:08 PM

How far away was the target?

nbk2000

July 16th, 2002, 11:40 PM

I hope you're NOT having these pictures developed! It IS being taken with a digital camera, correct? Because I can just imagine the police looking at copies of these pictures with an unpleasant smile on their faces.

nbk2000

July 17th, 2002, 01:07 AM

Well, from the pictures, it looks like the targets are at least 20 meters away, right? 1-6 Pictures of the claymore. You know, it looks a lot more like an EFP projector than a claymore. Next time, you may want to aim it (without the bearings) at the steel plate from 5-10 meters away and see if it will punch a hole in it. Use a waveformer though. This is a 2" thick wood or styrofoam disc that's a half inch less in radius than the can it sits in. 11 Looks like the balls were just randomly poured in? 18-20 The area where the claymore was exploded? 22-24, 27 Penetrated the wood completely. These would have been serious or fatal wounds on a person hit in the torso. 25 The bearings hit with enough force to leave a full sized dent of a bearing in 5mm steel plate! This shows that there was more than enough velocity behind them. From the pictures, it looks like you need to work on controlling the dispersion of the fragments. The velocity is there, but the pattern is random. You'd want uniform dispersion to ensure hits. Also, since a claymore is an anti-personnel weapon, you may want more realistic targets to test it against. Here's a target design made from cardboard. You'll need two sheets of cardboard for each target. The first sheet is cut 2.5' long, by 18" wide. The second sheet is cut 2' long by 18" wide. Cut the tabs and notches as shown and slide the two sheets together. This forms a 3D target that is self-standing. Anything that hits the 6" wide head is considered a fatal hit. Anything in the central (protruding) part is a serious/fatal injury. Anywhere else is a flesh wound. You want at least three hits to the central mass to ensure the kill. Set up a dozen or so targets at different ranges and angles from your claymore to test dispersion. The ultimate targets are, of course, live targets. Your in a forest area, surely there must be deer or something that you could bait and blast. Nothing tastes better than meat you blasted with your own claymore! :D

mrloud

July 17th, 2002, 02:48 AM

Half your explosive energy went into propelling the tin can backwards. Isn't the normal use of a claymore to bury it in a small hole and cover with a few leaves and sticks? For these experiments, I'd suggest placing the back of the tin up against a sandbag or a big rock.

nbk2000 Ah, but in actual use, would you always have the luxury of backinh it with a sandbag or boulder? Of course not. The way he has it set up now is just fine. I especially like the little tripod and sight. Gives it that added professional touch. :)

July 17th, 2002, 08:10 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Anyhows, here's some drawings from the original claymore patent. In the patent, it's stressed how important it is that the explosive be in direct contact with the fragments, to impel them with maximum velocity. Explosive weight is listed as being from 20% to 200% of the weight of the fragments. As it was, only the fragments directly against the explosive got the full velocity. Those were the ones that dented the steel. Those farthest from the explosive basicly got pushed, and not shot, out of the mine. So you had a wide spread of fragment velocity. :( In it's simplist form, you'd lay the fragments in a single layer in the bottom of a rectangular box, leaving a small border of about 1/2" of empty space around the frags. (See Fig. 9) Fill the border, and the remainder of the box, with your explosive and rear-center prime. Obviously, the more explosive behind your frags, the faster they'll go. :) Since you now know that the frags won't penetrate your steel target, you may want to be behind it when you set the next one off. Being downrange of a weapon gives you a whole different perspective on its effectiveness. You can hear the frags whistling by you, bouncing off the steel, etc. A tape recorder would be good too. Spectrum analysis of the sound can reveal all sorts of details, like velocity of fragments and uniformity of dispersion. Plus we'd like to hear it going BOOM! too, you know. :p

xoo1246

July 17th, 2002, 01:47 PM

Someone seems to like claymores. Thanks for all the good comments, and no the pictures werent developed(taken with a digital camera). That would have been fairly stupid. Posting them here is risky enought, happily the builder is not me. You are right about that fragments have to be in contact with explosive to have primary fragmentation effect, and if not in contact, confinment must be heavily increased. Say, if you use a (thick) steel pipe with one end sealed and fragments 1/4 way into that pipe(explosives behind). Much like a shotgun. Or is that what you call a pipe-claymore(NBK)? I have seen military claymores, belive it was anti-vehicle types, where the fragments are inside a block of some kind of casted(brittle?) metal? They must rely on confinment to reach high velocities I assume. In large destructive devices(those that are most often dropped from planes, not saying the B-word :) ) with heavy confinment, c:w ratio of around 2:3 fragments can reach 4000 m/s. With a c:w ratio of 1:10 the velocity average 1000 m/s wich is the aproximate speed required to penetrate 10mm steel(depending on shape and weight). Above 2000 m/s shape doesn't mather much. (from E,P&P) The tripod was from a camera staive, the distance was around 10-15 meters. If anyone will be behind a steel plate infront of a claymore it won't be a person, rather a tape recorder. Especially since there is no point in constructing the same things over and over again, you wish to develop(if you are sure they don't work properly), right? Ah, a claymore patent, have had troubles finding any.

Zero

July 17th, 2002, 03:49 PM

Shallow thought of the day: I think we just found a use for those silly tins the AOL CDs ship in nowadays... I'm picturing two stuck together, one stuffed with explosive and the other with lead shot. ~Zero the Inestimable

mongo blongo

July 17th, 2002, 06:28 PM

Being behind a steel plate with explosive propelled 8mm steel balls flying at you at a high velocity would be one hell of a rush!! I think I might just be crazy enough to do it! :) Send the video to the guys from Jackass. :D

A-BOMB

July 18th, 2002, 12:49 AM

Or just have it posthusmely sent the Darwin Awards, people because Jackass doesn't take tapes from the audience of then killing themself with a claymore (or anytapes for that matter)

john_smith

December 3rd, 2002, 10:16 PM

Theory question: Is there a reasonably simple and effective way for calculating the force that a fixed claymore applies to it's backing?

nbk2000

December 3rd, 2002, 10:41 PM

Define what you mean by "backing". Is that the side of the mine NOT facing the enemy? Or are you talking about having the claymore mounted to something (like a wall) and want to know if it'd be destroyed by the blast? Assuming you know the explosive type and weight, there's formulas out there to compute PSI and such. RTPB P.F.F Assume whatever you attach it to will be destroyed. Thus don't attach it to anything you'll miss. :)

john_smith

December 3rd, 2002, 11:19 PM

In fact, I was thinking about something like this, and whether a normal full frame car or truck would survive the blasts. More exactly, attaching a couple of mini-claymores to the reinforced front bumper, and some to the rear. If it'd work, well...think crashing roadblocks for instance. Fire front charges upon approach to make the piggies take cover, and the rear ones (angled to give more spread) immeadiately after crashing through to finish them off :D It would probably also do a good job getting rid of those pesky...erm...tailgaters :D Edit: damn graemlins... <small>[ December 03, 2002, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: john_smith ] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> My new Spudgun! Log in

View Full Version : My new Spudgun! Kdogg

December 1st, 2001, 05:54 PM

I have recently made a new spudgun, The barrel is 2" & about 4 ft long, maybe a little less. It has a 3" chamber that is about 20in. long. I have implanted a lantern ignitor in the back of the gun, on the clean out plug. I fired it about 8 times with White Rain hairspray, the potato barely w ent 100 ft at the most & had as pussy ass shw oomp sound. The amount of hairspray in seconds spray varied from 2 to 7 seconds. Tw o to three seconds seemed to work the best. I then tried carb cleaner, thinking it w as my hairspray that was bad, but that barely worked. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG?? My friend has a small gun that is tw ice as loud w hen dry fired! Is my chamber too big or too small for my barrel? Do I need better propellants? Please help...

-----------------Monkeyman

ALENGOSVIG1

December 1st, 2001, 06:17 PM

You should've calculated the barrel/chamber length for optimum performance. hairspray is a shitty fuel, don't use it. dont use carb cleaner either becuase it will deteriorate the the pipe. use propane, butane, or if you made the gun out of thick walled ABS pipe use MAPP/propane mix.

[This message has been edited by ALENGOSVIG1 (edited 12-01-2001).]

Kdogg

December 1st, 2001, 08:00 PM

Shit, I dont know how to caculate to get the right ratios, nor have I seen any on sites. I have noticed that people that use 3" for the chamber & 2" for the barrel, use a shorter chamber, but damn near same length of barrel. So im thinking I will get another reducer cut the old one off, shorten the chamber, & try that. How do you disperse your propane into your gun?? & how much??

-----------------Monkeyman

BoB-

December 1st, 2001, 08:28 PM

Try sw itching to a smaller barell, as in 1 1/2", or 1". Keep reducing until you get optimum performance.

CyclonitePyro

December 2nd, 2001, 09:15 AM

My spudgun, is has a 4" y section, with a 5' long 1 1/2" barrel, I use static guard as the fuel, that stuff is just aw esome, way better than starting fluid or propane. I have a 100,000 volt stun gun with wires leading inside the gun close to each other so when you push the trigger a large sparks jump across. Very loud, it makes your ears ring sometimes, and shoot potatoes across the lake I live at, maybe 250 yards. If I want to post some pictures of it here would I take a picture with my digital camera and then put it on one of those picture hosting websites and post the url here? O yeah, my first gun was exactly the one you described, it shot exactly as you desribed as well, it sucked. -----------------"Friends don't let friends play with Nitrogen Triiodide" [This message has been edited by CyclonitePyro (edited 12-02-2001).]

Energy84

December 2nd, 2001, 02:33 PM

Well, if you're like me, you're probably looking for the easiest possible fix. Try blowing air into the chamber after each shot. I might help a little bit... Personally though, I prefer pneumatics. they're cleaner and more pow erful in my opinion. I used the plans from this page: http://users2.nbn.net/~shindel/ download_free_plans.htm and it's awesome! I made a few modifications to the diaphragm and used ABS instead of PVC to reduce the risk of the thing shattering in our cold Canadian w inters! It performs very good too, launching a small, very hard frozen pear over 200yards at 40psi... no use using more pressure 'cause fruit isn't very aerodynamic and it slow s down to terminal velocity right away :-( oh, it has a 1.5"x6' barrel and a 4"x4' chamber. -----------------why oh w hy didn't I take the blue pill?

Kdogg

December 3rd, 2001, 04:17 PM

I already have a pnuematic, uses a ball valve though. This one has interchangeable barrels. -----------------Monkeyman

Kdogg

December 3rd, 2001, 07:47 PM

Tonight I bought another 2 to 3in. reducer, & cut the old one off & shortened my chamber to 1 ft. It works pretty damn good now, & is just as loud as my friends w hen dry fired. Now I am more familiar with pnuematic ones, So I have a few more questions: 1.Sometimes when I use the hairspray It misfires & I need to clean it out or w ait a w hile before it w ill work again. How can I fix this? 2.I am going to swich to propane, How much should I put in of this? 3 seconds? How to you put yours in, through a hole? Or from breech? -----------------Monkeyman

CyclonitePyro

December 4th, 2001, 01:33 PM

I'm telling ya, use "Static Guard", it is in the laundry section of most stores, w here the clothes detergents are. -----------------"Friends don't let friends play with Nitrogen Triiodide"

Kdogg

December 4th, 2001, 06:30 PM

Yeah, I have heard that before, but have not found it yet. Also today I bought some ether, & tried it. Not once did it fire. I think its because it shoots in a stream not in a mist. How much Ether would anyone reccomend? -----------------Monkeyman

imported_Sgt_Starr

January 1st, 2002, 01:06 AM

Hey guys, Wow long time no see eh?This upgrade looks nice...(just a little complicated for my taste) Anyw ays, more to the point. I have only gone through one spud gun(had some times when it has gone sour on me) Ive refurbed it and so on and it is still doing better than what yall say was your first combustion, (this was my first attempt and has out-tested models Ive have most recently made) My barrel is 33"X2" long with a 4 in flash supressor I made from a telescope Shade(it actually works well, it keeps my excess burn off or "flash" wich without the flash supressor is usually a 5 in diameter ball of flame into a 3 in long candle flame) My chamber is a 19"X3" PVC pipe, I use a Wal-mart brand Spray Lubricant(5 short bursts, mb 7) and I can fire a 1 1/2 Section of PVC pipe with a domed encap filled with paper and wrapped in Cardboard (tip is weighted w ith Elmers glue) about 300 yards, Sorry for all the blabble just to say that, its just really good to be back! (my ignition is a Grill Piezio connected to 2 Steel screws 1/2 in long spaced about 1/3 to a half in apart I usually get a spark under all conditions) I think the reason you have to wait awhile is because you have an excess of CO2 and w ater vapor in the chamber

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

and not alot of O2 (ergo the no ignition or incomplete ignition) Try blowing in the pipe or using a bycicle pump to blow the CO2 out and the air in should work everytime then. hope this helps in someway!

Fallout85

January 1st, 2002, 01:44 PM

CP- Yeah, it's great stuff. Surprisingly clean and powerful! Similar to straight butane. It makes a pretty good bang in my 1" barrell and 3" chamber gun. The first time I used it my neighbors thought it was a real gun and called the cops! I uploaded the jpg on the forum ftp so everyone will know w hat to look for.

Fallout85

January 5th, 2002, 02:59 PM

RTC- Thanks. I didn't actually read NBK's message until after I had uploaded it. But I figured nobody would mind terribly since it's only 32k. I'll crop my photos from now on. Yep, it's from a camcorder. I have this thing called Snappy that hooks the camera into the printer port essentially converting it into a digital camera. You can hook it into anything with the red and white prongs. VCR, TV, DVD, gaming consoles, ect. I got it on Ubid for about $30. It's normally about $60, but it's worth it.

Azazel

April 9th, 2002, 09:45 AM

spudguns rule :D

AcridSmoke

April 9th, 2002, 07:51 PM

I've made a couple of pneumatics and fired quite a few combustions, and I still like pneumatics. I use the cheapest possible potatoes and a 1+ 1/4" barrel for two shots per big potato. The chamber is 1+ 1/2" by 5 feet. My friend uses a 2" barrel and a 4" by 4 feet chamber. (these are pneumatics). His barrel used to be much shorter, but now he uses a 7 foot barrel and I use a 10 foot. That changed the range for both of us from 250 yards to more like 400. For combustion... My uncle's has a tiny chamber and a really long barrel. It shoots 300-350 yards with Aqua-Net Hairspray. I suggest a 1+1/2" barrel with more length than your chamber, regardless of diameter. I've had the best result with a setup like this... Requires minimal measurement :)

Zach

April 9th, 2002, 11:59 PM

if you dont have access to static-gaurd or whatever, try spray deoderant... check the fine print, it usually says what the propellant is. a friend of mine tried using oxy/ acetaline... he had to get peices of pvc carved outta his face at the hospital :D

Bignutsami

April 10th, 2002, 11:41 AM

How thick is everyone's spudgun PVC (in mm)? Will help in comparing betw een countries w hich all seem to use different systems. In Australia PN18 40mm (1.5")= 4mm thick PN18 50mm (2")= 5mm thick PN18 100mm (4")= 9mm thick Note - they are actually metric sizes, not imperial called metric, so slightly different sized to imperial systems.

Anthony

April 10th, 2002, 12:10 PM

21.5mm (3/4") - 1.5mm 32mm (1.25") - 2mm 40mm (1.5") - 2mm 50mm (2") - 2mm 68mm (2.5") - 2mm 110mm (4.5") - 3-3.5mm I haven't used 2.5" or 4.5" for pneumatic yet. Scarily thin huh?

Sparky

April 11th, 2002, 06:10 PM

I've had some experience with spudguns. The only reason I don't like pnuematics is because 1)I don't have a good compressor and 2) they are not nearly as portable (I live in the city so I have to travel every time I want to use my SRDF). I put up a crappy page more than a a year or so ago and I don't think I have gotten a visitor since . It is basically a diary of all the stuff I have done since I started with spudguns: http://www .pyropage.50megs.com/. I run my gun w ith propane and I have devised a simple measuring device to make sure it works every time. Ether (QuickStart) does give a sharper bang if the amount is just right but it's just not worth the chance of getting it wrong, it not firing, airing out etc.I made it out of ABS because it was easier to get than PVC. I had lots of problems with fuel when I first started so that's why I decided to scrap the guesswork and go propane. My page has all the details about my three guns. In Canada they usually refer to PVC pipe and ABS by schedule 20, 40 and so on but those are the common ones.

AcridSmoke

April 13th, 2002, 12:42 AM

I've been using SCH40 pipe for all of my cannons... I believe my combustion friends have too. I don't know what the w idth is in mm, but it tends to have a 350 psi rating. That's more than enough for most spudguns. My compression is usually around 90 psi. Unless you seriously damage the pipe, the only risk you have are improperly primed+ cemented fittings.

Spudgunner

April 17th, 2002, 09:40 PM

Just thought I'd put my new spudgun info up. Chamber 5 feet long, 4 inch pipe. The barrel is 10 feet long (right now, can be whatever length I want) and is w hatever diameter I want ( I have a 2 inch female adapter on the chamber, can hook up whatever I want). It can be combustion OR pnuematic w ith a change of the endcap, and removing the sprinkler valve that is screwed onto the 2 inch female adapter. I need a new grill ignitor (or to modify the one I have so it w ill work), so I have not tested the combustion properties yet. I just finished the pnuematic converstion today though, and I have tested it. One word: "Wow!" I have a 10 foot, 1 inch barrel on there right now . I first tested it with a wad of new spaper at around 80 or 100 psi. I put a small (inch by 3 inch by 4 inch) paperboard box at the end of the barrel, held up by a steel plate a quarter inch thick, about 4 by 5 inches, and a hammer against that. I shot it, and pieces of newspaper w ent everywhere. It went through the box (obviously) and shot the steel plate and hammer back around 3 or 4 feet (on concrete). Ok, so I decide it is time for a real test. I take a 2 liter bottle and fill it with w ater. I put a small (inch long hunk, if that large and inch diameter) in the barrel and set the barrel aimed at the 2 liter. Compress up to 100 psi and BAM! There is now a 1 inch hole in one side of the bottle w ith a split running vertically from the hole above and below it about 2 or 3 inches, and the cap is completely shattered from the hydraulic force. Not bad.... I am hoping to fully test the capabilites next time I head to my farm using a C-cell battery (perfect fit in 1 inch barrel). I am hoping for at LEAST a quarter mile range, and I am sure it will easily get that. Spudgunner (aka Spudgunr)

Purple Fire

April 29th, 2002, 05:52 AM

Ive only built one pneumatic spudgun before, just a real long ugly thin diameter prototype to test the principal, but im just starting work on my next one, a proper one. It w ill have a 65mm barrel that is split in tw o places with screw fitting so you can choose a long(accurate) barrel, a short( mortar style) one, or a compromise. There are 3 air tanks one to each side and one underneath. Tw o have valves at the end so you can have large, medium and small tank sizes. The barrel is 500mm long and each of the tanks is 300mm. The only pipe available in NZ is either pressure pipe, or ordinary PVC spouting. While the pressure pipe is fairly cheap, the fittings are VERY expensive, otherwise i w ould have made several spud guns by now. Pneumatic cannons are far better than crapy combustion ones, so much more reliable! My fav ammo by far is ice slugs! you can get a perfect fit in the barrel and they are lubed from the water on the sides. They go for miles! The second favourite is fishing sinkers, i can get ones that fit perfectly in the 15mm barrel of the prototype and i can put one through a fence paling at 20m. For the new gun, i found that Monteith's beer botles fit almost perfectly in the barrel! im gonna be havin me some FUN!

Yi Purple Fire..did you use to live in the UK? I think I know you :) Send me an email if you did as I won't be here to read this until the end of this month..

May 5th, 2002, 06:59 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Ctrl_C

May 5th, 2002, 07:57 PM

I built a pneumatic one using the SGTC SupahValve. It's awesome. It will but a potato through 1" think Oriental Strand Board (similar to plywood) at over 50 yards. Caulking tubes fly straight as an arrow too. I've shot chains, bolts, nails etc., all make it through the board but the 8" long nails only go half way in. I also was shot w ith a foam ball (for soaking with w ater and throw ing at people...a toy) at 20 feet at 50 psi and oh my god did it hurt like a mother. Like a giant paintball hitting you VERY hard. ow wie. I am fully confident this thing could take out small aircraft if you could hit them and I am going to try to kill a deer with it.

Cyclonite

May 3rd, 2003, 10:19 PM

I would post a new thread but I dont have many posts and this is semi on subject. I have entertained the idea of Sabot rounds for my spud gun for a while and decided to give it a shot. I used a foam cylinder cut in half surrounding the Sabot made of lead. I just drilled a 1/4 in sized hole in some wood and put in molten lead to make a sabot. I shapened the tip of the sabot and mushroomed the other end of it. I then placed it in the foam cylinder with duct tape on the rear ensureing even push on the projectile. Needless to say, I w as rather impressed at the resullts of a sabot round from my spud gun (10') on a junked car, has anyone tried this before? Im sure there could be alot of improvment on this design.

xyz

May 3rd, 2003, 10:58 PM

I hope to do some experimentation with Sabot rounds in my Pneumatic Cannon. The cannon has two barrels, a 20mm one for launching small potatoes and CO2 cannisters, and a 50mm one for launching normal size potatoes, onions, etc. Both barrels are about 185cm long. BTW, does anyone have a chart of what pressures different (Australian) PN classes are rated for? I made mine from PN 9 w hich is about the same thickness as the stuff that Anthony mentioned earlier in this thread.

Axt

May 4th, 2003, 12:43 AM

xyz, the PN rating is the pressure rating, PN9 means rated to 9bar. 9bar is 130psi.

xyz

May 4th, 2003, 03:54 AM

I knew that it was the pressure rating, I didn't know what units it was measured in though. Thanks for telling me its measured in bar.

Spaced Monkey 2002

May 7th, 2003, 09:52 AM

I recently tried a projectile made from a 6 inch section of the steel (?) rod used to reinforce concrete buildings. This w as wrapped in masking tape to fit the 20 mm barrel of my friends pneumatic cannon. Sadly his compressor screw ed up and w e had to use a cheap-ass bike pump to pump up the cannon. It still managed to smash through a breeze block at 10 metres though. The breeze block was stood up against a wall for support...

Flake2m

May 8th, 2003, 07:50 AM

I have a reletivly small pneumatic spudcannon. 25mm barrel and a 40mm air chamber both are about 1m long. I also have an attachable 15mm which I use for marbles. It is quite pow erful for its size, especially at a fairly short range and at 100 psi. I made a special sabot round for the cannon and I wanted to test it. I put a carboard box as a target. When I fired the round @ 120 psi the round made an entrance hole about 40mm wide and the exit hole was about 150mm wide :eek:. the round keep going until it hit a hardwood fence behind the box, at which point it embedded itself into the fence. It is stil there today. The round I made consisted of 2 polystyrene blocks with an 10cm screw in the middle and 8 4cm nails surrounding it. I have a "sniper style" piston spud cannon in the w orks, but progress has been delayed due to my studies. When I finally finish it though, the power it w ill have would be aw some. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Laser Claymore/Tripmine Log in

View Full Version : Laser Claymore/Tripmine Riot

D e c e m ber 14th, 2001, 04:37 PM

I got this ide a after reading the post o n the touchlight landm i n e s . T o m a k e a l a s e r t r i p m i n e a l l u n e e d i s t o g e t o n e o f t h o s e s e n t r y l i g h t s a n d r e p l a ce the lightbulbs with ur explosive of choice. And if you wanted to m ake it transportable hoo k it up to a car battery. The laser tripmine is m ore effective cos u can dodge a landmine (not saying it's a bad idea) by m i s t e a k , b u t u c a n ' t d o d g e a n i n f a - r e d b e a m (if u don't know it's there)

nbk2000

D e c e m ber 14th, 2001, 05:07 PM

http://assaultweb.net/ubb/icons/icon22.gif Can you spell HED? http://assaultweb.net/ubb/icons/icon18.gif

-----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. Th at is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com /nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Shaped charge Log in

View Full Version : Shaped charge Yikes

D e c e m ber 14th, 2001, 09:34 PM

Have any of you guys ever thought about how to build an effective shaped charge? W hat would you use, how would you co nstruct it, what re sults would you g et?

CyclonitePyro

D e c e m ber 14th, 2001, 10:21 PM

Ouch... Try a search. W ait no, quick delete or change your threadhttp://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/sm ile.gif -----------------"Friends don't let friends play with Nitrogen Triiodide"

twinkle

D e c e m ber 15th, 2001, 04:30 AM

I know that there is written a lot about it and to find here when he would search but maybe when you would take another a p p r o a c h a n d l o o k f o r u s i n g c o m m o n o n h a n d m aterials like a ( conicals) reflecto rs of a lamp (fitting) and so , this would be s o m ething different

nbk2000

D e c e m ber 15th, 2001, 05:08 PM

Y i k e s, on his VERY FIR S T P O S T , p o s t s a t o p i c a b o u t s o m e t h i n g t h a t h a s b e e n d i s c u s s e d u m p t e e n b a z i l l i o n t i m e s . Not an auspecious start. :shaking head: Firstly, newbies really shouldn't post a new topic till they've been here a while and proven themselves otherwise they're m uch m ore likely to get deleted for being fuck ups. I f y o u ' v e b e e n h e r e a w h i l e , a n d p o s t s o m ething stupid (which if you've been here a while is unlikely) you're m uch m ore likely to get a warning, rath er than outright banned. So, being as it is, I'm locking this thread. Y i k e s, you need to search first. Not just here, b ut the internet as well. You'll be am azed at what you find. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. Th at is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com /nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> circular charges Log in

View Full Version : circular charges Neil McCauley

December 16th, 2001, 08:52 AM

I have a simple question: if you make a circular/frame shaped charge e.g. by putting a piece of det cord in a shape and the beginning and end meet each other, where and how do you attach the detonator? Because the detonator should always point in the direction of the end of the explosive charge, that is the direction in which you want the shockwave to move. Can you put it just anywhere and reliably iniate the det cord? And will the shockwave go both ways, or just one. And if so, won't the explosion blow the end of the det cord away before the shockwave reaches it? So, how do you iniate a circular shaped charge?

Mr Cool

December 16th, 2001, 09:08 AM

Well if you have a ring of det cord, the only place you can initiate it from is a point on the ring. I'm sure you didn't need a new post to ask this, there are several threads on shaped charges... although your LOW EXPLOSIVE shaped charge is interesting. Not a good choice of section, IMHO. -----------------"Nothing makes a man fear much, more than to know little." - Francis Bacon.

Anthony

December 16th, 2001, 02:54 PM

If you have a ring of det cord, no matter which way you point the cap, it's going to be pointing along the cord. Yes the detonation wave will proagate in both directions.

Agent Blak

December 16th, 2001, 04:11 PM

I would just have "Q" style tail and attache the Cap to the tail. But what do I know right. -----------------A wise man once said: "If You Dance With The Devil, The Devil Don't Change The devil will Change you" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak">here</a> to download my files.

nbk2000

December 16th, 2001, 04:46 PM

Exactly Agent Blak. Just take a short length of Det-Cord and tie it around your loop using a prussick knot or clove hitch. Attach the detonator to the tail and off you go. I also assume your using a proper tamping mass? Also, this is more appropriatly suited to Improvised Weapons so I'm moving it there. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Neil McCauley

December 17th, 2001, 06:49 AM

Ok, I wasn´t sure in which forum to ask this question. Actually it could be asked in any forum, but since it´s about where to put the detonator I choose the Low Explosives section, although I know (really, I do) it involves no low explosives at all. Anyway, thanks for the answers. I do think the "Q" shape with the detonator in the tail is the best solution. And the shockwave will travel to both sides of the ring (and meeting each other at the middle). But what if I only use a ring of det cord and tie a detonator (pointing of course in only one direction) to it? Will it initiate the cord in both directions like Anthony said? Although I don´t want to question his authority and he most probably is right, I have some difficulty in understanding how the shockwave which is clearly pointing in one direction (or isn´t it?) can initiate the cord in two directions, so also the other way round (in an opposite direction). With the "Q" tail it´s just a bit different because then the shockwave is pointed towards the ring and iniates the cord in both directions. I have to know it because when the ring shaped det cord is initiated in only one direction it will be blown out of shape before the shockwave has reached the end (and beginning). Or am I also wrong in this case?

DBSP

December 17th, 2001, 01:10 PM

It shouldn't matter where you put the det as long as it closely atached to the detCord. It's just like a fuse, take a lenght of fuse and lite it on the middel. What happens? the fuse start burning in both directions. the shoch wawe from the blasting cap will move both out the sides and the bottom, it will also be directed against the top but it shouldn't be as powerful in that direction since there might be some obsicals like wires if your using an electrical cap. -----------------¤monte¤

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter nbk2000

December 17th, 2001, 02:40 PM

The explosion of a detonator forms a (basically) spherical shockwave. This interacts with the det-cord, causing an initiation of the PETN (typically) that travels at about 5 miles per second along its length. So, any fears of "deforming" the ring is foundless since the explosion travels faster than the energy release can break the inertia of the det-cords mass. Taping the detonator tightly against the ring will work perfectly fine. Although, I do have to say, that trying to make a shaped charge using just bare det-cord isn't going to do squat against any metal thicker than a car body panel. The monroe effect only works well when there is two opposing shockwaves colliding against each other to form a third (more powerful) force to be directed against the target. A simple cylinder shape (tube) is going to disperse the force in an equal manner in all directions, rather than in a directed fashion. For clarification of what goes where, the synthesis of an explosive (High or low) goes in the appropriate section. Anything that uses an explosive (but is not explosive itself) goes in improvised weapons. TNT is an explosive, and a shaped charge is a weapon that uses it. Get it? -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Agent Blak

December 17th, 2001, 06:42 PM

I while back i suggested a Hoola-Hoop Style Charge(PeTN/Mg) with a TNT or ANNM non-Shape Charge in the middle(works as boot would on a door). The theory behind it is that The PeTN/Mg Would detonate before the ANNM. This would work as follows; 1.The Ring Detonates slicing part way though or scoring a ring into the target. 2.The ANNM or TNT then punches it through so you can enter. That is the theory anyways never tried it though. -----------------A wise man once said: "If You Dance With The Devil, The Devil Don't Change The devil will Change you" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak">here</a> to download my files.

Neil McCauley

December 19th, 2001, 08:52 AM

Ok, thanks very much for the answers, it´s clear to me now. The shockwave is indeed spherical and moving in every direction, I mistakenly thought of it as a horizontal zone in a detonator and moving towards the end. I´m also clear about what topic to put where (I think) http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif. By the way, I´m not gonna use det cord for this frame shaped charge. I know the effect of such a charge is minimal (mostly because the VoD is not so high and the amount of explosive is low), it was just an example to keep it simple. I want to use an improvised linear shaped charge (although I like the "hoola hoop" idea (easy to improvise! and perfect disguise: if stopped by the police and asked what you´re doing over there, just do the hoola hoop), it´s effect will be much better than with det cord, mainly because of the higher amount of explosive and (thus) increased VoD). And I will take NBK´s word for it that when I put a detonator a the beginning of the charge and the beginning and end touch each other (but there´s no connection) the frame will not be blown out of shape (not even from the shockwave moving outward from the detonator/starting point?) but will detonate nicely like I want it to and puncture the target (if any doubts please say so, it´s a lot of responsibility http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif ). This leaves me with one more question: is the effect of the metal jet (let´s say from a brass liner)produced by the linear shaped charge on (laminated/safety) glass the as same as on metal? Or do I have to adjust the stand off distance or use an other liner for better effects?

[This message has been edited by Neil McCauley (edited December 19, 2001).]

Mr Cool

December 19th, 2001, 02:18 PM

The jet will cut through anything, as long as it's not too thick. Just treat the safety glass as if it was metal, use the same liner and everything. Although you probably won't get a nice neat hole on glass... The shape of the charge will not be distorted by the shock wave, as NBK rightly says - as soon as the shock wave hits it, it detonates and therefore has no time to move around. Even if it does move, the whole detonation will be over in a few microseconds so it won't be able to get very far. -----------------"Nothing makes a man fear much, more than to know little." - Francis Bacon.

Anthony

December 19th, 2001, 02:21 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Wire reinforced glass would be much easier to breach than steel and you wouldn't need to adjust the stand-off distance or liner material. I don't think a shaped charge is ideal for glass, as that concentration (quantity of explosive Vs hole size) is excessive. I think it would be more efficient to use the hoola hoop idea to create a larger hole with the same amount of explosive - or the same size hole with less explosive (more economical, less noise).

Neil McCauley

December 24th, 2001, 01:04 PM

The whole idea behind using a linear shaped charge is that it is THE most effective way for cutting materials. That is, you use the least possible amount of explosive with the maximum result. A LSC is many times more efficient than a ribbon charge (I think 2-3 times as effective at least). And a tube charge is even less effective because a ribbon charge touches the metal (which is necessary for the shockwave to do it´s work) and a tube only partial. And another thing is that a ribbon charge must be at least 12mm thick (and 36mm wide). Although maybe slightly less might be possible. And that a LSC will cut through anything I could have guessed myself but I want a more precise answer (please http:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif ): will the penetration be as deep as with a metal target, or more/less. And will the glass be sort of like melted and pushed out of the way by the jet as can be seen with metal, or are there other effects to be expected? And where can I find information about more details of LSC´s: for example information about the relationship between the thickness of the liner and amount of explosive and subquent the penetration and stand off distance. So I will be able to calculate those figures when starting with a certain liner (so sort of metal, thickness width and angle are known). If someone has the answer already for a brass liner with a 90 degree angle and 1 mm thick it´s much appreciated.

[This message has been edited by Neil McCauley (edited December 27, 2001).]

nbk2000

December 24th, 2001, 05:02 PM

Here's a link to a very through (and technical) PDF file on linear shaped charges (with pictures). Right click on this url ( http://www.prod.sandia.gov/cgi-bin/techlib/access-control.pl/1996/962031.pdf ) and choose "Save target as". It's a 10 meg download so it will take a while, but it will tell you just about everything you could want about designing LSCs. PS: This is from my December 16,1999 post in the High Explosives section of the Forum Archive PDF. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Neil McCauley

December 27th, 2001, 02:52 PM

Very much appreciated, thanks. That´s the kind of information I´m looking for. Although I have some problems getting it on paper. Yesterday the printer didn´t work and today I can´t seem to download it from the site. And I have difficulties finding the topic where it came from. But that´s all my fault. [This message has been edited by Neil McCauley (edited December 27, 2001).]

Noct

December 27th, 2001, 11:45 PM

The idea behind shaped charges seems simple to me, you want the force from the most explosives to collide at the same time, so if you have more surface area equal distance away it will "come together" and the forces of the two will sort of merge, and the strength of the final force is dependent upon how much surface area is facing the target (and obvious factors, like amount of explosives and what explosive is used). So, if you had an ice cream cone made of TNT, and set it circular side down on a surface, the detonation would cause an indention opposite the inside of the cone... like this: /\ <-- explosive == <-- surface ====\/===== <-- surface after detonation Does that make sense? Am I correct? ... this is just my perception of what I have read, and I am mostly just trying to see if it is correct by saying what I think is true... and if my explanation helps others understand the principle, then that is great too. But the question remains, is this an accurate description?

Anthony

December 28th, 2001, 12:06 AM

Colliding/focused shockwaves do play a part but IMO the liner does most of the work. The liner is turned inside out upon detonation and froms a long comet like shape. The liner is apparently not molten, but since it posses more energy than is needed to totally deform it, it behaves like a liquid. The head of the comet contains not very much material but is moving very fast, the rest of the comet - the "slug" contains most the liner material and moves more slowly. When the head of the comet strikes a target it exerts a pressure so great that steel will flow like a liquid. This moves the target material out of the way and then the slug generally follows though the hole probably giving follow-through.

PYRO500

December 28th, 2001, 01:22 AM

Remember you need to initiate the charge so that the detonation waves will travel the direction you need them to go. in the

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

"ice cream cone" of cast TNT example you would need to initiate the device fron the tail of the cone, the liner on the shaped charge behaves like anthony jsut described but it is important to note that the liner is right up aginst the explosive and I think that it might transfer more energy than the gasses of a shaped charge alone. the liner under extreme pressure is likely to acctualy be molten due to the extreme pressure against it, same thing goes for gasses, ever compress air into a tire and have it get hot? that might have some effect but I have herd that pressure on a substance lowers the melting point, an example is squeezing an ice cube with pliers slowly, you get water while there is little friction. an example that has been stated before is ice skates but that is an incorrect example I have been told. -----------------Society creates the crime, the criminal completes it.

kingspaz

December 28th, 2001, 05:30 PM

i was just wondering. if you made a detonator from a small cone with a concave underside (instead of flat base), to make use of the munroe effect, would it be more efficient than a regular detonator?...less explosive needed, maybe no need for a base charge or insertion into the explosive to be detonated? just a thought...

Anthony

December 28th, 2001, 05:46 PM

Dunno Kingspaz, might be worth investigating. I read of a test concerning whether shaped charge liners become molten, they cut a liner into multiple pieces, glued it back together and reinserted it into the charge. The charge was fired into water and the liner was recovered in as many pieces as it was previously cut into. The reasoning was that if it had become molten then it should have fused back together. Dunno whether this is correct, there seems to be a bit of a mystery surrounding some aspects of shaped charge technology.

Yikes

December 29th, 2001, 06:55 AM

I read about that test too, I actually have an article about it: Experimental Verification of the Theory of Jet Formation by Charges with Lined Conical Cavities the Journal of Applied Physics, vol 23 nr 5, may 1952 That journal has other very interesting articles about shaped charges, too! (Maybe you could search the library of the nearest university, sometime?) Any material can withstand a specific pressure. When the liner of the shaped charge collapses, a dart-like 'projectile' is formed, consisting of a very fast moving , long and thin tip (the jet), and a slower moving thicker end (the slug). The thin jet impacts at the target material with a very high speed (some 30000 ft/sec, depending on explosive, liner material etc.). The pressure created by that is many times higher than the pressure any material could withstand, under favorable conditions may well exceed 250,000 atmospheres! The target material simply has no significant resistance to such high pressures. From then on, the material of the impact zone REACTS as if it were a liquid. But it still is a solid which, as Anthony wrote, was proved by a test cutting a liner in pieces, then firing the charge, and retrieving the slug that was formed in pieces too. Not molten together, no. Funny thing: lead plate offers more resistance to the jet impact, since it's molecules are heavier! More energy must be used to move them. Why aren't armor plates made of lead then? Well, after impact from the jet, the slug will also hit the target. And the slug,although it moves much slower, is considerably heavier, and so will penetrate soft lead plate easily... (Nope, too bad, lead plating is not a cheap & easy way to reinforce your house to counter Maverick attacks!)

[This message has been edited by Yikes (edited December 29, 2001).]

Microtek

December 29th, 2001, 08:07 AM

Concerning the munroe-effect detonator: Gerald Hurst mentioned detonators of this kind on alt.engr.explosives. They are used for deep-well blasting and have the hollow cavity configuration in order to be able to withstand the pressure at those depths. The munroe-effect apparantly doesn't have any effect on initiating ability. Before I read this, and before I learned very much about ammonium nitrate, I tried to initiate pressed AN with a 12mm hollow charge. It didn't work ( it wouldn't have anyway; the charge was much too small ).

Neil McCauley

December 29th, 2001, 09:11 AM

Since you guys seem to know a lot about the subject, you probably can tell me also about the difference between (laminated/ safety) glass and steel in regard to the behaviour when subjected to the jet produced by a linear shaped charge. As stated earlier the jet produces a pressure on the target so high, it will be pushed aside like a liquid. And the penetration depents on the strength of the material. And there's another factor to be taken in account: the overall cutting capacity of a specific LSC is not only defined by the penetration of the jet but also of the "fracturing" of the material behind the penetration zone. That also depents on the type/ strength of material. This fracturing can be as much as 50% of the overall cutting capacity. Now, it's clear that even different metals will react differently to specific LSC, let alone a complete different material like glass. So can someone please inform me how (safety) glass will behave compaired to steel. Is the material strength stronger/weaker than steel. And will the penetration be deeper or not. And what about the fracturing zone? Thanks.

[This message has been edited by Neil McCauley (edited December 29, 2001).]

mrloud

December 29th, 2001, 10:28 AM

There are too many variables to be considered just to give a straight answer. I assume you are interested in cutting out a circular hole from a plate of either steel or laminated glass. Take a plate of 20mm thick steel and a plate of 20mm thick laminated glass. Hit each with a large sledge hammer. The glass will fracture all over but it wont fall to pieces. The steel will emit a loud 'bong' and sit there with a smug look.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Glass is amorphous, ie, a liquid. It flows, albeit very slowly. If you force it to flow faster than it naturally wants to, it will just snap. Just like toffee. Any sort of shaped charge should be quite effective at cutting through laminated glass. (well, more effective than steel of the same thickness). "Steel" is a generic term given to any iron based alloy. Different steels can have pretty much any sort properties. These properties will even change depending on the temperature. It is impossible to say "This is how such-and-such shaped charge will affect steel". Remember, metals are maleable. They will bend and deform before breaking. This acts as a kind of shock absorber and will absorb some of the energy from the explosion. Steel is also dense and its crystaline structure is strong. What it comes down to is: if I had to blast through either a steel panel or a glass panel; I'd go for the glass.

Anthony

December 30th, 2001, 09:16 PM

Depending on how thick the wire in the reinforced/armoured glass is, a sledgehammer blow may well just snap it all. As Mrloud said, glass is much easier to breach than steel (with the exception of glass hard tool steel :) ) because all you need to do is start a crack and it'll spread through the material and glass has very little "give". The spreading crack affect can be seen if you've ever broken safety (not laminated) glass used in cars (front screen is usually laminated with the rest being safety). If you break a small hole in the pane, you can watch and listen as the cracks slowly spread out across the entire pane, until you can collapse in areas with the tip of your finger. The thing about glass being a liquid - I really don't think it's true. The evidence for it being a liquid is usually that old window panes are thicker at the bottom, as though the glass has slowly flowed down over the decades. It was found that glass manufacturing at the time was inconsistant and panes were not of uniform thickness. As a result glaziers, logically, would fit panes with the thickest end at the bottom.

Neil McCauley

December 31st, 2001, 07:27 AM

OK, thanks for the replies. But I was hoping for a more precise answer. I know how glass cracks and doesn't bend like steel (although: have you ever seen how laminated glass acts when subjected to a bomb blast? It looks like a balloon! and it will return to it's original shape and not break. And what about the fact that bullets from an AK47 pierced the metal of an armoured truck but didn't go through the laminated safety glass in the front?). But I do agree laminated glass is probably more vulnerable than steel when subjected to a jet produced by a LSC. But I would like to know how much. And excactly in what way. I would also like to know if, because of the already mentioned different properties of laminated glass in comparison with steel, a ribbon charge might be a better option (because it is easier to make and if glass is so much more vulnerable than steel, you can probably use far less than the amount considered necessary for steel according to the demolition manuals). But again, I want to know precise amounts, penetration depth, properties of the glass, etc. Don't tell me what I know already. I know I ask a lot, and probably the only way to find a definite answer, is to just actually try it: find a piece of 1" thick steel and 1" thick safety glass and see what a LSC/ribbon charge does. Unfortunately it's not that easy to do such tests, because it's illegal and penalty's are high! So if someone has the answers or knows where to find it's much appreciated. [ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: Neil McCauley ]

Anthony

December 31st, 2001, 09:44 AM

The thing is, unless someone on this forum happens to have done comparison tests between glass and steel against verious kinds of charges, you're unlikely to recieve an answer nearly as precise as you want. There are just far too many variables to work it out theoretically, the only way is to try it. If the punishment is harsh then don't get caught.

Ctrl_C

December 31st, 2001, 05:30 PM

Anthony: I read an article in Popular Science explaining glass being liquid. They stated that while, in fact, older windows are thicker at the bottom, it is not because glass is liquid. They do say though that glass is a liquid but would take longer than the life of the universe to exhibit any noticible change. also, on the subject of glass, the safety glass in cars is manufactured in a really ingenious way. the molten plate of liquid glass is blasted on all sides with super cooled air that instantly hardens the outside edges. the inside, however, is still semimolten. as the inside cools, it "tries" to contract, but can't because it is in a sealed environnment. It sort of creates a vacuum of sorts, only without air, although that is the wrong analogy. In an accident, when the outer shell of glass breaks, the inside instantly contracts and causes minute stress fractures that, with the added force of the collision and their own weight, break into those little pieces that scatter everywhere. sorry about the offtopicness of this. :)

Anthony

December 31st, 2001, 10:26 PM

The amazing thing about safety glass is that although it has a weakness designed into it (to make it crumble as you describe) it is much more resistant to impact than ordinary plate glass.

nbk2000

January 4th, 2002, 03:43 AM

Here's a picture showing pro linear charges. http://server3001.freeyellow.com/nbk2000/Linear%20Shaped%20Charges_Copper_Cross-Sections.JPG Note how it's just copper tubing rolled into a certain shape? I'mve been thinking that if a person used a router, they could form two blocks of hardwood into a shape that, when a copper tube was placed between the two blocks, that the blocks, when hammered together, would reshape the pipe into the proper cutting shape. I've also been visiting other forums while our Forum was down. One of these was a firefighters forum that has a section to discuss forcible entry techniques (AKA Burglary School :) ).

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

When they need to get through laminated windows, they first punch a hole with a pick-ax (in your case a shaped charge), then use a sawz-all to cut out a flap that they can peel back. Oh, and side impact bars on the latest high-end cars are made of titanium and are impervious to the saw, ax, jaws of life, and similar. They have to use exothermic lances to cut them. Make of this tid-bit what you will. ;)

Neil McCauley

January 4th, 2002, 07:17 AM

I know I asked a lot, but in thought there might be a chance that someone knows the answer. And NBK thanks for the suggestion for how to improvise those copper sheathed linear cutting charges. The ones in the picture are very effective. The ones with just as less as 21 gram/m will cut through 6mm of mild steel. And about the "forcible entry techniques": I don't see myself sawing out a laminated glass window. It probably goes very quickly with the right kind of saw. I think I saw it once and it was done in a few seconds. But I like it more when it's done in milliseconds ;) . And those firemen have also another way to gain entry or make holes in roofs/walls: they use a "flexible cutting charge". That's a flexible linear shaped charge put in a polyethylene frame (as could be seen in your file "breaching charges"). And that flexible linear shaped charge is known as BLADE and consist only of a piece of copper with a 90° angle on which a layer of RDX-based explosive is put. Now this would be rather easy to improvise. The only disadvantage is this type of LSC is not as effective. For example, BLADE 100 containing 100 gram of DEMEX per meter will cut through 6mm of mild steel. That's 5 times less effective as those LSC's in the picture. I wonder why it's not as effective. One would assume it's because of the lack of confinement since they both use a copper liner and RDX as explosive. But I think it's not that simple (what's a sheet of copper going to add to the effect when you're using such an explosive as RDX anyway?). I read the article of "precision linear shaped charge analysis" and Table 1 clearly shows that when you make a LSC, a variation of any constant will have an effect and there are no rules to follow. It's impossible to say: when you use a thicker liner, the Stand Off Distance will be higher/lower and the penetration will be deeper/shallower. Every LSC has different properties and different effects. It seems impossible to predict the effect if you change the angle or the thickness of the liner or the amount of explosive. So a test is indeed the only way to get answers to all my questions. But I was wondering if there's not someone who could do it for me. That way I won't get caught and get to know what I need to know ;) . [ January 04, 2002: Message edited by: Neil McCauley ]

nbk2000

January 4th, 2002, 08:22 AM

Even if someone here DID a test, it still wouldn't answer your question because there's as many different types of laminated glass as there is steel (almost). Without a sheet of the EXACT same glass, any test would be meaningless. Also, why is it that you're trying to cut glass for? I don't expect an exact description of your "heist" but the purpsoe may be served better by some other means if the objective is suitable. The flexible charge may be less effective because, in order to be flexible, the copper isn't as dense/hard as the shown LSCs. And confinement is ALWAYS helpful, regardless of the explosives power. Standoff is an important factor too. The LSCs are usually attached to the target with plastic stand-offs. A flexible charge probably doesn't have that. It may even be that BLADE is deliberatly underpowered because of its intended application as a rescue tool for fireman, and not military/demolitions. Also, the RDX is more diluted in a flexibel PBX configuration than straight cast in the more convential LSC types. This will have a significant impact on d/v. And even a few hundred m/s decrease in VOD can cut performance in half.

Neil McCauley

January 5th, 2002, 07:36 AM

I don't agree such a test would be useless, it would at least give an indication of how laminated glass reacts to a LSC. And I don't expect someone to do such a test, although the laws in some countries are less harsh and the possibilities to use and test explosives are much better, and performing such a test wouldn't be such a problem (wish I was living in America ;) ). And BLADE is not deliberately less powerfull, it's used by the military and demolition industry as well. And the Stand Off is build in: the explosive and liner is surrounded by some low density foam. A nice site with pictures and data about LSC's you can find if you search for "BLADE" and "Schneidladungen". The lower performance of BLADE compaired to other commercial LSC's is probably, like you say, the slightly different explosive used (with different density and VoD) and a copper liner which is flexible (probably by using (a layer of) thin parts of liner that can move indepently from each other). [ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: Neil McCauley ]

nbk2000

January 5th, 2002, 08:59 AM

It would have helped if you'd posted a picture of it in the first place. http://www.spreng.de/luzern/img15.jpg Anyways, I know the reason for the low performance...it's the liner. It's not actually solid metallic copper, but rather a flexible polymer composition doped with copper powder. These powdered metal liners are mentioned in US patents for similar purposes. And the lack of "solidity" means lower density, less even jet formation, etc. But it does have the neatness of being wrapable. I could imagine wrapping one around a big metal light post and blowing it as you zoom past, leaving the piggies to eat it when it crashes to the street. :)

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter [ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Neil McCauley

January 6th, 2002, 07:49 AM

Yes, pictures are better than a thousand words, but I'm just not such a genius with computers. And are you sure about that polymer liner because I thought it would be pieces of copper liner moving indepently like described in US patent 2,543,057 "elongated tubular charge" (again no pictures sorry). But that's a very old patent and probably an old method so probably nowadays they use those polymers but do you have some patents that can prove you're right? ;) . And still my most important question remains what the effect of a LSC on laminated glass is. I think I read somewhere that a LSC penetrated a piece off acrylic glass about just as much as steel (but I can't remember where and when I read it and if I'm right). But assuming I am: one would expect those charges would cut through plastics like cutting through air but apparently not. And since laminated glass is nothing else than pieces of glass with layers of polymer/plastics in between, there's no reason to believe that a LSC will cut laminated glass easier than steel. Also when you consider the facts I mentioned earlier (laminated glass is very(!) flexible, and can absorb a lot of energy) So any information on this subject is more than welcome.

nbk2000

January 6th, 2002, 08:33 AM

Page 14 (I believe)(img13.jpg) of the powerpoint presentation on the german URL you cited says: "plastifizierter kupferliner" Which, referring to the above picture, we know that kupferliner is the copper liner. And it's not unreasonable to assume that plastifizierter means "plasticized" or "flexible plastic". Thus my statement. And it's not my job to search out details for people. Go to http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/search-bool.html and look for it yourself. It's there 'cause I've seen it. Also, you're getting dangerously close to beating a dead horse with the glass vs. metal question. See post about ATM cash machines in misc section to see a similarly persistant poster and the results. We can assume (though perhaps incorrectly) that glass is as vulnerable to an LSC as a similiar thickness of metal. The only way to know for sure is to test it out yourself. If it's life or death that the glass be penetrated, use a massively overpowered LSC that could cut a tank in half. RTPB: "Victory through superior firepower!". :) And the images are easy to do, that's why we now have a button in the "Instant UBB Code" list (see below your posting window) that you can just paste the pictures URL into. Or click the edit button on any post with pictures in it to see how it's done. Don't be lazy, learn how, it'll come in handy in the future. [ January 06, 2002: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Neil McCauley

January 6th, 2002, 04:37 PM

OK, no reason to get irritated. You´re right about the "plastifizierter Kupferliner". It means plasticized copper liner and I did actually see it but gave a different meaning to it, because I was not familiar with copper metal bonded in a polymer. And you don´t have to do a search for me, I just thought you might have the patent numbers at hand. But I can find it myself. And I will. Just like I will find an aswer to the most important question myself, as no one seems to know the answer. (Ooh, I wished I could just experiment for a couple of days without the danger of getting caught, just go out there and try the different explosives and targets...... Anyone doing it for me will get 10% of the profit, promise.... ;) . Since I cannot ask the same question again here´s a different one: since a ribbon charge might be a even a better (or just as good) choice for blasting laminated glass, I was wondering about the Genius system: it uses a 20 gram det cord placed in between two tubes filled with water and the whole construction is hold together by some paper container. The advantage of this system is obviously that there´s no shrapnel: water (and paper) is used as a tamper mass. And it´s used for blasting out doors. Would this kind of explosive be effective for blasting laminated security glass? Let´s say I would use a tube filled with 100-200 grams per meter of explosive instead of the 20 gram det cord, what would the effect be? (any estament for steel, glass is appreciated). I know normally metal/steel doors are not opened with det cord (only used for wooden doors because of it´s low (difuse) power) but with (F)LSC´s but maybe with the tamping and increased amount of explosive it´s possible (as it actually could be considered a tamped ribbon charge). And what the hell is a UBB code? Let alone an instant UBB code. And what the fuck is URL? ;) [ January 06, 2002: Message edited by: Neil McCauley ]

Anthony

January 6th, 2002, 08:24 PM

I would be helpful if you could give more details about the target besides it being made of laminated glass. Roughly how thick? What's the application (car windscreen or fire resistance etc), is it intended to ward off attack? (windows in rooms/ containers/vehicles containing things of high value, simply to resist vandalism, or just strong enough for the application). Also, acrylic is not glass. It's still very brittle but is more flexible than glass, softer too. Why can't you conduct any tests? We all live under oppressive, non understanding governments and societies but find a way.

nbk2000

January 7th, 2002, 01:34 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Yes, the country you live in doesn't make squat difference in the legality or severity of the "crime" of explosives since you obviously don't have a license for it. So regardless of where you live, if you don't have the governments approval, it's your ass if you get caught. You'll also notice we have people here from britan, germany, australia, france, and other countries not well known for there tolerance for guns and bombs. But we do it anyways. And if you're too scared to test things in some remote quarry or forest, how will you suddenly get the nuts to do it in an (implied) heist when there's likely to be people around to hear it and call the cops? Since I cannot ask the same question again here´s a different one: .....Would this kind of explosive be effective for blasting laminated security glass? :mad: SAME FUCKING QUESTION, DIFFERENT PHRASING! Don't be a smart-ass. I delete smart-asses. Topic closed. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> U PGRADE SHUTDOW N!!! Log in

View Full Version : UPGRADE SHUTDOWN!!! megalomania

D e c e m ber 26th, 2001, 09:45 PM

Read my post in the Forum Matters section here! -----------------For the m o s t c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n d i n f o r m ative web site on explosives and related topics, go to Megalomania's Controversial C h e m Lab at http://surf.to/m e g a l o m a n i a vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Bazooka vs. RPG

View Full Version : Bazooka vs. RPG 10fingers

Log in

July 14th, 2001, 07:46 PM

* [This message has been edited by 10fingers (edited July 19, 2001).]

DarkAngel

July 14th, 2001, 08:18 PM

I ones did a simulation shot of a shoulder rocket.I don't know the name but you need to point at the target with the weapon till impact because it can control the rocket,it whas pretty cool But i think it shoot's more comfortable with a weapon without a heavy backblast. -----------------ÐarkAngel For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www .run.to/section1) [email protected]

cutefix

July 15th, 2001, 12:12 AM

I have seen an actual firing of an RPG-7(test firing).I still see a backblast from it.But maybe not as extensive as the Bazooka.There has been a documented SAS report about IRA terrorist firing an RPG inside a vehicle,that happened to carry a lot of explosives inside.I think the target was a British officer in another car.What happened was that the backblast ignited the explosives blowing the van and the terrorist inside,but it failed to hit the intended target.

SMAG 12B/E5

July 15th, 2001, 01:42 AM

The "Bazooka", 2.75 in and later the 3.5 in rockets, are OK. The RPG-7 is excellent also. The Bazooka rockets must be designed to burn all propellent before leaving th launcher. I am not really sure that you really want to attempt the RPG-7. It is a complecated combination of recoiless and rocket munition. You might want to try the RPG-2 or PANZERFAUST varaition. It is much simplier, more reliable and less costly.

dmitrieff

August 16th, 2001, 04:33 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 10fingers: [B]* Rocket Propulsion The United States 2.36 inch Bazooka M9A1 w as perhaps the m ost fam ous early rocket launcher; it was the forerunner of the 3.5 inch rocket launcher M20 (sometim es called the Super Bazooka ) w hic h was used in Western Block arm ies. The launcher tube has two m ain purposes. It guides the projectile on to the correct line and it protects the firer. A rocket must all be burnt before it emerges from its tube (All Burnt On Launch = ABOL); its efflux will burn the firer if it is not. This necessitates long, often unw ieldy tubes. To improve their portability, they have been hinged or separated into two parts which could the be interlocked for use. When a rocket is launched, the rocket and its casing must be accelerated away in addition to the warhead. If a high muzzle velocity were demanded then the launcher would be very long and the rocket w ould be large and heavy. On the whole, as a consequence, rocket launchers tend to have a low muzzle velocity and a restricted effective range. In the case of the 3.5 inch Super Bazooka, the effective fighting range w as some 110 m. Modern systems such as the British LAW 80 have improved on this; battle ranges for rocket launched LAW will probably be 300 to 400 meters in the future, using a tw o stage rocket. Fortunately a rocket in an open-ended tube does not build up such high pressure as a recoilless w eapon. Consequently there is no need for it to be strong and heavy. The resultant lightweight tube has given birth to one shot disposable launchers. Recoilless Propulsion Increased range can be achieved by the use of a recoilless launcher. In case of the recoilless principle the propellant provides its trust in one short blast as a normal gun. There is no danger for the firer from the efflux at the muzzle and only the mass of the warhead need be accelerated away. There is a gain, not only of range, but also because the launcher can be shorter. A 3.5 inch rocket launcher has a length of 1549 mm (front tube; 768mm and rear tube 803 mm) and the Swedish 84mm Carl Gustav recoilless launcher a length of 1130 mm. The modern Carl Gustav M3 has a weight of 9 kg compared with the 5.5 kg of the rocket launcher. Its effective range is 400 meters or more and this has been extended to 700 m by the incorporation of small rocket motors, which give extra in-flight trust. However, at such ranges the sighting becomes complicated for a shoulder launched w eapon and guidance becomes desirable. Adoption of Propulsive Methods The Russian RPG-7v is an interesting approach to decrease the w eight (7kg) and length (990mm) of the launcher whilst retaining lethality and range (300 to 500 meters). The propellant, which is composed of two parts fits into the launcher. An initial charge launches the rocket clear (11 m) of the launcher and firer before a rocket ignites and provides the remainder of the trust. This design results in a light launcher w hilst maintaining a large and lethal warhead. On the other hand the accuracy is suspect because the rocket may well ignite w hilst the projectile is yawing and will then be driven off line.

I hope that the above is helpfull.

EP

August 16th, 2001, 02:03 PM

Do modern Bazookas/RPGs use the All Burnt (propellant) On Lauch method? I read that Stinger SAMs have a compressed nitrogen charge that launches it from the tube and the main propellant then ignites a safe distance from the firer. Could this also be true for modern bazookas/rpgs? It seems this would make a lot of sense for improving range and accuracy.

10fingers

August 17th, 2001, 12:18 AM

This is interesting! I have a book titled "The Poor Mans RPG", written by George Dmitrieff. Good book.

dmitrieff

August 18th, 2001, 10:25 AM

Although it looked like the ABOL type rocket launchers, like the M20 3.5 inch Rocket Launcher and the M-72 66 mm LAW, were becoming obsolete and would be replaced by recoilless launchers (AT-4 / M136) or recoilless launchers w ith rocket assisted grenades, a new trend in rocket launchers seemed to have emerged over the last 10 to 15 years. While most Western Block countries replaced the old M-72 66 mm LAW, partly due its relative ineffectiveness against modern armor, the Russian copy of this weapon, the RPG18, saw extensive use in both Afghanistan and Cheznia in recent years. Modern LAWS design makes use of a launcher tube, on the rear of which fits the projectile in its container: It doubles as a disposable extension to the launcher. The container takes majority of the force of the propellant. The main tube takes only a little of it and, although it is lightweight, can withstand up to a hundred launchings. This system has the advantage of a good propulsive trust combined w ith a light launcher. The United States, and many of its NATO allies, not only prefer self-contained rockets, they specify it. The idea is to keep the rocket ammunition factory-fresh until the moment it leaves the tube. Damage to unpackeged rockets is a consideration, and there are times when Soviet RPG rockets are bent, dented, or otherw ise made unusable by field carry. If a rocket is shipped to the battlefield and fired from its own sealed tube, the cost of the disposable tube are justified by its dual role. Examples of these systems are the French 89-mm LRAC anti-tank rocket launcher and SEP DARD 120 close anti-armor w eapon. But also the Israeli B-300 light ant-armor weapon and the United States 83 mm SMAW (Shoulder-launched Multi-purpose Assault Weapon) and the South African XXXX. (forgot the name http://theforum.virtualave.net/ ubb/smilies/redface.gif) The use of a disposable container does however not have to mean that the w eapon uses the ABOL system. The SEP DARD uses a double-based cordite propellant charge to launch the projectile. A splitting breach block of compressed plastic flakes is ejected to the rear to balance the recoil forces. The manufacturer claims that the recoil is at a minimum w ith a noise level less than 180 dB. The Belgium firm Mecar produced a rocket with a separate booster rocket for the 3.5 rocket launcher. This tw o-stage system, together w ith the improved w arhead, enhanced

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

the performance of the 3.5 inch Rocket Launcher close to the standard of modern rocket systems and gave the old 3.5 inch Rocket Launcher a much-needed new lease of life. Due to the new round the launcher can also be shorter The length of the Mecar RL-83 Blincide Launcher (a mechanically firing copy of the 3.5 inch M20) was reduced from 1700 mm to 1200 mm. How ever the 3.5 inch Rocket Launcher is now only used by some third world countries. Im not sure if the Stinger SAM uses a compressed nitrogen charge to launch it from its tube. The manufacturer only states that the system uses a solid propellant dual-trust rocket motor with a separate boost motor. It is however very likely that it does. Since the rocket is shot upwards the back of the relative long launcher (1524 mm) is close to the ground. A recoilless system or ABOL system needs room for the emerging high-speed gases to escape; the danger zone of a M72 66mm launcher is 8 to 25 meters. In Afghanistan the mudjahideen fighters would clime up trees and tie themselves to the tree in order to fire their RPG-7 at Russian helicopters. Modern Anti Tank Guided Weapons (ATGW) use gas generators to launch the guided missiles and I do not know if they are used in shoulder fired LAWS. I guess that these systems use a very low muzzle velocity since the guidance system will correct the line of fire. The Poor Man s RPG is one of the best books on the subject of improvised rocket launchers . (No relation to the author) I dislike the just stick a model rocket in a tube solution as provided by people like Robert Wells in his book The Anarchist Handbook They totally ignore the interesting design aspects of this kind of weapon. Other good how-to-books are; Improvised Home-Build Recoilless Launchers by F. DeMarco, Bazooka; How to Build Your Ow n by Anthony Lewis, LAW & Disorder Rearming the 66mm Light Anti-Tank Weapon by Fred Brown and Improvised Rifle Grenades by Pow der Burns. All published by Paladin Press before the Hit Man case censorship. I would be very interested to learn of other good titles on this subject or if anyone has a good idea for building an improvised version of the RPG-7v.

BoB-

August 18th, 2001, 10:56 PM

If the homemade rocket were ignited after it left the barell, then this would add complexity, and therefore there would be an increased chance of failure. Estes rocket motors lack the thrust nessacary for horizontal takeoff, if they are ignited inside an enclosed barell however, there is a pressure buildup that launches the rocket like a bullet. A pictures worth a thousand w ords... http://ww w.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/m1.jpg The homemade rocket tube should obviously be DOM, or other seamless pipe if using steel, Aluminum w ould be much cheaper, and is seamless, PVC/ABS w ould maybe work for one shot, they're certainly cheaper than metal, but using it more than once is asking for trouble, I personally wouldnt risk using plastics. Notice the electrical connections on the bottom of the rocket? This system is simple and could be improvised easilly, the battery pack/safety/fire sw itch-circuit could have a female electrical connector, and all the rockets could have Male electrical connectors, this would make loading alot simpler, and faster. As already mentioned, the backblast from the exiting rocket had a tendency to melt off the shooters face. http://ww w.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/m1a1.jpg "...How ever the protective mesh wire did not prove very useful and therefore was rarely used by the troops. Instead, a solid metal funnel at the muzzle was to reduce the backblast." This safety feature could be improvised by using a square sheet of heat-resistant plexi-glass (so you can still sight), or in a pinch, a metal funnel could be w elded or strongly secured to the muzzle. The M1, and M1A1 bazooka both use no breeches, or hatches, the rocket is simply loaded into the back of the weapon and fired, as mentioned before, Estes rocket motors are not capable of this, a hatch, or breech is needed for a pressure buildup, this breech could be a simple solid (metal!) rod that is secured w ith a removable bolt, like on this page: http://ww w.geocities.com/spudguns_uk/drainpipe_cannon.htm DO NOT attempt anyhing mentioned in this post! it is submitted for entertainment, and discussion purposes only! serious injury could result!

[This message has been edited by BoB- (edited August 18, 2001).]

10fingers

August 18th, 2001, 11:44 PM

The reason I started this topic a while back w as to discuss which type of shoulder fired rocket would be the easiest to improvise. The device that I would like to build would have good range and accuracy, be relatively easy to build with commonly available materials. It would be used for battle reenactments and would not have an explosive warhead. In the book "poor mans rpg" it does not give details on what type of propellant is used in the RPG. The bazooka uses a modified double based propellant. My guess is that the rpg propellant would be easier to fabricate than the bazooka propellant. In the bazooka w here all the propellant burns very rapidly I would think that the composition is very critical. Also the dimensions for the rocket motor w ould need to be exact. An error in this area may cause the rocket motor to explode. In the RPG where the propellant burn rate is much slower I think it w ould be a little more forgiving. There are probably several propellant formulas that could be used in this system. The downside is that the RPG uses a two stage system, ejection followed by the propulsion stage. The entire rocket seems to require more parts and is inherently less accurate than the bazooka. A driveshaft from a vehicle may w ork for the launch tube of a bazooka system. I found one that is made of aluminum alloy, is 3 inches in diameter, it is quite strong and light.

dmitrieff

August 19th, 2001, 10:44 AM

I guess that for a reenactment type of launcher the below -described method is worth considering. I have read that the Estes D-12-0 model rocket engine can be modified by carefully drilling a hole through the propellant of the engine centrally from the nozzle opening to the other end with a 1/8 inch-diameter drill bit. This will give the engine a higher initial trust. (Note: do not use high-speed electrical drill!) A number of these rocket engines can be glued together by removing the clay nozzle and cut them down so only the cardboard container w ith the propellant is left and then glue them together w ith wood-glue. If some of the paper of the cardboard casing is removed four or five of these engines can be stuck into a lightweight 1-inch plastic pipe. This seems quite an easy way to build a simple but powerful engine for lightweight rockets. The m aximum lifting weight of a D-12-0 seem s to be around 400 gram and Im not sure if this method w ill increase the lifting power dramatically. The tw o stage problem could be solved by using the delay pellet of an emergency flare as shot from blank-firing pistols. These flares tend to be activated after aprox. 10m of flight. A commercially manufactured delay pellet seems the w ay to go because of safety concerns and shot by shot accuracy. A plug with the delay pellet can be inserted into the nozzle of the rocket engine and as soon as the rocket engine fires the plug will be pushed out of the nozzle. The plug w ould also protect the rocket and the rocket engine from the explosion of the propellant in the launcher. Im not sure if it will be dangerous for the firer if the plug is shot backwards by the rocket motor. Probably depends on the w eight and design of the plug. DO NOT attempt anyhing mentioned in this post! it is submitted for entertainment, and discussion purposes only! serious injury could result!

BoB-

August 19th, 2001, 06:42 PM

Estes info.

http://ww w.estesrockets.com/rocketry101/impulse.gif http://ww w.estesrockets.com/rocketry101/howhigh.gif Color code: Provides at a glance the specific application of the engine: "Green Single Stage Purple Upper Stage (on Multi-Staged Rockets ) Red Booster Stage Black Plugged for special applications" http://ww w.estesrockets.com/rocketry101/enginefacts.cfm If for some reason you cant see the pics, I sw iped them from this page.

[This message has been edited by BoB- (edited August 19, 2001).]

Victim

August 19th, 2001, 06:52 PM

I can post some picture's of the Law90 Bazooka and the RPG 7 if anyone wants me too, also does anyone have any information on the RPG 22? Remember a w hile ago when the MI6 got attacked by the supposed Real IRA, well at first the people investigating, thought that the attack was done with a RPG 22, but later found it out to be a 66mm "one shot pot" anti tank rocket. Well, getting to the point, does anyone have any picture's, spec's, or anything on the RPG 22, coz I can't find any decent information. -----------------"Death, The End Of Hope, The Friend Of The Friendless..."

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter dmitrieff

August 20th, 2001, 01:37 PM

RPG-22 A scaled-up version of the RPG-18, the RPG-22 has improved performance and was introduced in 1985. It is the current issue disposable Russian LAW. Usually issued one per squad. The RPG-22 has an 8-yard backblast (4d6 flame damage). The RPG-22 is a short-range, tube-launched, disposable, infantry antitank rocket launcher, similar to the US LAW system. The lightw eight, collapsible launch tube consists of tw o parts: the outer tube made of fiberglass and a sliding inner tube made of aluminum. The inner tube extends 10 centimeters to the front of the outer tube in firing position. It fires a 73-mm fin-stabilized rocket w ith an effective range of 250 meters and a HEAT w arhead capable of penetrating approximately 390 millimeters of armor. The trigger and the pop-up rear peep sight are in the middle of the extended tube. The pop-up front sight is at the forw ard end of the outer tube. The front sight is calibrated for ranges of 50, 150, and 250 meters.

SawedOff8gaugeman

August 20th, 2001, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by dmitrieff: RPG-22 A scaled-up version of the RPG-18, the RPG-22 has improved performance and was introduced in 1985. It is the current issue disposable Russian LAW. Usually issued one per squad. The RPG-22 has an 8-yard backblast (4d6 flame damage). The RPG-22 is a short-range, tube-launched, disposable, infantry antitank rocket launcher, similar to the US LAW system. The lightw eight, collapsible launch tube consists of tw o parts: the outer tube made of fiberglass and a sliding inner tube made of aluminum. The inner tube extends 10 centimeters to the front of the outer tube in firing position. It fires a 73-mm fin-stabilized rocket w ith an effective range of 250 meters and a HEAT w arhead capable of penetrating approximately 390 millimeters of armor. The trigger and the pop-up rear peep sight are in the middle of the extended tube. The pop-up front sight is at the forw ard end of the outer tube. The front sight is calibrated for ranges of 50, 150, and 250 meters. Ripped from some RPG(w ell, ...) rules?? Yep: Originally posted by dmitrieff: (4d6 flame damage) ROFLOL!!! http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif

nbk2000

August 20th, 2001, 04:37 PM

There is an RPG 26 (or 27) that's the russkie equivilant of the US LAWW. Speaking of RPG, I found a video clip of one blowing up a stack of 55 gallon drums. Go to http://www .rbs.ru/exhibition/UralExpoArms/2000/video/rpg.mpg -----------------"The know ledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF. Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.

EP

August 21st, 2001, 02:33 AM

I have made a rocket launcher with Estes D engines. I have only tested it once, but here is w hat I used and have learned. The tube is a 5 foot lenght of ABS pipe w ith an electrical ignition system and a metal lid taped over the back end. The rocket was just a simple tube w/nosecone and the fins were made of cut playing cards and bent to make the rocket spiral. I did not put a payload in as it w as the first test. When I launched it, I w ore a full face sheild, but w as surprised at how little smoke/flame/whatever was shot back, the tube took the w orst of it before it shot out. Im not sure how far it went, but it w ent a good distance and fairly straight also, probably in part because of the spin. The tube had surprisingly little damage, but the w ires to the igniter w ere a bit fried. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> R aketen Sprenggranate Log in

View Full Version : Raketen Sprenggranate Eliteforum

July 20th, 20 02, 08:4 8 PM

This weapon entered service in mid-19 44 with patrol craft and was later fitted to larger units. Used a single-barrel projector. Several different kind s of shells were produced, including HE, sm oke and wire cable. Each HE rocket had the destructive power of an 8.8 cm AA shell. The wire cable version was sim ilar to the British UP AA rocket and used parachutes connected to 10 0 m (330 feet) of cable. It is not known if these weapons ever shot down an attacking plane. It is interesting to note that the parachute version of this weapon was similar to the ineffective British UP AA rockets. That weapon was withdrawn from service following the loss of HMS Hood. This is the only information I have apart from the picture, but th e picture is in German (I belive) Raketen Sprenggranate 86m m This is the picture, if anyone cou ld provid e any more inform ation on this could you please tell me what kind of fusing system it had? A n d a n y p o s s i b l e i m p rovisations/im p r o v e m e n t s ?

qube

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2002, 03:03 PM

The im age link doesnt appear to be working for me, can you host it somewhere else? The n i can see it and suggest im p r o v m e n t s .

Eliteforum

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2002, 03:11 PM

Link should work now, I deleted it off the host server thing by accident when I was cleaning it up.

Machiavelli

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2002, 05:56 PM

Hm m, just wondering, why do you think the picture is in German? Words like shell, cap, percussion fuse and spacer sound awfully English to m e. But do you have a larger version?

Eliteforum

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2002, 06:27 PM

Sadly, this is the only picture I can find that is showing details.

Arkangel

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2002, 06:44 PM

Interesting d esign. To me it looks like the rock e t m o t o r h a s 6 s e p e r a t e n o z z l e s , f r o m a single fuel grain. T his would be an excellent way to im part spin sabilisatio n, far m ore so than the stinger types, since all nozzles provide thrust and spin. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Seriously cool gun

View Full Version : Seriously cool gun Charlie Workman

Log in

July 29th, 20 02, 03:4 0 AM

Ran across this one and had to share it with you guyswww.swivelm achine.com W hat they have done i s a d a p t e d a . 2 2 rifle to fire 16" a lum inum crossbow bolts. They claim a velocity of over 450 fps. and an accu racy of 1 " at 50 yards. I d id an overview check of th eir patents, but they seem to only cover the airpowered version. From what I've seen it seem s to be a m odified form of spigot launche r. They replace the stock barrel with one that will cham ber c o m m on industrial blanks, but not bulleted cartridges. The bore is choked down increase the velocity of the gas flow. This is a l s o n e c e s s a ry, as the OD of the spigot barrel m ust fit into the hollw shaft of an alum inum arrow. I don't know what this is. There is an outer tube, .920 OD, ID unknown, which covers the entire arrow. You apparently have to roll the fins to fit them in. Noise level is said to be half of a conventional rim fire. They provide barrels for the Ruger 10/22 and 77/22. This m a k e s m e wonder how or if the 10/22 action rem ains closed with such an in crease in back pressure. It has potential for experim entation, or at least just fucking around . I've got a couple of Rom anian M1969 trainers that could be obvious candidates. Any thoughts?

PYRO500

July 29th, 20 02, 04:1 0 AM

W hile I like the idea of a crossbow arrow flying through the air at those speeds while being in an accurate rifle configuration, I like the idea that they travel less than sonicc speed and while doing alot of dama g e a l s o a r e s u b s o n i c a n d n o t a s l o u d . I searched the entire page and I found that one of the pages had these four patents on the bottom : #4,890,597 #5,086,7 49 #2,218,786 #1,332, 686 <sm all>[ July 29, 2002, 03:11 AM: Me s s a g e e d i t e d b y : P Y R O 5 0 0 ] < / s m all> vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Tri-Grenade Log in

View Full Version : Tri-Grenade nbk2000

August 2nd, 2002, 08:12 PM

I've been studying up on some variations on grenade designs that I've seen on various military, RPG, and patent sites. Skipping the more exotic designs, I've come to think that simply changing the shape of the grenade would greatly increase its effectiveness. The black four sided equilateral triangle in the center is the actual explosive charge, with the rounded green being the plastic embedded fragmentation shell. The reasoning behind the pyramid shape is that, unlike conventional grenades which are egg shaped and thusly waste about 80% of their fragments into the air or ground, a triangular pyramid will ALWAYS have three of its four sides (75%) facing upwards and outwards...towards the enemy. (look at picture with the bottom being the ground) Because of the upward projection, the prone thrower (you) would be underneath the path of the majority of the fragments, while the standing (or kneeling enemy) near the grenade would catch the majority of them. Also, because the majority of us would be using these in city fighting, rather than in a wilderness setting, it makes sense to optimize the weapon for the streets. With four (essentialy) flat sides, this grenade isn't going to roll past your enemy and down the storm drain. And, because of the shape, if it lands in front of him, it'll bounce once or twice in random directions, making it impossible to catch or dodge if they see it coming. (Looking down at grenade from above) With a typical modern grenade using prefragmented bodies, there's a thousand+ fragments embedded in the plastic body. If the enemy is in line with one of the three faces (likely) of the tri-grenade, than he's looking at 1/4th of 1,000 fragments, or 250 fragments. Unfortunately, there is a small flaw...the corners. If the enemy is in line with a corner, he's not to likely to catch a frag. A cylinder, having no corners, would obviate this. And there is a grenade design patent that does just that. However, as anyone who's ever thrown an empty can knows, it's a near miracle if it lands upright on one end and stays that way. 99.9999% of the time a cylinder will land on its side. This is prevented (in the patent) by the use of spring loaded legs to upright it. But this is complicating things. By using the geometry of the triangular grenade body, you get the same benefits, only without the hassle. Besides which, you wouldn't want to be thought of as cheap and only give ONE grenade, when you can show you care and give TWO, right? :D The probability of the enemy avoiding death/injury by being in the blind spot of two trigrenades is nil.

Fallout85

August 2nd, 2002, 08:25 PM

Hmm. Good idea! I never really thougth about how ineffective the convetional design is. Wouldn't making a cone shape alleviate the corner problem? It would still, most likely, land base down. I may have to test this with some wooden mock-ups.

Yi

August 2nd, 2002, 08:36 PM

Very nice. I think a cone would most is just at likely to land on its side as it is on its base. What about the firing/fuse mechanism? any extraneous lumps would alter the shape. Perhaps a tube leading to a detonator in the center with a fuse train and percussion cap to initiate and a simple spring loaded hammer with a pull pin on the surface...when the pin is pulled the hammer would pull inside the pyramid leaving only a small area of casing without fragmentation material.

Fallout85

August 2nd, 2002, 08:43 PM

Yup, they all landed on they're sides. It would have to either be very "squatty" or weighted at the bottom. But with the "squatty" cone you would have a bad "base-to-side-ratio" and lose about half of the energy to the ground. With the weighted one it might land on uneven terrain and still not go base down. Yes the triangle design is probably best.

0EZ0

August 2nd, 2002, 09:32 PM

quote:

---

However, as anyone who's ever thrown an empty can knows, it's a near miracle if it lands upright on one end and stays that way. 99.9999% of the time a cylinder will land on its side. This is prevented (in the patent) by the use of spring loaded legs to upright it. But this is complicating things.

---

No need for spring loaded legs. Make an eliptical Dome end on one end of the cylinder, and fill with cast lead or anything that will end up heavier than the explosive charge together with it's section of pipe/cylinder. When thrown, if the wieght is heavy enough, it will have a *toyclown* effect and bob back up on it's weighted dome end. If it is too unstable when it lands and bobs too much, try making a flat section on the middle of the dome with a hammer or some other tool. This shold bob less and find the flat section which it can sit on, thus making the time to stabilise a bit less. *Does anyone know those stupid clown toys that just bob back up again when they are pushed over? Well that is what I was

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter referring to.

If you want to get tricky and go 'ERASER' style ,try making an ejection charge that would propell the actual genade charge into the air a few feet for a full target hit, while leaving behind the heavy base weight behind. But i think thats getting a bit carried away. Well anyways, worth a thought. On another note, a pyramid shaped grenade would probably be better for improvising, while getting quite good results. With a cylindrical charge, things could get tricky. So good design NBK!

FarbrorBosse

August 2nd, 2002, 10:59 PM

When fighting in a city cleaning rooms there is not much time. You throw in a grenade, wait < 3 seconds for the KABOOM then you rush into the room following a wall, low positions directly after detonation with your group shoulder to shoulder and spray the room with 5.56 or 7.62 from one corner to the other to remove any targets still not dead cause they have kept away from the blast and not died instantly by the stress of the detonation or metal. I would not trust a "triangle" grenade cause of some reasons, the main one is there will be very little effect in low corners, even less then with a normal "egg" shaped grenade. People tend to keep low positions when they suspect someone will attack/kill them and if you see a grenade you will most likely hug the ground as far away from it as possible. A standard grenade will place the metal pieces in a more spread out and regular pattern, and the new egg shaped ones kills even better now with less HE and better construction giving better killing rate and less chance of getting a brick wall over you when you throw it in, the beauty of science...

Whitey

August 3rd, 2002, 12:04 AM

Very creative idea. How big would it be? If it is to big it would be difficult to carry on the load bearing equiptment or load bearing vest. That's the problem with stick grenades, you can throw them farther but their isn't many easy ways to carry them where you can get to them fast other than tucking them in your belt. One of the main reasons grenades are shaped like eggs or circular is because we grow up throwing things with a similiar shape (baseballs). So an American hand (is that different to any other hand?)is used to throwing something that shape long distances. And long distance are important with grenades since the the chances of getting hurt decrease with the increase in distance. As is grenades can still produce casualties at the ranges an average man can throw one. That is why soldiers are trained to always throw from cover or from the prone position. Where would you place the fuze assembley? The mechanism should be placed so that the hand naturally has a firm grip on the spoon. As far as city fighting goes fragmentation is not always a good thing. Modern buildings use lots of thin walls made of sheetrock, that wouldn't stop grenade fragments. What the military often does is use offensive (concussion) grenades instead of defensive (fragmentation) grenades. Offensive grenades are meant to be used against troops occupying enclosed spaces (rooms, bunkers, fox holes). Since the explosion is confined it is much more effective than it would be in the open. Use of this type of casing might be very useful in a "bouncing betty" type anti personel mine or perhaps in a ground bursting mine. This "tri grenade" idea could prove very interesting. <small>[ August 03, 2002, 06:16 AM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]

MrSamosa

August 3rd, 2002, 12:39 AM

One thing that bugs me about this design is how aerodynamic the pyramid shape is... It's not very stable in the air, which will lead to shorter throws. Also, the pyramid shape seems like it would be more susceptible to windage than the ordinary egg shaped design. BUT, if you're not very concerned about distances, this is definately the way to go...good thinking NBK.

nbk2000

August 3rd, 2002, 06:32 AM

Here's the problem with the standard egg grenade designs: Unless the enemy at a 90 degree angle to the grenade body when it explodes, he's only risking 5% of the total frag count. Also, there's no directional control as to where the frags go since it essentially a sphere. You're just as likely to get hit as the enemy is. Whereas, with the faces of the grenade pointing upwards: the majority of the fragments go far over your head. The greater the distance you are from the explosion, the greater the distance over your head the fragments are. The grenade (if commercially made) could have a hollow plastic body where one side snaps off to allow removal of the pyramidal explosive filler block to use as a concussion only grenade. But that's too complicated for us. I'm thinking a cast block of Nipolit with frag plates that clip on/off. The detonator is in the center (natch) with a fuze well in the center of the face of one of the sides. A mousetrap type spring loaded striker could be built in, with the primer being slightly recessed. After pulling the pin, the striker is held back by the thumb till thrown. The grenade would be smaller than a baseball, so wouldn't be very heavy. Yes, it's not to aerodynamic, but that's unimportant at the low speeds a person is able to throw at. For added range, a yard of cord could be clipped onto a recessed eyelet in one of the corners. Pull the pin, give it a whirl, then throw. You could, with practice, be airbursting these over enemies hiding behind cars. Also, you have to remember to think about these in the context of the poster (me). I'm not worried about fighting off invading

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

soldiers wearing camo and helmets. Rather, my enemies would be wearing blue and badges. They're not going to be charging through grenade bursts to assualt MY hill. :p

FarbrorBosse

August 3rd, 2002, 09:41 AM

I'll make some 50gram triangle with 4mm hardened steel bullets inside and around the shell, to see how they behave. I'm still looking for a program able to calculate and visualize how pressure travel through material and such, to improve my designs but the good ones are expensive, and do not give out any trial/shareware programs. :) Hard to figure the exact effect just by looking at the device. Talking about blue ones... I have a vague memory I was very close to get uninvited visitors while thinking of a linear shaped charge yesterday (looked like xtreme's shaped charge but I used AL instead of brass and < 1mm thick. Fortunately there was a 5 min delay between BOOM and the car with blue lights on the roof so I was already on the highway when it passed by. The charge was square shaped like the border surrounding a painting. I wanted to use equal length det cord and ignite in opposite corners but only had about150mm homemade so it had to be a regular 1 cap charge. The sound was very loud even though it was surrounded by a drainpipe full of sand. Think I'll choose a better location for my tests, recall there is a weapon storage like 1 km from where I was and someone might have suspected it got visitors.

nbk2000

August 3rd, 2002, 07:10 PM

4mm is BB size. If I remembere right, most grenades using steel balls as fragments use 2mm balls. Though BBs are much easier to obtain. In order to properly test a weapon, you need targets. Use these set up at varying distances from the grenade to examine the frag pattern. Also, what HE are you going to use?

Spudkilla

August 3rd, 2002, 07:24 PM

One problem that you guys seem to not be talking about is the greandes faces? How would you keep these together, and exploding, rather than just ripping away from the seams? Welding with a primary and HE inside the thing you are welding isnt a very good idea. I dont think soldering would be a very good idea either. It is a good idea, but not good for use. Manufacturing would probably cost 2 - 4 times more than simple egg shaped grenade, they would hard to carry, and, they could just bust if they hit the ground wrong!!!! I would do extensive testing before I tried to sell that to somebody, because this grenade has more weaknesses then an egg shaped greneade.

James

August 3rd, 2002, 09:24 PM

I have a copy of 'the illustrated encyclopedia of ammunition' in which there is a picture of a roughly cylindrical offensive hand grenade and a fragmenting jacket. (p. 107 far right) the markings read 'HGR SPRENG DM 51' \n 'LOS DN-1-2'.

rjche

August 3rd, 2002, 09:29 PM

Good Idea, if practical items can be solved. There is a serious problem of wasted fragments in most designs of antipersonnel devices. The thing could have steel bb's embedded in a material like auto bondo, which would be resilient, tough, but NOT absorb much energy of the blast due to mass or strength. For example of bb's , a design was theorized using an ordinary 99cent empty spray paint can, with stick of 50% dyamite in its center with cap set in the center of the stick. The volume around the stick to the outside can was filled with steel BB's, (about 4 $ worth. buck for the stick, and buck for a commercial primer.) These were designed as pre positioned area protectors, electrically fired from inside a dwelling, to clear the deck around them. The would be positioned around obvious cover spots of attackers. In that analysis the coupling from blast energy to bb's was estimated at about 50%. The energy of the stick was calculated, and was divided equally among the bb's. I believe there were artound 3000 in that design but I'm remembering from several itterations. Anyway that design yielded about 2700 fps for each bb. What I never got around to was finding the ballistic coefficient for a 17 cal bb, of steel and seeing how far it traveled before its velocity dropped below mach 1. At 1000 fps a steel bb is an effective injury inducing fragment against ordinary clothing and flesh. Armor would stop it cold, but I believe the calculation showed that a man size target at 20 some feet from it would be hit with around a hundred bb's, more or less. The paint can was chosen as the handiest container with not too much restraint, etc. and did NOT Hold too much nor too little bb's to be effective. For safety the unit would use a fuse blasting cap, with RG58 coax crimped in as the fuse. That would be fired by a stun gun in the house to put enough hi voltage on the coax at the far end to cause it to arc over. That is about 6 kv. The flame of the capacitance of the line would make a humongous initation for the fuse cap, so it would reach detonation much better if hit by a flame. More of it would thus go off high order, although that would not be needed for dynamite. The coax is more immune from lightning, compared to ordinary electric caps.To further reduce any accidents the cable could be put in metal tubing, such as 3/8 inch soft copper tubing, and well grounded each end.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter That gives the general idea of that design, and the bb's would be just loose in that design. However the use of bondo to allow no outer container is also a good design. I recall the spinner bomblets in the carpet bomb had hard fragments embedded in a pot metal housing, which also lost trivial energy of the blast. Also in WWII, Germany used steel frags, or quartz rounded river gravel, embedded in sorry concrete for their potato masher stick grenades. The bursting charge powdered the light weight concrete, and the steel or river gravel absorbed much of the blast energy. I think the angle protection of the thrower is an important feature. Even a bb, can make a painful dent in a buttock from 30 yards away with an initial velocity of only 300 fps or so. One going 2000 or so would be deadly to one's exposed vitals up to probably 50 yards. Get hit by a dozen and nervous system shutdown could occur as in people shot with firing squads. Never seen any of them sass back, or say anything after the bang. Something to be said about multiple hits. OFF thread, but while I'm on the subject those playing with projectiles, we designed one using bondo in 38 cal. 38 spcl, loaded with 8 grs bullseye, and gas check over that and filled with bondo to top, resulted in a 2500 fps light projectile from 2 inch bbl. Exploded on impact and made large diameter 2-3 inch hole in chest cavity (side of beef). Thus bondo is a useful material for weaponeers to consider. Never thought of making one loaded with bb's before, but that would probably be even more impressive on hitting, but would probably weigh enough to require slower 2400 powder. Nuff off topic. Those interested in weapons probably enjoyed the rant, but to the triangular grenade, I'm thinking it ought be given trials, to see what it can do, THEN if it has good tactical merit, let the mfg engrs work out the process to make it. They know tricks we'd never think of. If soldiers like it and feel better using it, and it has a good casualty rate, they can make it. Think what could be done if it was launched by large slingshot, like those theu use to send water balloons. With a 3 second fuze. even a lit fuse, it could be used as aerial bombardment. Several hundred bb's coming down from above would raise much hell with one's unarmored appendages and buttocks. Could likely change ones agressive attitude into a pelp pelp pelp high speed retreat, specially for blue uniformed attackers, not used to pirania like incoming.

zaibatsu

August 3rd, 2002, 10:13 PM

I would have thought it would be relatively easy to make up a casing for the grenade from GRP. It would be simple to incorporate the BBs, after applying a gelcoat, apply a layer of thin chopped mat, then wait until the resin is close to curing and therefore sticky, then roll the grenade body in a bath of BBs. Then just lay another layer over the top of these, and you have the body. Obviously it would have to be done well to be strong, but I don't forsee it being very difficult. Also, it would be quite cheap to make.

EP

August 3rd, 2002, 10:15 PM

quote:

---

Welding with a primary and HE inside the thing you are welding isnt a very good idea.

---

While I agree that the casing itself would be fairly difficult to make and might end up too weak at the seams, I think the explosives problem can be solved without too much difficulty. Why not just make the case, then fill with a castable HE, leaving a formed hole the same way you might do for a fountain or rocket core. The detonator/fuze assembly could then be slid in place and attached once the rest is all ready.

FarbrorBosse

August 3rd, 2002, 10:15 PM

I'll either use PETN or RDX as HE and then AP to cause the shock since those are the ones I am pretty sure I won't screw up on doing. Or just fill it with AP depending on next month income. Have a friend that can get me unlimited access of 4mm rounds so I'll have to use those even if it limits the holes in my test dummies. I'll check if he can get me any smaller ones like the 2mm you mentioned and maybe even smaller to lower the safety distance, and make more holes so it is easier to see the spray pattern.

J.T.Ripper

August 4th, 2002, 04:12 AM

Why not have a grenade that like an ice cream cone. It would have a point at one end and be round at the other. The explosives would be in the cone part and the semi rounded bottom would be just something heavy to make it stand up. the only problem with this is that it would be hard to throw. you can fix this problem with a round case like a normal smoke grenade. just have it empty or full of tiny BB's. the wieght at the bottom would make it stand up and the blast pattern would be at the angle you want, not wasting any shrapnel.

nbk2000

August 4th, 2002, 09:18 AM

A cone isn't going to stand upright. Even with a heavy base, the center of gravity is too high (towards the point) for it to remain upright, thus it'll always fall over. A triangle is the most stable geometric shape there is. Also, it's not hard to make a frag casing for these. Since it IS exactly the same shape on all sides, it wouldn't be difficult at all to make triangular plates of HFS and attach them to the explosive core. Or, as suggested, cover in bondo and coat with BBs. Then, for added strength, cover those with a fiberglass wrap and top off with an additional acrylic coat before painting. Obviously, the explosive can't be liquid, slurry, or powder. It'd have to be cast. That's why Nipolit would be perfect for these since it's castable, very strong (mechanically), and uses availble (or makeable) NC as a binder for more powerful explosives like PETN or TNP.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anthony

August 4th, 2002, 07:03 PM

A bit on the frag energy: A steel 4.5mm BB weighs 4.5 grains, at 2000 fps, that's 40ft/lb per frag. Comparitevly, a 12 bore shotty firing No.6 cart has 7ft/lb per pellet at the muzzle, dropping to about 2ft/lb at 45yards. I reckon the BC of a piece of No.6 shot and a BB would be fairly similar so a bit of rough comparison would be ok. Say, divide energy by 4 (to be conservative) to give energy at 45yds. So that's about 10ft/lb per frag at 45yds. Bearing in mind that young adults have been killed by a shot to the head from a single BB at around, or less than that kind of energy, it should do some damage. If someone got hit by a bunch of them, it should be worse than a hit from a shotty at the same distance (buckshot and slugs excluded :) ).

DBSP

August 6th, 2002, 06:40 AM

I made a tri-grenade yesterday, which I haven't detonated yet. I need to shot a sutible bird for use in the testing first. I'll use APAN for practical reasons. What explosive I use isn't critical to my test since I just want to test the pattern at first. It has a thin plastic body with the bbs fastened by double adhesive tape and then secured with spray glue. http:// w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/tri_grenade_before_assembling.JPG http:// w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/DBSPs_tri_grenade_prototype.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/E&W/tri_grenade_from_above.JPG <small>[ August 06, 2002, 05:41 AM: Message edited by: DBSP ]

nbk2000

August 6th, 2002, 09:37 AM

Good job there! The only thing I'd do differently would be to have the frags in direct contact with the explosive filler, since even a couple of millimeters seperation can result in a dramatic lose in velocity. Is the bird to test flesh penetration? Good thinking. Also, APAN is a kinda slow explosive for a grenade filler, but if that's all you got... You should have several cardboard targets (as detailed in the claymore thread) to test fragment dispersion pattern. Anxiously awaiting test results. Is video possible? Using a mirror, of course, so as not to risk the camera.

Mr Cool

August 6th, 2002, 11:08 AM

Looks nicer with the frags on the outside though, which is of course a top priority :) . Video would be great, and be sure to have lots of stuff around (wooden planks, thin metal sheets, thicker metal sheets) and take pics of the effects.

DBSP

August 6th, 2002, 05:55 PM

Glad you like it :) The bird is for flesh penetration test. It's only a prototype so there are lots of things to improve. I have some large papers I thought I'd put my brother on and draw the curves of his body, and cut them out and fasten them on a stick and position them in different hights and angles to se how the pattern is. I haven't got a video camera so thats a bit hard, but I've allways got my digicam. APAN isn't the only thing I've got, I could use ANNM but I don't think that I can get more than 20-30g into it. A nother thing I thought about would be NG sensitised AN with a higher percentage of NG(got any idea of this?). BTW I've counted the bullets and there are about 240 of them.(about 80 each side)

xoo1246

August 6th, 2002, 06:06 PM

Don't forget to remove your brother from the paper when you are done. Anyways, to make the contruction more exotic one could attach two of thease tri-grenades to each other, thus forming a more normal grenade shape. They could be held together with NC, when thrown, they separate(with little or no force, you don't want one of them to fly back again) after a second due to a pyrotechnical train reaching the NC. Two seconds later they both detonate. It's hard to throw back two grenades.

Eliteforum

August 6th, 2002, 07:19 PM

I agree with the idea that Xoo has, I have made a little picture to illustrate what he means but boomSHITE keeps timing out. (Anyone else having problems like this?) I'll upload it as soon as I can log into my account. It has the same idea as the tri-grenade, it will always have 3 sides pointing outwards, however one will always be at a lesser

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter angle thus lowering kill/target zone.

kingspaz

August 6th, 2002, 08:17 PM

yer but if its at a lesser angle and it land in such a way as to point back to you then you have a greater chance of being hit. nbk's picture illustrates the principle well. the angle side of the pyramid results in hitting nearby targets but not further ones (like the thrower).

DBSP

August 6th, 2002, 09:45 PM

What xoo means is that you have a grenade made out of two tri-s when it hits the ground or when triggered by a mechanism they seperate and you have two grenades which increeses the chance of hitting the target since there are a larger number of surfaces on the grenades. This while the risk of getting hit yourself still isn't to great since you still are at a proper distace(presumably).

Spudkilla

August 7th, 2002, 12:19 AM

I am worried about that grenade you constructed, DBSP. My worries are with the fragmentation. I am guessing that the grenade will explode, but the slugs will fail to seperate from the metal, and your Tri-Grenade will turn out to be an expensive pipe bomb. For future reference, I think the slugs should be right up next to the explosive charge, so that when the grenade explodes, you will not just have the "Expensive Pipe Bomb Effect". I just thought of this, but NBK, you should patent your grenade sometime in the next month or so, once you have had time to experiment with it. It is an excellent design, and we don't want anybody stealing your ideas (I would never think of it :D )

PYRO500

August 7th, 2002, 12:46 AM

I don't think NBK has the time or money to patent this. last I checked it was about 7,000$ for all the stuff needed to get a patent (patent lawyer, patent fees, drafter fees etc) I actually invented a few things before that have either already patented or patented later ( example the poloroid printing digital camera witch exposes film to a backlit lcd matrix) The only real way to make money off of an invention without large cash investments is to sell it to an invention company who's purpose is to rip you off.

nbk2000

August 7th, 2002, 10:30 AM

I've whipped up a cardboard mock-up of two "trinades". Wonders you can make with cardboard and poster putty. :) I see what he meant by two stuck together. That wouldn't be a bad idea if you can get a decent grip on them. But they'd have to kinda small to be able to throw two together. With a small seperation charge of flash, and a little practice on the timing so they seperate in midair above the target, you could have quite an effective dispersion of fragments. The trinades might be better suited as use as bomblets for cluster weapons. I can envision triangular plates of HFS backed with sheet explosive. The plates are layed flat, but fold up in mid-air (after dispersion from the carrier) by small flat springs. The fuse mechanism is embedded in a paper IC circuit that is embedded in the sheet explosive, along with the paper battery that powers it. Naturally, these trinades are hollow pyramids, meaning they're light for their volume, but are flat during storage. With 75% fragment dispersion per bomblet, better than 75% of the bomblets weight being fragments (the HFS steel), and able to pack them very densely since they lay out flat... Patents are indeed expensive. And more than 99% of them never make the owner any money. There's some guy who writes a lot of articles in some electronics magazine or something who's got a whole series of books on using trademarks, instead of patents, for protecting your ideas. Supposedly just as effective and only costs a few hundred, instead of thousands. Well, as an example of previous ideas I've had that I could have profited from if I had had the money to patent them: Telescopic Mast (periscope) for Armored Vehicles Only now are they coming out with this. I had this idea back in '89 and can prove it in court since the design was part of my notes which the cops copied and entered as evidence against me at my trial. Other things which I've designed (in said notes) that are comimg out now is the OICW concept of an individual weapon that uses a laser range finder to program airbursting shells. Another one was a "bomb" in which individual SOF troopers are dropped into hostile territory by low flying combat jets, thus obviating the need for slow (and easy to shoot down) transport planes for airdrops. The DOD went the pussy way of having the "bombs" attached to Harriers that would actually land and disembark the troops on the ground. With mine, the bomb free falls under GPS guidance till radar detects the ground a few hundred feet below, at which time a retro-rocket fires to slow the troop carrier to a slow enough speed for the ram chute to deploy without shredding. Time form retro firing to deployment on the ground would be less than 15 seconds. The troops would be dropped at the same time as live bombs. Small retarder fins on the carriers give adequate safe distance from the exploding bombs. This way the troopers are landing within seconds of a bombing run and can easily overcome the stunned defenders. :) 'Course it'll happen that the occasional manufacturing error results in a failure of the retro to fire or chute to deploy. But that

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

saves time since they'll automatically be buried in a conveniently provided coffin! :D I also have an idea for a 20mm+ man portable direct fire cannon that uses gyrojet type rockets with a rifled barrel and retaining pins similiar to the MLRS system. Rapid fire, recoilless, lightweight (under 25 pounds is light for a "heavy" infantry weapon), explosive effect, able to engage infantry in the open, behind cover, light armored vehicles, helicopters, and bunkers, all within line of sight out to more than a kilometer. Minimal firing signature, quick reloading from preloaded revolver-type drums, alloy and plastic construction (no complicated machining), etc. Only thing stopping me is a million for R&D. :p Damn it! Where's the letter M when you need it?! <small>[ August 07, 2002, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

PrimoPyro

August 7th, 2002, 06:49 PM

This is a very unique design. I like it very much, but it is not without it's problems. Manufacture of the casing has already been discussed, being evaluated as a hindrance due to complexity of manufacture and structuring to maintain case integrity as long as possible to ensure complete detonation. The other problem is that if it is detonated from a single point detonator placed in the center (the logical choice) you will have a lot of force culminating in the points of the grenade where it does little good except to tear the seams. As the force spreads out via internal combustion, and the pressure is not yet great enough to rupture the casing, the force rolls off the closest point of impact to the further points. The closest point will be the flat walls, and the farther points will be the corners. Most of your force will culminate at the corners at the time of blasting, unless you initiate the blast from these corners. I would use a five point multi-ignition based on an exploding bridgewire circuit wired through the device. This could easily detonate all five points simultaneously from one power source (simple capacitor) and could even incorporate various extra features such as timed delay, impact detonation, arming and disarming, etc. It could be run off a watch battery placed into one of the corners. Sounds complicated but so is this entire device if you want it to work correctly. Its not that hard. Wire all the detonators (four at the points and one at the center) in a small parallel circuit in line with capacitor discharge, and they will all detonate simultaneously upon closing of the capacitor circuit. As for building it, I personally would make the actual device as two pieces. Imagine one piece as three of the triangles fused together, and the second half of the device is the sole remaining piece. In the fused triangle piece, the "top" corner of this bottomless pyramid should be flat and round, like a nail head for example. In this head is a + that is used in conjunbction with a screwdriver. The other piece is the last triangle. Picture it flat on the floor in your mind. Extending upward from its inner center is a thin threaded bolt that also contains the ignition explosives and contacts. The bolt piece is placed inside the other fused triangle piece, fitting into the small socket at the "top" of the bottomless pyramid (on the inside of course) The small space between the flat plate piece and the pyramid is enough to stick a funnel inside and fill with explosive. Then the pieces are cranked together with a screwdriver, twising the bolt inside the shaft and causing the threads to pull the two pieces together and compessing the explosive to a higher density within. Ideally, the bolt would slip into a small jacket that is part of the fuzed piece, to prevent grinding and premature detonation. As for what I mean by "small" well 3mm diameter of iron is more than strong enough to crank this down, and that is the average diameter of a screw. You could actually use a REAL screw if you reversed the principle, and had the central screw on the fuzed triangle piece be the real center, and the flat triangle had the jacket that didn't turn. This jacket would slip around the the central screw shaft, and the screw is just cranked from outside to pull them together. The metal screw can also serve as an electrical contact from the shaft where the power source for the bridgewire is contained, to the far point at the end of the screw. All theory, but so is your grenade. :D PrimoPyro <small>[ August 07, 2002, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: PrimoPyro ]

Anthony

August 7th, 2002, 09:23 PM

Although the features would be nice, and multi-point detonation would be more efficient, the cost of a "smart" grenade like that would be huge compared to the regular grenades it is intended to replace. I don't think exploding bridge wire detonators are going to practical, unless the grenade is attached to a long cable running to your cap bank :) I think these grenades are a good idea, just as long as their probable extra expense doesn't outweigh their benefits over a regular grenade, I see no reason why they wouldn't be used.

PYRO500

August 7th, 2002, 10:26 PM

I had an idea for the manufacture of these in large quantities. it is as follows: 1.TNT is melted and then cast in a pyramidal mold 2.The TNT pyramid is drilled out on the top to make a hole for a detonator to be placed later. 3.many parabolic indentations are machined in the sides as an area for the ball berings to be placed in.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

4.ball berings are placed in firm contact with the TNT afterwards they are fastened in their place by some type of glue or epoxy. 5.the grenade is sprayed with a laquor that prevents the handelers from gettin poisoned by the TNT. 6.a detonator/ fuse assembly is inserted into the hole that was previously drilled out. 7.the detonator/fuse assembly is fixred in place and the grenade is now ready for use. 8.the shavings of TNT from drilling the triangle are recycled and thrown back into the molten TNT mix. The only other thing I could see in the above process as being diffrent is having the ball bering spaces as being cast with the mold improving production simplicity. THe only problem I see with that is that it may be difficult to make so many indentations with a simple molding process

zaibatsu

August 7th, 2002, 11:09 PM

To mould the TNT with indentations already present, you could make a mold from latex by first mocking up the grenades shape with the indentations. Brush the latex on to three sides of the mock-up of the grenade with the hole for the det. already in place, wait for it to set, and peel off. Then, make a metal/wooden section of the fourth side. Support the latex mould in sand etc, and pour in the TNT. While still molten, press the metal/wooden side on top and leave to solidify. When the TNT has set, remove the metal/wooden side and peel off the latex mould. This is assuming the molten TNT doesn't react with the latex. Also, some work would be needed to ensure a good fit between the latex mold and the metal/wooden side. But, it would result in a shaped block of TNT ready for the addition of the ball bearings. You could then place a drop of adhesive in each indentation, then drop in a BB, and carry on like that. Hope this made *some* sense.

endotherm

August 8th, 2002, 12:25 AM

Perhaps a design similiar to a weeble childs toy "An egg-shaped plastic toy person with a weight in the bottom so that, if tipped over, they would right themselves and stand up again. They were popular in the UK during the 1970s and were famous for the slogan "Weebles wobble but they don't fall down" WEEBLE Could be used. A triangular shape with an heavily weighted egg like bottom. The casing can be of a single metal piece, filed to release shrapnel only from the top part, so no energy is waisted destroying the bottom of the casing.

Ron McDonald

August 8th, 2002, 04:46 AM

This design will work. That being said if you are building these things simply to kill/hurt people (I'm sure none of you are) instead of winning a governmnet contract with complex ratios, and blast patterns simple is better. A insanely simple design can be made from a toilet paper tube, duct tape, and bbs. I won't bother explaining all the details, but is a simplification of a russian design. Priotize what you are looking for. 1 Does it work 2 Cost 3 Ease of use 4 Ease of production Keep it Simple

nbk2000

August 8th, 2002, 09:59 AM

Well I tested a full sized cardboard dummy trinade last night at work. It's three inches along all the edges (natch) and was weighted with sand to about 3-4 ounces. Internal volume is 34 ml (measured at home with water and cylinder). Using 3/16" steel HFS plating for casing, that'd give a case weight of 13 ounces, plus 52 grams HE charge at d1.5 (C-4). From throwing it around for a half hour in the parking lot I learned that: It flies straight. It doesn't veer left or right. It does (naturally) tumble in flight. When thrown, it'll fly pretty much in a straight line till the end, at which time it stalls and drops straight down. Like this:

code:

---

<pre style="font-size:x-small; fontfamily: monospace;">-----------------------+ + + /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/(Ground)

---

Throwing as hard as I could, it would go 26-28 paces (yards since I've measured my stride as almost exactly such) consistantly. Perhaps because of the unstable aerodynamics of a triangle, there's a maximum distance it'll fly, regardless of the force applied to it. If such a "maximum" is possible, then you could, in combination with the "straight down drop" consistantly drop a trinade down small holes at a distance (like tunnel holes, foxholes, bunker entrances, etc) without the variables that fuck up most grenade throwers. When it lands, it'll either stop exactly there (flat side landing), or bounce ONCE and land within 2 feet of it's original landing point. It did this on flat and sloped concrete (up and downhill), and thick grass. It didn't roll, tumble, or slide when thrown downhill (about 30 degree slope). Best way to hold it was with one corner between the index and middle fingers where they join the hand. The little finger and ring finger are curled up into the palm, and the themb crosses the flat side (side opposite the palm) to touch the index and middle finger on the edge. You don't have to complicate the design by machining or casting in dimples or such. Just make a triangular form out of cardboard, line the outside with magnetic sheeting, and pour in the shot. Line it up by hand to maximum density and the magnet field holds it in place. I've done this with BBs before. Then fill the mold with your molten explosive that, when cooled, will hold the shot in place. Hence the Nipolit. Though TNP/wax, or PBX would work fine too. Weebles stay upright because all the weight is at the bottom. So where's the explosive going to be in a weeble shaped frag case? At the bottom? Then what about the casing? :rolleyes: When the explosion starts in the center, it'll radiate out in a spherical manner. Thus, the center of the faces will be the first to

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

be hit by the shockwave since they're closest to the center. The corners would be last. Thus, what's the problem? Multipoint initiation for something like a grenade, which needs to be KISSed, is going WAY overboard. As for why there'd be extra expense for the triangle shape, I don't know where you get that idea from. it'd be VERY cheap to stamp out a simple shape from sheet steel. A hole is stamped (at the same time) in one face for the detonator well to be screwed in (later), then stamped into a die to form it into a triangle. Fill through provided hole, and there it is. Two or three stamping operations and one fitting makes a grenade body. How simple is that? :)

endotherm

August 8th, 2002, 10:48 AM

NBK:

quote:

---

Weebles stay upright because all the weight is at the bottom. So where's the explosive going to be in a weeble shaped frag case? At the bottom? Then what about the casing?

---

Most high explosive fillers would be of a lower density, than perhaps a lead slug at the base of the tri-grenade with the egg shaped bottom. Maybe the bottom of the tri-grenade could be filled with molten lead to provide the bottom-heaviness to keep it upright like a weeble. Maybe i'm complicating things too much, or maybe i'm not, because a grenade that stands upright and throws it shrapnel at only the perfect angles and wastes little explosive energy through unimportant areas(the bottom of the grenade if it's upright, or the side of the grenade facing the ground for a regular grenade) is a concept worth complication.

Eliteforum

August 8th, 2002, 01:15 PM

I think what endotherm is trying to say, is a tri-grenade like this: The black part being the weight, and the area above your frag/explosive area.

Anthony

August 8th, 2002, 05:37 PM

Yes... Except that the weight of the explosive/frags will make the grenade non bottom heavy, so the weighted bottom will be useless.

Eliteforum

August 8th, 2002, 06:38 PM

I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to get the balance right..

nbk2000

August 8th, 2002, 06:53 PM

And if you succeed in weighting it so it stays upright, how heavy is it going to be? :( Probably too heavy to throw far enough away. Lets just wait till the test results come in before we start arguing over theory, shall we?

Eliteforum

August 8th, 2002, 07:57 PM

I'll make one like in my diagram above. If I take pictures they will be small like my other pictures were. So.. :confused:

Eliteforum

August 8th, 2002, 09:17 PM

Just finished the demo design. Bear in mind it is just a demo and the pictures are crap and everything.. 'nuff said, here's the pictures. - Top view of materials. - View of rounded base. - Top view of compleated cone and base. - Bottom view of cone and base. - Top view of cone.

nbk2000

August 9th, 2002, 01:59 AM

Looks like a vanilla ice cream cone that fell upside down. And just as deadly! :D

THErAPIST

August 9th, 2002, 03:51 AM

i have an idea. you would first make a tri grenade cast out of heavy cardboard. you would then fill the cast with AP/DBSP and put a match stick or a big tooth pick in there to make a hole for a fuse. after the putty is dry it would keep the tri grenade shape so you would be free to put a thin layer of adhesive onto the triangle and then put your BB's on the adhesive. then you would put a fuse in the afore mentioned tooth pick hole. you would light the fuse and throw it. if it hit hard enough it would detonate on impact or it would go off when the fuse hit it. if it detonated on impact we could get rid of the throwing it back problem all together. not to mention there wouldnt be any space between the projectiles and the explosive so the projectile would go at the greatest speed possible. or maybe have a bondo cover that held the BB's. the bondo covers would have an adhesive on one side, like double sided tape or something. that way you could keep the bondo covers off and have a small somewhat shitty concussion grenade for those worried about shrapnel or you could peel the cover strip off of the double sided tape and stick the bondo/ bb covers on the charge for a frag grenade. the bondo might kinda cussion the grenade from impact detonation also. just an idea

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter PYRO500

August 9th, 2002, 04:20 AM

I see potential advantages and disadvantages for both. For one the original tri grenade has it's strong points such as great kill zone schrapel coverage while it possibly lacks coverage in the sides where the sides of the paramid meet. other than that it has almost 360 coverage and has the nice feature of pretty much unlimited schrapenel. another problem is the aerodynamics witch seem to keep it from going very far, perhaps with a heavyer model the effects will differ. On the cone idea, you get absolute 360 coverage but you are limited not only to the weight of schrapnel but you are also limited on the explosive and the size as the weight has to compensate. I'd say for aerodynamics the cone has the parymid beat by a mile beacuse when throwing the cone you have a smooth face that comes to a point in the back. the design will tumble in flight depending on how you throw it but if the end is heavy enough and the cone is long/narrow enough it would possibly strike end first meaning you could have impact detonation. The problem I see in the cone is the small size of the base of the cone is making the surface area around the cone (witch you can only add limited weight to anyways) small and reducing the density of the schrapnel at longer ranges. I think a combination of self righting and directional controlon where the schrapnel might work. How about a grenade that's aerodynamic and has control over the direction in witch the schrapen goes when it lands in the right position. possibly a grenade that has metal extrusions that cause it to roll into the desired position. After all, all the grenade has to do is land in the right position there's no saying a cheap plastic shell that makes it land in the right orentation (and makes it more aerodynamic) couldn't be used on the outside of the device. Something else that I've considered is attaching high power magnets to the outside of a metallic fragmentation gredade. if the cops are taking cover and duck and firing behind their cars then you could possibly create a magnetic grenade that would practicly stick to any car or large iron containing object it might touch instead of bouncing off. Another practical use for something like this is to throw from a moving car, you have your grenade and when tossed from a car is likely to crack a few of the magnets but that won't matter beacuse there stuck to an iron ring anyways and need over 200 pounds to pull em off. any car that happened to be in the path of the grenade would have it stick and go off while attached to the car adding to the lethality and stopping power (where is a grenade gonna hit a car that won't disable it or the occupant?

DBSP

August 10th, 2002, 03:07 PM

I made some targets today, sadly I haven't shot a sutible bird yet(when I don't one I can have one but when I really need one I can't get one, fuck :mad: ). http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/E&W/trinade_target.JPG I just couldn't resist it, I just had to kill him :D Anyway, I added a thing to one of the sieds of my trinade today. I added some 2,0-2,2mm lead shots(US #9)to it, you don't get killed by them but thay are "extra" distractive and add to the total ammount of shock experiensed by the target, this acomplished by the greater ammount of hits. http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/ trinade.JPG

THErAPIST

August 11th, 2002, 01:05 AM

must you shoot a bird? is there anything else you might be able to bag? a stray cat or a rabbit maybe? maybe even a racoon or somehting. go out into the woods, open up a package of jimmy dean sausages, and shoot anything that comes around. or trap something. what better way to test the effects of the grenade on flesh than to test it on something thats still living? trap a cat or something, put a collar on it and stake it somewhere near the trinade. youd then be able to see the punctures better. and see if the pellets do enough damage to actually kill something instead of just puncture it a little. tis what id do... lotsa stray cats around here.

Energy84

August 11th, 2002, 02:45 AM

You're sick man. Mabye you should be used as the target? Why not use a human (if you can be called that) as a test target? That is what the tri-grenade is intended for isn't it?

PYRO500

August 11th, 2002, 02:56 AM

I'm not really interested in a target demonstration. I don't care about a bird, I say save them for the poison gas testing. I think the added bb's are going to make it harder to differentiate between the larger shot and the pattern that it spreads in. Just seeing that it slopes upwards away from the explosive (paper punch) is good enough for me althoug if you could set up multiple large targets that were in front of eachother in regular intervals you could see if the schrapnel was actually sloping upwards as intended. Another thing I wanst to know is how much schrapenl is flung aroung the ground, if you can't stop them from throwing schrapnel at ankle hiegth that dosent rise then forget about staying prone far away to avoid the schrapnel.

nbk2000

August 11th, 2002, 10:05 AM

The military uses live `goats, sheep, dogs, and monkeys as targets to test weapons effects. After all, dead targets don't bleed out, or survive a hit. The ability to kill is a prime concern for a weapon, and the only way to test that is to KILL something that's alive. As for ground level fragments, that'd be easy enough to test if you have a flat water pond (like a certain someone has :D ). Simply set the trinade on a float and explode it out on the water while videoing it. If you see any splashs on the water at a distance, that's a fragment. No splashes equals no fragments. Some surveyors stakes and a roll of kraft paper or such could be used to test for low level frags. Set up a snail shaped spiral from 1 yard out to 15 or so. Attach the 18" wide kraft paper to the stakes using a heavy stapler. Look for what distance the frags no longer puncture the paper. That's you minimum safe distance. After all, if the 18" paper isn't penetrated, neither would a person laying down since they're less than 18" high.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter One could deliberatly design it so the frags are very unaerodynamic. Use cubes of dense plastic as fragments. They'll travel very quickly at first, but rapidly lose velocity since they're of low mass and high drag. This would make it lethal for a few yards, but harmless at distance. Besides which, this is just part of a larger concept anyways, which includes the use of lightweight ballistic shields. This would be between you and the target anyhows, so between the design and the shield, you'd be quite safe at even close range. Smaller BB's won't confuse the test results since you can clearly diffirentiate between bullet sizes in paper targets. I'd include some kind of wood target to catch some frags with. If the frags penetrate a 2 inch thick pine board then it'd kill a person. Usually, the military goes with the 2mm size because of the large number of fragments this allows to be packed into a grenade (1,500 or more), but limits the penetration since the main objective is to seriously wound an enemy, requiring the removal of two other enemy soldiers to help the wounded man. However, since (in our context) we're not interested in wounding, but rather immediate cessation of hostilities by killing the enemy, larger fragments are required. Plus, large fragments will better penetrate soft body armor. Interestingly enough, I saw a patent for pyramidal shotgun pellets. The patent states that they travel farther and faster than round shot since it's somewhat aerodynamically shaped, and penetrates better since it has sharp points and edges to pierce and cut a target. I could see a mold into which regular round steel shot (heated white hot) is dropped into and hammered to turn it into a pyramid. The mold would be hard, but the conversion would be easy.

DBSP

August 11th, 2002, 11:11 AM

Ok test results up. http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/trinade_setup.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/after_trinade_det.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/trinade_crater.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/target_nr1.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/back_of_targtet_nr1.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/target_nr2.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/closeup.JPG I got about 25g of ANNM into the trinade and detonated it with a 22 WM shell full of HMTD. I placed the trinade about 10cm above the ground on a piece of wood. I was supprised to see how few of the frags that had hit the targets, target #1 had substained the heaviest damage. #1 was placed about 1,5m from the target in a position that would equil to a person sitting on the ground. Not only had about 20-25 of the larger bullets hit it, it had also been sprayed with fragments from the ground and casing, I'm not shure wether that person had survived or not but I doubt that he would have been in a position where he could have posed a threat to anyone in the area:p #2 only got hit 3 times, and #3 not hit once. The red rings indicate hits from the larger bullets. I belive the results would have been better if a cast explosive had benn used and had had the frags directly on the explosive.

xoo1246

August 11th, 2002, 11:29 AM

You know when I was in the military, they had a weapons demonstration. One example was a handgrenade on the ground with paper figures around it. The closest(few meters) had only been hit three times. This is not that bad. I would say it's fairly good to be the first test.

Anthony

August 11th, 2002, 11:53 AM

One thing is does show is that the frags did travel at an upwards angle from the grenade.

nbk2000

August 11th, 2002, 12:28 PM

An overhead view would have been helpful because I have a feeling that the orientation of the faces of the trinade in relation to the targets would reveal much. For instance, was target #1 (the closest) also in direct line with one of the faces of the trinade? If so, that'd explain the almost claymore-like shredding of the target. I've looked very closely at the picture, and it looks like this may have been the case, but it's hard to tell since I'm using a TV as a monitor at the moment, so resolution is crappy and it may be my eyes playing tricks on me. Also, target #2, while it only got 3 hits, got 2 of them in the chest cavity, one in the center mass, where the lungs/heart/ arteries are. That would have been a serious or fatal hit right there.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter And, let's not forget the math. Your test model had 90 frags per side. If we multiply that by 4 because of using 2mm frags instead, that increases the hits from 3 to 12 for the farthest target to get hit, and 25 for the closest to...well...swiss cheese. :p After enhacing the contrast in photoshop, I was able to find an additional dozen or so significant holes. These are highlighted in larger red circles than the originals. I also overlayed a typical ballistic resistant vest to demonstrate that, even with a vest, the target would have been fucked. An even ten in the upper thorax, head, and neck. An additional 4 in the belly, plus numerous in the arms and shoulders. As stated, even if the target wasn't "killed" it'd be MAJORLY wounded and in no condition to fight you. BTW, a trinade landing at either end of a parked car would likely be no more than 1.5 meters from a vest wearing target hiding behind a parked vehicle, using it as cover from your weapons fire. The targets where made out of some kind of wood or particle board, weren't they? It doesn't look like cardboard to me. Anyways, this is indeed very interesting results. I'd suggest the next one be made from a cast explosive (TNP/wax or TNT) in direct contact with BB frags (better coverage than large shot). Also, more targets in the spiral pattern to determine frag coverage. I've also thought of the possibility of creating a concaved indentation into the faces of the trinade to act as a focus for the frags. The focus, being very close to the face of the trinade, would cause the frags to widely disperse past the focus. Another idea: Create many small trinades from AP putty. Coat with BBs, then with bonbo or rubber cement to fire proof. Only a inch or less of cannon fuse protrudes out of the trinades. These are then loaded into a light cardboard container filled with (Shit! :mad: Forgot what it's called, but its rice hulls covered with black powder) to ignite the fuses and disperse the trinades. These would (in turn) explode from multiple points around the targets, ensure multiple hits from all angles. Basically, a hand thrown cluster bomb. :D Suspend the large grenade from a tree about 5 meters above the targets and electrically ignite. Do you have any FLAT areas around there? Like a rock outcropping or field? This would be a better test since the trinade was envisioned as an URBAN weapon, thus nice and flat surfaces. <small>[ August 11, 2002, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

kingspaz

August 11th, 2002, 02:12 PM

well after zooming into the picture of the setup and looking closely it looks to me as if #1 had a full face, #2 had the very edge of a face and #3 had where 2 faces join. i have to say that the slaughter number 1 got is very impressive! also well done DBSP for your work. its nice to see some real experiments with pictures. pictures say sooo much more.

EP

August 11th, 2002, 04:42 PM

quote:

---

(Shit! Forgot what it's called, but its rice hulls covered with black powder)

---

Most people just call it "bp coated rice hulls" :p Nice work DBSP!

DBSP

August 11th, 2002, 06:16 PM

As I don't have any cast explosives at the moment it would be a bit hard to test a trinade with the frags directly in contact with the explosive. But I got an idea when you mentioned AP putty. What if you make a trigrenade body out of AP putty, thus you would have the frags in direct contact with the explosive. The inside of the body could then be filled with a more powerful explosive(that doesn't dissolve the NC) the casing would allso serve as detonator. Perhaps you could use TNP or better RDX or PETN, at this moment I have whats needed to make TNP and perhaps RDX(I recently got a simple distillation flask ). Do you have any ideas? target #1 was faced directly at one of the sides at a distance of about 1,25-1,5m. #2 was about 3-4m away and faced... I'll have to continiue tomorrow, goto go to bed now, going to the hospital tomorrow.

Anthony

August 11th, 2002, 08:44 PM

I can knock up Trinade if the construction is deemed suitable. I don't have any RHS to hand. So it's going to have to be BB frags. I'm thinking of cutting 4, 3" triangles from 0.5-1mm thick mild steel sheet, coating with BBs (I'll give the magnet trick a go, if not glue) and assembling into a triangle. My concern is that the relatively flexible steel skin might interfer with the frag dispersal, or do people not think this will be a problem? Filler would be plasticised PETN or mannitol hexanitrate, although I cannot make this ATM, although I do have nitromethane and NaNO3 to hand. Making enough carboard mankins to full map the frag pattern seems like a royal pain. I can test it indoors though. The room is about 30ft square (in fact, the exact size of a squash court), the walls are white painted plaster so should show the frag hits and give a 360 degree map.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Worth doing?

PYRO500

August 11th, 2002, 09:31 PM

an indoor room that you can test a fragnetation device in? who would happen to own this room :) I hope for the legality it's you. I think that a 30 square foot room would give the fragments ample time to expand and with a decent digital camera could provide some useul data.

nbk2000

August 12th, 2002, 09:55 AM

DBSP: Why you going to the hospital? You didn't get hit, did you? I don't know about using AP putty as a body...seems unstable. As the charge, maybe, but the casing, no. Definatly use the TNP, since that's a good HE, and easily mixed with some parrafin wax for casting. You'd have to use a strong detonator to ensure high order detonation. Anthony: The thinner the casing, the better I'd think. How about trying the metal of sodas can (aluminium to you brits ) for the outer casing? Nice and thin, and soft too. Though, with rightous HE, the steel would easily break apart, but it MAY interfere with frag dispersal. HFS (AKA High Fragment Steel) is a brittle steel formulation used in US arty and warhead rounds that breaks apart into nice diamond shaped fragments (as shown): This would be nice for making a trinade casing from, but I doubt you can go to the local scrapyard and pick up some sheets of it. :( Besides, BBs make for much more numerous (if less fearsome) fragments for the same weight. Put the BBs inside, not outside, of a cardboard trinade case so they're in as direct contact with the explosive as much as possible so they gain maximum velocity. The magnet is used only to hold the BBs still so they can be bound in place, not as permanent holding. In fact,I think plaster would be better than glue to hold the BBs still since it's very fragile and would easily disintegrate from the explosion, with no BBs being (possibly) held in "clumps" by glue or epoxy. Definitaly go with the PETN. Maximum velocity possible equals much greater effect. Boosted detonator too to ensure maximal VOD. The NM/NO3 would be too weak. Don't put the trinade in the direct center of the square room since this would show only equal distance effects. Rather, place it towards a corner, so you get both the close, and the far, effects. If you get a nice line of fragments rising up the wall as it gets farther away, you've done a good job. :) Large sheets of white plastic are available at nursery (plants, not brats) stores for covering seedlings. These sheets are yards wide and very cheap. I'm assuming wood walls for the room? If not (brick/concrete) you should cover the walls with the plastic sheeting so it can record the frag impacts. Otherwise they'll just bounce off the walls, likely leaving very small marks. Good thing about an enclosed space is that you can easily recover spent fragments. This in itself tells you a lot about the explosions effect on the frags. Are they deformed/shattered/nelted? Or relatively intact? <small>[ August 12, 2002, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Bignutsami

August 12th, 2002, 10:33 AM

Could you not dip a cast pyramid into NC/Acteone, use this to stick the bb's to the surfaces. When dry coat the device with a few layers of inert laquer. This way you would have explosive to bb contact, as NC will detonate along with the rest and no casing to interfear with shot patterns. You can poke a hole through a bird with a blunt stick .. so i wouldnt bother messing with that. Find a kangaroo or something and you'll have a worthy human sized target.

Mr Cool

August 12th, 2002, 11:51 AM

Yes, we can all go out and pick up kangaroos for our tests :rolleyes: Anthony, did the stuff I sent you arrive OK?

nbk2000

August 12th, 2002, 12:43 PM

Well...he's australian....so allowances must be made for that. :p It's a Tri-grenade, not a Tri-garoo. :D Though if an ozzie member wants to test one out against a 'roo, go for it! :) Just be sure to get some pictures. NC laquer, or regular laquer, it's not going to make much difference. <small>[ August 12, 2002, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter THErAPIST

August 12th, 2002, 12:53 PM

so i thought live animals would be a more effective test subject than a dead ones... im not all that sick. for a case, instead of aluminium maybe some thin plastic like that used in 2 liter drink bottles would work? im not sure but i think that thin plastic would give easier than some aluminum. sure aluminum would rip a little easier but wouldnt plastic give just as easily? detonation = heat, heat and force from detonation would = melting and shattering of plastic. now if the aluminum would be able to be used as fragmentation itself id say use it, but since aluminum wouldnt make very good shrapnel past a couple feet plastic might be better. the plastic might possibly cool into hard sharply shaped pieces that would be more effective for shrapnel at a meter or more but, it would more likely get vaporized. if i remember correctly A-3 is pretty much C-4, A-3 being wax binded RDX instead of being binded with oils and such, im not too great with binding things but binding some RDX with wax and then pouring it into a mold could be done easily couldnt it?. and nice work DBSP

Anthony

August 12th, 2002, 01:14 PM

I'll try the drink can aluminium, I am a bit concerned about it's rigidity though. Yeah, I did intend to put the frags on the inside and the magnets only to hold the frags until they're set in place. I will cast them in plaster. The walls of the room are plastered brick, I'll take a reccy down there later and test the dentability of the plaster. I'm hoping it's soft enough to show the frag hits as-is. For legality's sake: yes, I do own the building. I grew tired of my private squash courts and abandoned them to vandals :) Emailed you Mr C

Anthony

August 12th, 2002, 05:40 PM

I took a walk down there this afternoon. It's a shame about it being the school holidays, too many bloody little people about for my liking. They should know better than to play in abandoned buildings - especially ones used for prototype anti-personal weapons testing Anyway, I was a bit off on the measurements of the room, also the end of the room with the door only has plasterwork up to a height of 7 feet. There's enough loose material around for me to cover the door way to avoid a blind spot in the frag map. Below is a map of the room, with dimensions: http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/ room_map.htm The numbers in blue relate to the photos on this page: http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/ squash_court.htm The page contains 800kb of photos so it's going to be slow for you poor DUNers Unfortunately, I managed to blur a few of the shots. I forgot you have to be patient with that poxy camera... To test the walls for dentability, I decided to shoot some BBs at it from across the room. I would have used an airgun, but didn't have my BB firing pistol to hand. The next best thing was a 9mm blank firing pistol loaded with a tissue paper sabot and 10 BBs. I fired at an angle to the wall to avoid richocets, so the BBs striking the wall weren't at any optimum angle to penetrate into the plaster (the ejected brass still got me in the ear after bouncing off the wall behind me though). Forgive the shitiness of this picture, but I assure you that it contains 10 dents in the plaster circled with a marker pen: http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/BB_hit.htm To guage the energy of the fired BB's, I did a control shot at a piece of hardboard from a closer distance: http://www.geocities.com/eawfuk/ BB_hit_hardboard.htm Only four of the ten BBs penetrated the hardboard and one of these was still lodged in the board. I concluded that each BB couldn't have had more than a few ft/lbs of energy. So the frags from a Trinade should leave easily noticeable marks in the plasterwork. Next step is to construct the Trinade and try synthesising some more PETN with the NaNO3 I have on hand, failing that, it will have to wait till I can get some more KNO3. EDIT: considering the dimensions of the room, where do you think would be the best position to locate the Trinade? <small>[ August 12, 2002, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

DBSP

August 12th, 2002, 07:24 PM

I went back to the det site erlier today to see if I could find anything of value to the valuation of the trinade. I was amazed by what I found. Somewhere between 8 and 10 meters behind target one there are two trees. http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/view_from_detsite.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/2hits.JPG I went up to them to see if I could find anything, and I did:

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/fraghit1.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/fraghit2.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/fraghit3.JPG There where about three hits from what I could see. I took my knife and started carving into the tree to recover the bullet, I expected to find the bullet just beneath the surface but NO I found it 5mm into the actual tree, which in turn is covered by 20mm of the ...whats the english word for it, you now the outer layer of the tree. Thus it had penetrated 25mm of wood, nice :D On the tree a meter behind the first I found a hit from one of the smaller 2.. lead bullets, this one had penetrated about 5mm which isn't that bad considering the low mass of the bullet. http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/view_from_detsite.JPG And NBK I wasn't hit, I just went back to check that my heart infection had healed. I stayed behind this rock which seemes to thick to be penetrated by those tiny bullets :p I allmost forgot one thing, the stick target #1 was held on had allso been penetrated. One of the larger bullets had hit it in the middel. It is clear that the bullets path is directed uppwards as the entrace hole was about 12mm lower than the exit hole. The bullet had penetrated the stick which is about 20mm thick with apparent ease. http://w1.478.telia.com/ ~u47804009/trinade/entrance_hole.JPG http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/ trinade/exit_hole.JPG If you where to use a better design and a better explosive this thing would be DEADLY. I've been thinking about the idea of placing the frags inside the casing instead of on the outside. If you had a thinner casing that the bullets would easily penetrate without to much hassle, the velocity of the frags would dramaticly increase, and to that you can add the raise in velocity from a better explosve. I can emagine that the the penetration abilitys would be very good. Sorry for the bad quality of the last two pics.

endotherm

August 12th, 2002, 08:05 PM

Does anyone have any idea what the relative velocity of grenade frags is (not necessarily improvised either)? When these bb's fly off,let's say a cast block of PETN what is the estimated velocity at a few meters? Judging by the wounds on stick target #1 those BB's appear to be chuggin' along at well over 1000 fps. <small>[ August 12, 2002, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: endotherm ]

Eliteforum

August 12th, 2002, 08:44 PM

DBSP, some good info and nice pics! Oh, and the outer layer of a tree is called the *bark* of a tree.

nbk2000

August 12th, 2002, 11:31 PM

For the US standard issue frag grenade, it's 1,600 m/s at 5 yards from the explosion for a .11 gram fragment.

nbk2000

August 13th, 2002, 11:25 AM

DBSP:

quote:

---

If you where to use a better design and a better explosive this thing would be DEADLY.

---

My design's perfect. Now IF that damn rock wasn't in the way we'd know if ALL the fragments had gone over your head into the trees. I don't think target #1 would say it's NOT deadly. :p Assuming none bounced off the rock, then it'd seem that a thrower more than 10 meters distant (and kneeling/prone) would be quite safe from fragments, while anyone closer who was standing would catch them. And anyone within a cars length would be shredded regardless, vest or not. :) Being able to penetrate an inch of hardwood at 10 meters using only an ounce or so of a mid-range explosive is pretty damn good for something you could whip up in a wal-mart! I also noticed how the crater was triangular shaped, not spherical. You may want to try a claymore test using only one face of a trinade with 2 layers of shot inside the casing. The detonator being at the apex opposite the shot face. This might prove to be a quite effective directional mine design for something so simple to make. Anthony: Using the layout from your diagram of the court, I'd say place the trinade where a line drawn from 8 to 4 and 7 to 2 intersect with a face parallel to the far wall (1,2). This should give sufficient coverage for determining the pattern. Hopefully the material isn't so tough the the angled impact frags richochet off without penetrating. :( As a suggestion, you may wish to bring a large spool of twine or thread. This way, after the test (assuming no piggies are coming), you can place one end of the thread into a frag hole, secure in place, then secure the other end at the grenades

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

position. Repeat several hundred times :D and you'll have a visual representation of the grenade frags paths. Now THAT'D be impressive. :) In General: From my references, it seems that a 5mm steel ball propelled at grenade speeds has greater than 1.5x impact energy as a 5.56mm NATO (M-16) bullet. And that a 3.7mm tungsten ball has twice the penetration capability against body armor. I got this from some info about grenade I mentioned at the beginning of this topic. Their design was intended to defeat CRISAT armor (com-block) consisting of 26 layers of kevlar and 1.6mm titanium plate that'll stop a 9mm at the muzzle. In their design, the thrower at 25meters had a 5% chance of getting hit, while a crouching enemy at 10 yards had a 99.9% chance of catching frags. These frags being capable of directly defeating the armor. :D You won't be seeing these though because it wasn't selected for production because a more conventional design was choosen because it would kill the enemy through saturation of the limbs with fragments, achieving the same results at 3 meters (the test criteria). Density of the frags effects both penetration and weight velocity retention. Shape of the frags effects the distance to which a frag of given weight will travel, given the same velocity. Spheres aren't very aerodynamic, but they're easy to get a hold of. Plastic or aluminium casing won't matter not with a HE filling inside it. Both will be equally pulverized to nothingness. Only a steel shell of substantial thickness might alter the frags pattern.

zaibatsu

August 13th, 2002, 02:29 PM

DBSP, I don't think that you could say it penetrated 25mm of hardwood, the barks very easy to penetrate, comparable to a couple of mm of actual hardwood (at a guess). A .177 air rifle firing lead pellets can achieve about 5mm of penetration at 30 yards into a hardwood tree, where I think the power has dropped down to around 5-6ftlb. Therefore I believe the power of that one BB has to be below 5-6fltb, as the lead pellets have a greater mass, and deform more, but still penetrates the same amount at a greater distance. All the above is IMHO! But the research you are doing is good, and the pics very interesting :)

DBSP

August 13th, 2002, 03:28 PM

You are right, it didn't penetrate 25mm of hadwood. It penetrated 20mm of bark and 5mm of hardwood. I can imagine that it would have penetrated about 10-15mm of Hwood if it had hit it directly. The bark does and excelent job slowing the hte bullet down. I'll shoot a few rounds with my .177 and .22 tomorrow at the same distace for comparison. What I meant with better design was that the manufacture and choise of casing could be made better.

nbk2000

August 17th, 2002, 09:13 AM

Well, in the patnet they use a conical frag casing to direct the fragments in a circular band, but this requires a self-righting mechanism. A similar type device would be (in theory) constructed from a plastic easter egg shell used a form into which is layered the BBs and filled with the explosive. Here I've overlayed the easter egg shell over the patent image to demonstrate the idea. Naturally the plastic shell would either be removed, or reinforced with fiberglass or such, before deployment, depending on construction. Because of the more "upward" angle of the eggshell, more frags would be directed upwards (over your head) than would be by the patented design. This reduces effective radius, but greatly increases user safety. That's a big selling point to me. :D (I can already hear the cries of "Weeble-Wooble!") Problem with a WW is that it wobbles for quite a bit of time if tossed about. If it isn't straight up, it could be tilted towards YOU, thus ricocheting frags along the ground into your hide. :( Thus, you need to ensure uprightness by either geometry (Trinade), or self-righting mechanism. I'm envisioning the use of 4 mouse traps which have the "neck breaker" cut into two parts, along with the spring which is reduced in size and twisted around a little. A wood base is made into which is fitted the "legs" (mouse traps), which are folded up against the grenade body and held in place with a string made of nitrated cotton. The grenade fuse is run against the string, just before going into the detonator. When the fuse is about a second or less from the det, the flash-string burns off, freeing the legs which spring open and upright the grenade. The (now upright) grenade explodes a moment later, showering the target with frags. :)

Flake2m

August 17th, 2002, 10:39 AM

NBK I really think your idea of a tetrahedral shaped grenade is fantastic, thought there are a few design flaws concerning the shape that potenially could reduce effectiveness. 1. If the triade detonates directly below the target then the cop ... I mean target won't take very much shrapnel. 2. A tetrahedral shaped grenade cannot be rolled very easily. My final point is, that if you want to reduce costs, you could use marbles rather then ball bearings. The good thing about marbles is that they are light weight, they also aren't detected by metal detectors
This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

src="wink.gif" /> . Marbles are also cheap a large bag of about 30 is AU$3 at Big W. The bad thing about them is, that you aren't likey to find 4.5mm marbles easily but rather 12mm marbles.

nbk2000

August 17th, 2002, 12:53 PM

Marbles are made of glass, and would thus be pulverized into bits of ineffectual sand by any decent HE. If a trinade landed directly between someones legs, and they didn't ry to run, then their legs would be blown clean off. There's not enough dispersion at 1' distance for the fragments to miss two legs. Considering how shredded the closest target was, I can't imagine the surgeons being able to save someone point blank to one. True, you can't roll a trinade worth a shit. But that's also a good thing in an urban enviroment. It'll stay where you land it and not roll in an undesirable direction. In stairwells, for instance, a trinade wouldn't roll back down at you. It'd stay right on the stair. Conversly, it wouldn't likely roll down past an enemy. As a matter of fact, you'd WANT it lower than their level because the frags would sweep UP the stairs, catching them from behind. :) Roofs have gutters through which a round grenade might roll back down. And I wouldn't want to use a regular grenade in a typical car garage, what with all those sloped surfaces and drop offs. OH! IDEA! I was at the grocery store earlier waiting for my ride when an armored car came up for a pick-up. I got the engine model number off the side (since it was SO conceniently on the side :D INTERNATIONAL DT466E) and was talking to this guy sitting next to me about the feeb courier who looked like he barely had enough brain power to walk, let along handle large sums of cash. Anyways, the idea of a large SC/EFP trinade came to me. 4 copper platters embedded in a trinade charge made from NIPOLIT with RDX/PETN could be tossed on an armored car roof, engine compartment, or underneath, and it'd pretty much fuck it up no matter where it landed. If on top, it wouldn't roll off, and would pierce the roof, injuring/killing the crew. On the engine compartment, it would immobilize the vehicle by destroying the engine, and possibly taking out the driver if you had one of the vertical faces pointed that way. Underneath, it would shot 3 penetrators up into the hydralics/fuel/transmission/tires, likely immobilizing it. Rare earth magnets embedded in the corners would keep it from sliding off in wet/windy weather. <small>[ August 17, 2002, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Energy84

August 17th, 2002, 06:28 PM

OT: NBK, all you need for an armoured car heist is a sawed off shotgun or a handgun. There was a guy running around Winnipeg since 1998 who used a sawed of shotgun to rob these armoured cars. His plan was flawless. He would scout out when and where the cars would be and figure out there schedules. Then when he the appropriate time came (christmas, thanksgiving, easter or any other time when money was flowing) he would steal two cars and park one a few blocks away. The second one would be used to go to the scene and do the job. Usually he would park the car infront or behind of the armoured car (he actually rammed it on a few occasions) and run out with a ski mask over his face while blasting away with either a shotgun or a pistol. The guards would either be hit/out of commission or scared shitless. Sometimes the robber would get close enough to grab the bag from the guard before opening fire. Out of eight tries, he got away with the money 6 times. Over the 4 year period, he collected over 1.2million dollars (canadian unfortunatley ). Poor bugger was finally caught this spring when he got careless and started flashing large bills and buying lots of drugs. He was found in an apartment screwing a whore. When the cops burst in though, he managed to get off a few shots and wounded 2 officers. :D

PYRO500

August 17th, 2002, 08:29 PM

No need for rare earth magnets NBK, there are far cheaper larger magnets with a bit less power but they are more than enough. I am refering to the magnets that are found on the end of the head arm inside a hard drive they can be seperated from their shielded mounts with the aid of a screwdriver or flat piece of metal and prying them up. something like 3 on each side of a grenade would allow it to stick to the steel of the car making it stick when thrown over the top or easily sticking to the side or bottob as well.

nbk2000

August 17th, 2002, 11:33 PM

Rare earth magnets are small, very strong, and cheap. You can get them at Wal-Mart for Gods sake! And I'd much rather not tear apart a HDD to get them, thank you very much. :p OTR (Off Topic Reply) That guy was an idiot. How often did he expect to do it and get away with it? Can you spot the RTPB violations?

firebreether

August 18th, 2002, 12:03 AM

Besides, if you're gonna rob an armored car with some trinades with magnets, who the hell cares whether rare earths cost a little more then normal magnets :D PS very good idea NBK about the magnets.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter PYRO500

August 18th, 2002, 12:59 AM

Where have you seen rare earth magnets in walmart? I sure havent seen them except in some high price headphones and such. As for tearing apart a HDD, I don't think it's that hard, you just need one screwdriver with the right security bit to get the magnets out on most of them and the hard drive magnets are very common on surplus's or if the HDD designer got fancy possibly 2 screwdrivers.

nbk2000

August 18th, 2002, 11:21 AM

I've disassembled HDDs before, so that's not the problem. Rather, the fact that you can no longer use it as such afterwards. :( REMs are in the crafts section in the back corner of Wally-Mart. And sometimes in the hardware section. Rat-Shack has them too. I suppose a limpet mine would work too...sigh...but that's SOOoooo unoriginal... :rolleyes: ... :p Any progress Anthony?

Anthony

August 19th, 2002, 02:31 PM

Slow at the moment I'm afraid. I tried a batch of PETN with the NaNO3, the yield didn't seem too bad when I initially drowned the PETN/HNO3. Because it was late, I left the crude PETN in the water, and chilled and filtered it the next day. I'm *sure* I remembered there being a lot more PETN than I got, but PETN is insoluble in water. Anyway, I wasn't pleased, I've got about 10gm of crude PETN from 20gm of PE! So it's going to take a little while till I can fill a trinade. I'm going away for a week on thursday (Reading :) ) so there won't be much progress any time soon... OT: HDD magnets are Neodymium Iron Boron. You either get two big ones (two poles on each face) or four smaller ones. I've got some of the smaller ones somewhere and they'll hold about 10lbs each. You don't need the correct torx driver either, a drill does the job :)

xoo1246

August 19th, 2002, 05:46 PM

A nedodym magnet with a diameter of 16mm can hold ~7,5 kg(16.5 lbs if you prefer), and one with a diameter of 32mm can hold ~31 kg(68.2lbs). They cost around 3.5$ and 9.8$. They could be used to make nice little clamp mines. Another thing, what kind of igniter would thease tri-grenades be fitted with? A drag pull igniter that dissconnects after igniton? How would they be constructed? Played around with some improvised ideas a few days ago but didn't come up with anything reliable enough. <small>[ August 19, 2002, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

carbonated

August 22nd, 2002, 03:18 PM

What if you simply made the trigrenade out of numerous cylinders to get the best of both worlds? If you made a pyramid out of cylinders, even the edges and corners would really be rounded and thus allow some more shrapnel, whereas the regular trigrenade wouldn't. I think you'd also have greater shrapnel increase overall. A problem I see is initiating all the cylinders to go off together, perhaps with a uniform detonater in the middle of the grenade or would detcord be fast enough? Maybe even some circuitry, but that gets too complex for my liking. An idea for crude cylinders is empty 12g CO2 cartridges or even small diameter pipe.

Eliteforum

August 22nd, 2002, 04:39 PM

It's a Tri-Grenade, not a 'friggin pipe bomb!

kingspaz

August 22nd, 2002, 05:14 PM

i agree, its not a pipe bomb! but that post did give me another idea whihc would eliminate the shrapnel less space around the trinade vertices. this would however be harder to improvise. each face of the trinade could be made from a convex section. only slightly convex so it would still retain the tetrahedral shape but the slight rounded angle would result in a better spread of shrapnel and no more 'safe' areas along verticies.

Cricket

August 22nd, 2002, 10:01 PM

I did some grenade testing a long time ago. I got a BB covered strip of duct tape and wrapped it around a BP crater maker. I was just having fun, so I didn't make any measurements. I did notice that at about 2 feet away the BB's were in the plywood, just beneth the surface toi make a more or less smothe surface. It was ok for fucking around, but to kill reliably, I would want something better for sure. It did make one HELL of a noise though (my face was about 3 feet away when it went. luckily it was not on the BB covered side!). Maybe good for scaring away bums and stray animals. One thing I have been thinking of goes like this. Get something round, about the size of a golf ball or bigger (maybe an Easter egg) and fill it with your HE. Then put your detonator in it. Then put the whole thing in a baloon and leave the fuze/wires hanging out the top. Then fill another baloon with BB's to about the diameter of a hairspray can. Then put your baloon-covered-charge with fuze/wires hanging out into the baloon with the BB's and work it into the middle. I hope this makes sence, its hard for me to explain. So you would now have a baloon full of BB's containing another baloon containing the charge and detonator (or just a fuze with a primary). It would have to be tougher prolly if it were to be used in action, but this should work for testing. The good part is that it will spread shrapnel everywhere, it should be somewhat moldable so you can put the charge closer to the bottom if you are throwing in under a truck, or smush it a little flatter if its to kill people (to give more shrapnel to the siges, not up). It will need to be modified if its to be used effectivly, the casing in particular (you throw it on concrete and it breaks and you are left with a flash bang essentially). Seems to be a semi-good idea though. I think a problem with the tri-nade is that it has blind spots and it looks like the sides will not disperse that well, maybe a convex buldge will help? <small>[ August 22, 2002, 09:02 PM: Message edited by: Cricket ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Madog555

August 22nd, 2002, 10:22 PM

carbonated's idea isnt bad. it would give more shrapnel than a simple sheet of metal and as kingspaz said it will eliminate the safe zones. when u think about it a pipe full of HE with a grenade fuse is a crude frag grenade. pipe bombs that kewls use for noise makeing are filled with a LE. this is stupid because it makes uneeded shrapnel and isnt good enough for spreading shrapnel to be used as a good frag device. if a pipe bomb is filled with HE it is now a fairly efective fragmentation device.

nbk2000

August 23rd, 2002, 08:42 AM

The WHOLE point behind the design of the trinade is to: A. Direct as much of the grenades fragments into an effective kill zone between the knees and top of the head of a standing man within a 5 meter radius. B. To direct as much of the fragments as possible over the head of the prone thrower that's 25 meters or less away. C. To do both A and B in an enviroment that is flat and level, which is the vast majority of urban areas, and possibly devoid of cover (such as a vacant parking lot). And, you're not going to be tossing just one, since two (or more) is always better (RTPB: Victory through superior firepower) so there will be NO safe spots. And there's no such thing as overkill when dealing with someone intent on killing you! <small>[ August 23, 2002, 07:50 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

nbk2000

October 28th, 2002, 07:14 AM

I had the idea that a trinade would make a good bounding grenade. Firstly, the fragmentation shell would be spherical, contained within a trinade shaped body. Recessed in the center of the face of each side of the body is a small charge of AP or such which acts as a bounding charge. This is initated by a 5 second electronic delay fuse after throwing. The fuze has a small positional sensor that conducts the firing impulse to whichever side of the trinade is in contact with the ground. The small AP explosion throws the trinade back up into the air. As the flame from the explosion passes through a small flashhole in the body to the central core, it ignites a small amount of fuse powder. The frag sphere is supported within a slightly larger spherical space, the fuse powder being in the space to ensure that, no matter what side functions, the delay gets ignited. This, in turns, ignites a 100 millisecond pyrotechnic delay that explodes the fragmentation sphere at about 6'-10' above the ground. Or, if inside a room, explodes at ceiling height or bounces off the ceiling so it richochets in some random direction before exploding at chest height. :) I'd post a picture but, because of all the added traffic we got from the RC incident, I can't use my picture host. :mad: Also, by combining two trinades, one regular frag, the other bounding, and connecting them by a wire of about 10 yards, you might be able to make a decent IPDM. See, one trinade has an IR transmitter, the other a receiver. When tossed, the two seperate and land. Anything gets in the way of the line of sight between the two triggers the explosion of both. One directs fragments, claymore style, along the LOS, the other fires up into the air to attack from above. :D Any progress Anthony?

Anthony

October 28th, 2002, 09:50 AM

The PETN I was saving up for the filler had to be disposed of, along with other finished explosives due to this RC issue. I'm also waiting to get some better H2SO4 to make the PETN yields worth doing

nbk2000

October 28th, 2002, 07:07 PM

Here's an illustration of what I mean by the sphere inside of a trinade. The purple squares are the bounding charges, the pink squares are spacers, and the gray sphere is the frag ball. The yellow is the gap within which the sphere is suspended and (not shown) is the fuse powder. I'm thinking the simplist way to make it work would be to use 4 small mercury switches. A switch is embedded parallel to each face of the trinade. Whichever face is in contact with the ground is going to have the part of the mercury switch with the contacts at the bottom, with the circuit being completed by the mercury. All the other switches will be open because the mercury will be at the "top" of those switches. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> gun turret Log in

View Full Version : gun turret phyrelord

August 19th, 2002, 01:49 AM

does anyone have any ideas for making a remote controlled gun turret. it needs to support 25-50 pounds Capable of moving about 90 degrees from left to right and about 90 degrees up and down. All I need is a basis for the stand i'll mount my firing device on it. Should i use a motor or hydraulics/pneumatics. It doesn't have to be RC but i will probabely have a line running from it with which to control the turret. Any input is greatly appreciated.

nbk2000

August 19th, 2002, 09:15 AM

What you're referring to is called a "telesniper". It's already a manufactured product ($50,000). Look in the archives for an existing thread about it (pictures and all) by me.

Anthony

August 19th, 2002, 02:36 PM

Building one of these is on my list-of-things-that-will-probably-never-get-done. I'd go for motor driven linear actuators (like car scissor jacks, satellite adjusters etc). They're cheap, strong, simple and will hold position indefinitely. Depending on the speed you drive them at they are pretty precise too, even with a plain cheap dc motor (as opposed to steppers).

xoo1246

August 19th, 2002, 05:26 PM

Reminds me of what was the name of that movie again, the jackal(modern version). Someone with access to a workshop, some technical knowledge and the resources could build one. You could use one of these closed circuit cameras and connect it to a microwave link to give it a few hundred meters range in open terrain at best. What would the cost be to build one, no weapon included? My guess is less than 2000$.

PYRO500

August 19th, 2002, 05:55 PM

Remember now, your turret has to be strong enough to hold a weapon and manage it's recoil possibly many times. I think that you'd surely need some kind of gearbox attached to a stepper motor and you'd need an brake of somekind to hold it in place. I think that if you had some threaded metal shafts going through something like the bottom of a scissor jack you could slowly adjust the verticle angle of the gun while keeping it very secure (for sniping not rapid fire) there would be jacks at the front and rear of the gun and some kind of hinge in the middle to allow it to move up and down but not side to side. The jacks would hold the gun in place securely with some kind of hinge mounts of their own. The left/right angleing of the shot would simply be controlled by turning the platform the gun was on.

Eliteforum

August 19th, 2002, 06:30 PM

Although you probably have good intentions, roguesci does not encourage members to reveal personal information, such as their postal address, tel/fax number. <small>[ August 20, 2002, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

xoo1246

August 19th, 2002, 09:08 PM

Something like this could be used for the elevation: It can pull/lift 300N an operates at 12 or 24 v, although it's expensive, around 170$. Possibly you could build something like it yourself. http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/electromechanic01.jpg

Energy84

August 20th, 2002, 03:47 PM

I believe the greatest problem to overcome will be dealing with recoil. Unless you're mounting a rocket launcher on the platform, or using a small caliber rifle (smaller than a .50B) you're going to have to build some rather heavy duty mounts. I'd also recommend using bearings for all the pivoting joints to ensure smooth operation.

Arkangel

August 20th, 2002, 04:37 PM

The mounts would be a piece of piss I reckon. Make the structure pretty strong, if you can deal with the weight, and then sit it on some anti vibration engine mounts. There are loads of that type of thing available, especially for boats. You could even pick a load up at a scrapyard

zaibatsu

August 20th, 2002, 06:40 PM

Surely for smaller calibre rifles you could weight them to decrease the recoil, and have the actions of the rifle on a sled, so when the rifle fired, the action travelled backwards along the sled, compressing a spring or extending one. This would decrease the recoil, or at least spread it out over a longer period of time. I've read about a similar mechanism in some mortors and also recoiless air weapons. I guess what I'm describing is a recoiless rifle :)

xoo1246

August 21st, 2002, 01:31 PM

Too bad most of us are into chemistry and not into electronics, programming and mechanics. Someone sufficiently skilled in the above arts could make a gun mount controlled from a laptop via an internet connection. That would be interesting, remote controlling a weapon from the other side of earth.

parabolic

August 21st, 2002, 03:50 PM

well,well, this sounds like a good project :) . would your turret have a gattleing gun attached or a single shot rifle mounted which would require you to load up after each shot? as iam an engineer i find that you would be more concerned about the type of action you would use if using a self loading gun, as this would require alot of careful thought into making, as the chamber pressure produced from a rifle is around 3000 bar to 5000 bar i would make sure my action would be able to cope with these pressures. but if using an existing gun which has been "proofed" at a proofing house, then it should be ok, and you need not to worry about that, as for recoil you can use a method like what zaibatsu described by having a slide with travels with the gun when recoil takes place, we have a rifle mounted on a type of sled, but instead of springs to absorb the recoil, we use a ram, much like what you get on the back of a car boot, the parts that hold the boot open, you notice how the boot doesnt fall down because the ram cylinders stop it, and no matter how quickly you try to shut the boot the rams only let it close at a certain rate, the quicker you try to shut the harder it is to shut. i would personally go for this type of system to take the recoil out. but be very careful when trying stuff out. we also used an electric trigger, which was basically a small electrical solenoid, which pressed against the trigger of the action. para <small>[ October 15, 2002, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: parabolic ]

NoltaiR

August 21st, 2002, 04:51 PM

Well to add to the idea of being able to control the gun with the internet, wouldn't it be nice to have it somehow controlled by a cell phone? I mean technically this is an ageold idea, but if you could take it a step further so that there some sort of automated operating machine onboard that would answer your phone call similarly to how a calling card service does? For instance when you call a calling card number you get something along the lines of: 'press 1 for english, 'press 2 for spanish, 'press 3 for assistance.' But if you could set up your answering machine to say something along the lines of: 'please enter access code'....[pause while you enter code]... 'access granted. press 1 to shift gun 45 degrees to the right; press 2 to shift gun 45 degrees to the left; press 3 to fire'... and so on.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

But I guess, in essence, with all the currently available technology, anyone with the mind to do so could make a remote out of anything. Anyways I don't think recoil is as big of a problem as most think unless he really is planning on working with anything that a single man couldn't fire while holding either under his arm or on his shoulder. Just as the 'neck' which holds the gun and its armor up rotates easily by a sufficient motor (which wouldn't require much if the neck was well lubricated), I think the turret should be able to fire as much as needed without problem. Also a thing to think about (although this would probably be more for looks than anything unless you were planning on taking your turret into war) is the overall armor. This may seem a bit obvious, but it is always important that you armor has no side on it in which an enemy bullet would have a (what I call) a maximum efficiency hit. Meaning that the bullet should never direct all its force to the place it was aimed. By making your armor slanted, the bullet will always be deflected (usually in an upward direction) so that only partial force from the bullet is actually given at the point of contact. In fact, if slanted enough and by possibly putting some heavy duty grease on all the sides, an enemy weapon such as an RPG could be fired at it and it would simply slide up and over without contacting enough force to detonate. But then again many of todays newer RPGs (and similar weapons) have timers built in that correspond to the scopes on the firing gun, so that whether the RPG hit anything or not, it would still detonate. <small>[ August 21, 2002, 03:56 PM: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]

xoo1246

August 21st, 2002, 05:33 PM

A wireless LAN(around 2Mbit/s) can have a range of 5 km with propper antennas, that way you could have laptop on each side of the LAN and send everything on one channel(using TV-in, a PC-controll card and some extensive C++ knowledge). The question is what uses it would have(except costing alot of money and time). Using a a semi automatic cal .50 rifle it could be used for sniping as well as taking out armoured limousines. I have read you americans can buy them without too much trouble.

phyrelord

August 23rd, 2002, 03:35 PM

what i have so far is a small scissorjack, a windshield wiper motor, a barstool swivel a sprocket off a bike, and an electrical engineer who is going to wire it for me. I'm using an sks and a motor to drive the trigger. I'm going to work on a sled system for the recoil, and the engineer is going to hook up motion sensors for the time being later we will experiment with types of remote to drive it. Ideally i want to hook it up so i can use a nintendo pad to control it. So far i have the top half made once it's done i will post pics. It may be a while however. I also want to be able to put a paintball gun on instead of the sks. Thanks for all of the help. Any more input is appreciated

Eliteforum

August 23rd, 2002, 04:10 PM

Hehe, A to fire, B to aim! :D

Die Another Day

August 27th, 2002, 07:37 PM

I agree with zaibatsu... Using spring(s) to deal with the recoil of the gun. I remember seeing a spud gun on xinventions.com that used springs because it had so much recoil.

Keref

September 6th, 2002, 11:25 AM

NBK2000 you said that telesniper had already been discuted before and was in the archives with plans to make one. But more than half of the arcives are not accessible so maybe could you post that stuff again ? By the way is it normal we can't access archives later than july ?

nbk2000

September 6th, 2002, 12:23 PM

I'm not in charge of the archives, so I wouldn't know. You could download the complete archive as a .ZIP file from the FTp...if you had a password...which you're not going to get till you've proven yourself as a worthy member here. Search the 'net dude. It's out there (telesnipers).

Keref

September 6th, 2002, 12:37 PM

I gonna do that. But since you had told it was in the archives, why looking elsewhere ? i've not much time. Don't worry about the FTP access, i'm not planing to ask one right now. But check in the archives, in january 2001, contributions by Arthis. It used to be my pseudo, someone else has it now (fun !). I'm not a Kewl nor a newbie. But thanks for answering. Well, i did a search in Google as nbk2000 kindly told me... I'm gonna search more but there is 1 answer to the search (at that time). This is a link to this one page, the summary is Nbk2000 who dreams about his PDF and a way to use a telesniper ... :D thx for advises nbk... [EDIT: i searched on Google...] <small>[ September 06, 2002, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: Keref ]

nbk2000

October 4th, 2002, 07:57 AM

Try this instead: trap remote rifle Or, you could have right clicked on one of the pictures, copied the URL, and pasted it into your browser, where hence you would have been taken directly to the manufacturers homepage. I leave that to you. Really, learn some basic web skills, eh?

Axt

January 29th, 2003, 12:30 PM

I had a simular idea years ago.. though on a far smaller scale. My intention was to rig up a small gun on a r/c turret and a small wireless IR camera so that it could be set up over my yard. The point being, when TV got boring one could turn it onto the "shooting channel" and comb the yard for cats, a noble cause, though one that didnt happen. I got as far as making a very small single shot gun ( .096 cal!!) but was turned off the idea by the cost of the camera. This thread re-kindled some interest in the project, since im now loaded with cash. What sort of radio gear would be needed? I dont know much about what is available but I expect a 3 channel transmitter for turning, elevation and firing, but it aint that simple. Is there servo's available that would turn 360° and keep their position? I tried searching but their doesnt seem to be any such thing available off the shelf .. but what 'may' work is a winch for a r/c sailing ship??? problem is I havnt seen a r/c boat before and dont know how they work. Any ideas on the radio gear needed?

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anthony

January 29th, 2003, 01:02 PM

You can modify off the shelf RC servos for continuous rotation. One could be used to rotate the (very light) gun platform and the other one using a spring returned winch to tilt the platform. The trigger solenoid could act directly upon the trigger or via a linkage. Although personally, I'd have the servo arm make/break microswitches to control far stronger pan/tilt mechanisms. I was going to find you a step-by-step for modifying servos but my ISP has had it's routing table corrupted again so I can't access Google.

Axt

January 29th, 2003, 01:29 PM

Thanks, Im just looking for something very simple or it wont happen. I searched google and found a few step by step's for modifying bought ones so its a valid option I guess, though im pretty simple minded. A servo will be plenty for the gun I made, ill try find it and post a pic, you could well call it a "pen gun". Since its so small I was just going to attach the elevation servo directly onto the trunnion .. very easy, though it wont hold its position.

Anthony

January 29th, 2003, 02:10 PM

Considering the probable weight of a pen sized gun, I'm surprised a servo won't hold its elevation when not powered. A simple friction lock might help the problem.

nbk2000

January 29th, 2003, 02:24 PM

See how the Big Boys do it.

Axt

January 29th, 2003, 02:38 PM

Dont all servos reset to centre once the nob on transmitter has been let go? thats what I was refering to when saying that it wont hold position. I was actually the one that posted that robotics site in the link/lit section. While it would be fun to have a huge turret .. I know I cant do it :( + a "Ultra Motion Smart Actuator :confused: " sounds a bit high tech ... <small>[ January 29, 2003, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Axt ]

Anthony

January 29th, 2003, 04:03 PM

They do return to centre stick position, unless you switch off the transmiter before releasing the stick. Although that'd be pretty useless if you wanted to then press the fire button :p I hadn't thought of this because it's not a problem in an actuator switched by servo system. http://www.motionshop.com/pr/ultrala.shtml Those actuators with the big name are just a regular linear actuator (nut moving along a thread shaft), but is controlled by an EEPROM. It probably also runs from a stepper rather than a brushed PM motor giving finer control. It's a neat solution, as you could plug your RC straight into it (no servo), the IC could interpret the PWM signal given by the reciever and relate transmitter stick position directly into an elevation position. It certainly doesn't need to be that complicated though. As with a camera as a feedback you just tilt till you see your target and then stop it.

Axt

January 29th, 2003, 05:53 PM

Well personally im looking for something that I 'will' do, that doesnt include these actuator thingys but I guess if you were going for a serious weapon they are what you would be looking at using. Im pretty set on servos, as I know I can get them. Also if I tried to make an actuator thing it would end up noisy, which isnt a big problem with servos. Ive had a thought, the transmitter has them "trim" things under the sticks. Using the trim one could aim and it would hold position - though does anyone know over what movement range the trim will adjust to?

Anthony

January 29th, 2003, 06:50 PM

I did briefly think of the trims, but they only move the servo by a few degrees, maybe 5 degrees. They really are only ment for fine adjustment.

Axt

January 30th, 2003, 12:20 PM

If the trim idea is crap, I guess one could always pull the springs off the sticks on the transmitter so it will hold position, and use a large gear onto a smaller one to give 360° rotation (though you will lose fine adjustment).

Stoic

February 2nd, 2003, 11:57 AM

http://www.anycities.com/user/thestoic/stoic001.html http://www.anycities.com/user/thestoic/stoic002.html http://www.anycities.com/user/thestoic/stoic003.html "The main idea of such a weapon is to keep a sniper out of the line of suppressive fire, while maintaining his own superior accuracy on one target or several targets. The whole system consists of the following main components: (A) T-2 remote platform with rifle and surveillance camera; (B) T-2 Controller, with viewer (CP-076), Screen Switch, Aim Joy-Stick and Trigger; (C) T-2 Interface Control Unit, with the Video Control Capability." Intresting, as in another thread we were talking about GPS and cell phone jamming. Now could the same be applied for the interface control unit and video display, jamming the signal both to and from the T2 unit? Or perhaps overide it all together, and use it for your own needs! :D Also, if there is a video display being broadcast. Would there be any way of piggy backing off it? So you could see what they see and thus, stay out of harms way as it were?

nbk2000

February 2nd, 2003, 05:29 PM

You couldn't jam a TRAP since it's hooked up to the controller by a cable, not an radio, connection. Thus it's immune to jamming or eavesdropping.

Jake Ellwood

February 3rd, 2003, 03:27 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Just a heads-up on the servo modification, the current issue of NUTS & VOLTS has a complete how to for several popular models. The author recommended using the Hitec brand because of low cost and ease of modification.

Energy84

February 3rd, 2003, 07:10 PM

Do you have a scanner by any chance? It'd be awful nice to have a copy of that article.

Axt

February 4th, 2003, 12:23 AM

Jake, does the two winks on the end by any chance mean you wrote the article? if that is the case be good if you would upload the file. I just pulled apart a transmitter, removed the springs and tightened a screw, so now it will hold its position. So in theory one would move the sight to near the target, then fine adjust with the trim - should work. I also contacted a hobby shop about sail winches, heres the reply

quote:

---

Hi We have a sil winch for $110.00 but they rotate 3 1/2 turns and are not proportional otherwise servos rotate 60 degrees. Budget Hobbies

---

So they will rotate plenty, and hold their position when the stick is released, im not sure what effect the trim would have it though.

Jake Ellwood

February 10th, 2003, 04:08 PM

Sorry I didn't write the article but I do have a scanner and it's only a four page article so I will get around to scanning it this week,but I don't have access to the FTP yet so I can't upload it there. Have a look at www.balsapr.com look at the bp148t rated at 100 oz.-in it should do the trick for you. Also for further servo mods, look at alsrobotics.botic.com

concrete feet

February 13th, 2003, 04:05 PM

on the subject of remotely controlling a _device_ over long distances i have a few ideas. i am not claiming them to be the most practical, or even verry practical at all, but they are feasable. first off, i like the idea of using celular transmission, as it can be done over long distances with less consideration to geography between A and B than wireles LAN, though the limitations become clear when you want to stream vidio so you can see what is going on in front of the _device_ to be operated. i also like the idea of using a laptop controller because of the ease of protability, it's opperation on independent power, and the fact that you can often pick up old laptops (Pentium 1-2 or similar) for verry cheap. it is also easy to implement either a wireless LAN or a cell dialup as the software is already there and requires no custom development on that side. actual comunication between the laptop and the _device's_ electronic controllers is as easy as developing a simple device driver for SCSI comunication. although such a task is beyond the scope of my programming ability (meaning that i could not give much specific advise), it is a simple matter of basic proficiency in any low level language (like c/ c++) and a desent understanding of ASPI standards, not too dificult for many. i'm also giving some thought to the recoil supression mechanism and the hardware to make adjestments via electronic controll in real time (someone mentioned linear actuators). [edit: edited for poor spelling, and gramar] <small>[ February 13, 2003, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: concrete feet ]

Jacks Complete

March 15th, 2004, 07:39 PM

Couple of things: If you use a mobile phone, you might be found to have links to Ally Keeda (recently of Spain). Sail winches are very powerful compared to other servos. They are also slower, and less accurate. Digital radio controllers will let you store positions, settings, adjust rates of swing, etc. and, of course, you get to keep a hold of the expensive bit! vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Not sure what to call it (bullet powered blowgun)?

View Full Version : Not sure what to call it (bullet powered blowgun)? darkdontay

Log in

December 28th, 2001, 11:02 AM

Old question I had, had about a blowgun powdered by a blank. 1. It would be a device that is powered by the high expansive gases created but no bullet would be fired. 2. It would not have a bullet in the caseing just somethign to seal in the charge 3. it would use the gas to fire a Dart or bolt 4. it would be a single shot. 5. Could it be built with Polyvinly chloride or possibly AL tubing. 6.Basicly I was hoping to create a collective brainstorm. Thanks for all the thoughts and ideas. <small>[ January 30, 2003, 04:04 AM: Message edited by: darkdontay ]

darkdontay

December 28th, 2001, 11:10 AM

Allways use the edit button rather then post a rebuttle to your own question. Scolds self. <small>[ January 30, 2003, 04:05 AM: Message edited by: darkdontay ]

PYRO500

December 28th, 2001, 01:43 PM

actually I have herd of pellet guns that get around gun laws by propelling a .177 or .22 air gun pellet with a 9mm blank. what you are looking for is blank propelled weapons, I have herd of a knife that does something similar, you can fire the entire blade! Of course that has been illegal for quite some time. As for using PVC, I wouldn't PVC can give out schrapnel and will only get up near 300 psi max for the thickest pipe and blanks can get up to thousands of PSI meaning a ton of schrapnel in your hands that won't show up on an x ray. I would use metal piping for such a device. -----------------Society creates the crime, the criminal completes it.

RTC

December 28th, 2001, 01:51 PM

Pyro, do you have any more information on this .22/.177 from a blank? As im looking into making such a device from a blank semi. I've made a post about it on the UK Forum if you want more info on that. [Edit] Sorry I got the link mixed up I put kickme.to instead of surf.to, however the direct link is here -----------------We have assembled here today to teach you all a little lesson. One cannot remain on top for years while closing one's mind to the influence of others. I will demonstrate the true meaning of inovation for all you to see. [This message has been edited by RTC (edited December 28, 2001).]

nbk2000

December 28th, 2001, 02:26 PM

RTC, the UK forum link you provided goes to a 404'd page. Did you give the right URL? http://kickme.to/eliteforum -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

kingspaz

December 28th, 2001, 05:44 PM

what i did post here now makes no sense and only adds to the confusion - sorry.

[This message has been edited by kingspaz (edited December 28, 2001).]

RTC

December 28th, 2001, 05:51 PM

darkdontay, It would be a good idea to download the "Breath Of Death" book from the Forum, I don't know if it's up there, but I downloaded it some time ago. (Before _C went offline for a little while) So I should assume that it is still there for download. -----------------We have assembled here today to teach you all a little lesson. One cannot remain on top for years while closing one's mind to the influence of others. I will demonstrate the true meaning of inovation for all you to see. [This message has been edited by RTC (edited December 28, 2001).] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Refillible flamethrower Log in

View Full Version : Refillible flamethrower PYRO500

December 30th, 2001, 11:25 PM

Recently I have been wondering if it was possible to convert a paint sprayer into a hand held flame thrower the idea I have is on a picture in the page below : http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/flame.html anyone have any ideas on if this might actually work?

RTC

December 31st, 2001, 01:10 AM

Why not just build a Fire Dragon? However on your design, the pump/air bottal is a good idea in general, it's prone to leaks and seal ruptures, with the air hose that problem is resolved. However it means you have to proide a constant supply of air, not good, unless you can carry a battery pack/generator on your back. So in realism and just general quickness I would favor the pump over the air hose. You may have to think of another means of ignition also. From my own experiments/tests a spark from those piezo[sp?] things havent ignited my flammable liquid tests. Although the gas tests worked, so if your using liquid, a pencil torch may be required, unless you can spray the liquid into an EXTREAMLY fine mist, even then I have doubts. But over all a good idea.

PYRO500

December 31st, 2001, 01:43 AM

I was considering using a flammable gas (possibly propane) as a propellant, the idea of a liquid flame thrower is that the vapors not the liquid itself burns, when it is misted the liquid will form more vapors, a pocket dragon is fun but kind of expensive for fuel, a piezo ignitor may work if made right but needs to be adjused to work adequitely. I have wondered about the ability of a blow gun valve to hold back propane, I think the liquification point of propane at 100 F is 172 psi and I think there are blow guns that can run 200 psi so maybee a blowgun with a special nozzle and a flashback arrester to make a fairly low flow flame thrower that would be compact enough for easy storage and would burn inexpensive propane from those disposable tanks and could have a poilit light.

RTC

December 31st, 2001, 01:51 AM

I just thought of this while reading your post so bare with me. It's not related to your post exactly but in relation to a refillible flamethrower as such. Take an ordinary bike pump, put a small hole in it, fill with gas then press it forward (pump it) slowly forwards and light the escaping gas then once lit press the rest of the pump (pump it hard) so all the other gas it pushed out fast igniting the rest of the gas in a 12foot flameball. Considering if it'll work of course.

BoB-

December 31st, 2001, 07:24 PM

hmm, what if the peizoid fails to work? it would suck if you had to click it a million times when you really needed it. If your willing to spend some money you could use one of these trigger start nozzles as a pilot; http://www.homedepot.com/cmc_upload/HDUS/ EN_US/asset/images/pii/2/0/0/5/A5002_3.JPG http://www.homedepot.com/cmc_upload/ HDUS/EN_US/asset/images/pii/5/2/5/6/A136525_3.JPG Both of them run for about 20 bucks, if your willing to puke up some more money you could create a beautifully destructive unit, you could buy some gas fittings and use the propane tank as a pressurant, and to power the torch head, it would suck down the propane pretty fast though. It would also end up looking more like a rifle than your pistol like design. I hope this post doesnt fuck up the new forum....

CyclonitePyro

December 31st, 2001, 08:26 PM

A friend of mine built a simple device like a pocket dragon but refillable. He took an empty starting fluid spray can and cut a round hole in it and put a short section of threaded copper pipe in it and glued it in, he can now pour whatever flammable fuel in it he wants and screw on a threaded cap. He cut another hole in the can and put the fill valve of bike inner tube and glued that on. He just pumps it up with a normal bike pump and puts the can on a spray gun handle, with clothes hanger wire extending out holding a wick wihich burns constantly.

PYRO500

December 31st, 2001, 09:18 PM

how did he make the holes in it? and what glue did he use, I have tried several times to do this only to fail. it would be cool to get a refillable arisol container to hook to a pocket dragon. you could then add a custom nozle, such as the nozzles on spray shaving gel it lets the liquids come out in a thick stream. If I had a constant source of fuel I could experiment with ignition sources for a pocket dragon besides the matchbook ignitor, I have been thinking piezo electric or the guts of a stun gun in the hollow handle to arc across the stream.

bangandow

January 1st, 2002, 01:16 AM

Would a simple Zippo attached to the front be efficient?

PYRO500

January 1st, 2002, 04:04 AM

nah, I can do beter than that, a zipp is light fire close, I want triggerpull fire, triggerpull fire, it seems like more fun that way, plys adds one hand operation eliminating the need for a second hand and lets you have infinite time between shots such as, toast mofo's ass, 10 min later, toast mofo's cat.

Agent Blak

January 1st, 2002, 05:31 AM

I prefer NBK2000's design and other similiar to it. I prefer them for the reason they are cheap and you can toss them away after. If the "pO pO" search my house and find a packet of matches, tape, pistol grip(for paint can) and a can of spray paint(all stored in closew proximity) they can't do or say much. If they find a reusable/fill flame thrower they will be like a pig in shit. also I would empoly a 12g CO2 Powerlet for a preasure source instead of compressed air. The reason for this is; CO2 displaces O2 and will not allow the Preasurized container of Napalm to ignite in side.

atropine

January 1st, 2002, 04:42 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

you need a wide nozle. :0) other wise youl get a spray. I had an idea using co2 cart's and filling a tube about the same width up with napalm and with the cart behind this all, somehow you could puncture the lead cap at the top and you'd get a nice jet of flames as well as a co2 cart flying in the same general direction. Oh forgot bout the pen blow torch too ignite the napalm as i exits.

blacktalon

January 7th, 2002, 08:52 PM

All you need is an old garden sprayer with a brass wand. They generally have an adjustable nozzle. Adjust it to a solid stream and wire a small piece of wood to the end of the wand. Fill the sprayer with White gas (Coleman lantern fuel). Don't use regular gas unless you want to cook yourself, and k1 doesn't burn.

Purple Fire

January 16th, 2002, 12:04 AM

Just a thought, but if you took some wide (2" or bigger) copper pipe from a plumbing shop, screw end cap it, drill a hole in the end cap and braze on an attatchment for a BB gun CO2 cannister. Then chuck a reducer on the other end followed by an elbow and a valve. Then get a nozzle of some sort that you could screw on, just match the thread size on your pipe to your nozzle. You just screw the end cap off, fill it with stuff, screw back on and slam on your CO2 cannister. Depending on the density of your fuel it might need to have the fuel tank at the top and the nozzle at the bottom, so the CO2 can float above your fuel. Wearing insulated gloves might come in handy if its copper :)

RTC

March 13th, 2002, 01:01 AM

Sorry for bringing up an old topic but I've just had an idea, I've made the paintballgun on Anthony's web site, and thought that if I fill the air tank half with petrol, then pump it up, attach some kind of ignition device at the end of the "barrel" and fire it, would it work as a short range "flamethrower" ?

A-BOMB

March 13th, 2002, 02:56 AM

Na, but a potato slug in the barrel then pour the gas down ontop of it and tir burning rag to barrel now shoot, now you got a flame thrower.

Anthony

March 13th, 2002, 06:32 AM

It should work because you'll get a mixture of air and petrol spray being ejected which should burn more fiercly than petrol alone. Might be some safety problems with storing the petrol mixedwith air though.

EP

March 14th, 2002, 09:29 PM

A bit basic, but this may be useful: http://www.howstuffworks.com/flamethrower.htm vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Recoilless Rifle Log in

View Full Version : Recoilless Rifle BlackTallon

January 6th, 2002, 03:34 AM

I am dreaming of a recoilless rifle, but not much is posted on this topic. I have the book floating around "Improvised recoilless rifle" or w hatever it w as called, but I am thinking of something a little more advanced that the "cookie" launcher design. The thought of using a fairly massive weight to cover two large vent holes seems to have merit. When the propellant was ignited, the projectile w ould begin moving, as would the more massive counter weight. Being more massive, it should have to travel a shorter distance to counter act the recoil forces from the projectile. When the counter weight reached the full extent of it's travel, the gas could be vented through holes like a large mussel break of sorts in the rear of the rifle. This would reduce the pressure in the barrel and should keep it recoilless. Then the counter weight could be returned to it's forw ard position with the aid of a large spring. Any input guys?

nbk2000

January 6th, 2002, 09:16 AM

Asides from posting a topic for your very fist post, spelling "Black Talon" (the bullet) wrong, and bringing up a topic that HAS been talked about endlessly, I'd also like to point out the following fact. "An object in motion w ill stay in motion till external forces stop it." In other w ords, your massive counterw eight w ill continue to move after it passes the vent hole till it either flyes out the back (recoilless) or hits the back of your launcher (recoil). For true recoilless without a water/cookie/etc counterweight, you need 5 times the projectiles weight in propellant powder (smokeless) plus a rupture disk to build up the combustion to critical velocity. 1 part propels the warhead, one part of combustion gases acts as counterweight, and the other three provides enough "ommph" to get it all moving.

BlackTallon

January 6th, 2002, 07:26 PM

NBK, Pardon the typo in my name and my posting so soon. I have a question however. Not to sound smart but, If this has been talked about so much, w hy can't I find it? I have conducted a proper search. The only thing I came up with was something talking about that new 20mm/5.56 over and under combo they are making, (I don't recall w hat they call it.), and a thread on Bazooka vs. RPG. I can find nothing dealing with an actual recoilless rifle. If there is something on here, please direct me to it. ""An object in motion will stay in motion till external forces stop it." In other w ords, your massive counterw eight w ill continue to move after it passes the vent hole till it either flyes out the back (recoilless) or hits the back of your launcher (recoil)." I know there would be a little recoil, but how substantial would it really be? After the counter weight passed the vents, the pressure in the barrel would be reduced to nothing. If timing and the spring pressure were right, most of the "recoil" caused by the weight hitting the back of the rifle could be absorbed. Anyw ay, if you have ever seen a 75 or 105 mm recoilless being fired, there is actually a bit of recoil. You could also use the vent gasses in my idea for a mild venture effect which would further tame any recoil that w ould be present.

Anthony

January 6th, 2002, 08:11 PM

Venting the barrel/chamber gas does nothing to reduce recoil (unless the jet effect of the escaping gas is used to push the weapon in the opposiion direction to which it is recoiling - like a muzzle brake). All it w ill do is stop thge counter weight from further accelerating. All it would do is store the recoil energy in the moving counter wight, which if you don't w ant it flying off, must be absorbed. This puts you back to square one. A large spring would help but the counter w eight pushing the spring w ould impart recoil on the gun. Maybe fit the action on rails w ith springs or better, dampers and use a good muzzle brake. It w ould help if you w ere more specific in what this weapon must be like. You mention "rifle" which could imply a 50cal w eapon, or do you mean something like a 110mm for firing anti-tank rounds?

Arkangel

January 6th, 2002, 11:06 PM

The system you are describing is not dissimilar to a blowback type weapon, where the light projectile is accelerated very rapidly at the same time as the (equal and opposite) force is being applied to the relatively heavy breech block. In practice the bullet has left the barrel pretty much before the breech block has made any significant movement. When it does begin to move, it does so w ith some force, and is then pushed forw ards again by the mainspring of the gun. That mainspring then exerts a force on the weapon body, which exerts a force on you. If you've ever fired a blow back smg you will be in no doubt that the recoil is there, and is enough to push you and your aim all over the place if you're firing a burst. Scale it up (if that's w hat you mean) and you will have more recoil than you want to deal with. As NBK says, the only way you truly get a recoiless weapon is when an equal part of the charge is directed to keeping the w eapon stationary.

BlackTallon

January 7th, 2002, 02:15 AM

I think I w ill use this time to clarify myself a bit. What I am thinking here is a big bore, in the three inch category with a one or two pound projectile. Not a standard rifle by any means. Something much like the military 75 mm recoilless rifles. All I really want to do is get rid of the plastic blow away plug and the complicated casing and venture system. If you have ever seen a recoilless round, the casing is full of holes and there is a plastic cup like device that builds the pressure up as NBK mentioned. When the plastic thing ruptures, the gasses flow out the holes in the case and through the venture. The venture accelerate the gases to the point that the forw ard force from the venture equal the rearward force from the gases pushing on the projectile. This renders the weapon "recoilless." (Although there is a bit) I am thinking of a mussel loading weapon. I may be wrong, but it seems to me, that if you had a 1 pound projectile, and a 2 pound projectile with propellant between them and it w ere ignited, the 2 pound projectile would move half the distance of the one pound projectile in a given time. If that w ere true, a 5 pound projectile would move 1/5 the distance of the one pound projectile and so on. If barrel length, projectile w eight, and counter weight were calculated properly, you could theoretically get to the point where the projectile w ould leave the barrel and the counter weight would only move 2 inches or so. Now yes, the weight would smack the back of the action, but the velocity should be fairly low, so not much recoil would be generated in the first place. I still w ant to vent the gases through venture like a mussel break, I just don't want them to be too complicated. That is why I was thinking about the vent holes. I envisioned a 90 degree bend, and then some cones to deflect the vented gases to the rear. Also, springs can be used to absorb quite a bit of recoil. If you have any experience with Barrett 50's there is a drastic difference in the recoil of the A1 and the 95. They are basically the same weapon. The break is the same and everything. The semiautomatic A1's recoil is around that of a 12 gage shotgun. The 95 kicks the shit out of you. It is more like a 300 Winchester magnum from my experience. The difference is only that one is a blowback weapon and the other is bolt action. Now, as for smg's there is recoil, but the bolt weight has an effect on that too. They use fairly light bolts to keep the ciclic rate up. All that chattering back and forth jars you around a lot, and you don't have much control. In an open bolt smg, when the bolt smacks forward, you are pulled dow n and left. When the bullet fires, you are pushed back and right. When the bolt becomes more dense, the ciclic rate goes down, and controllability increases. Shoot a sten. They have a heavy bolt, and I don't think there is as much recoil as some smg's with lighter, faster moving bolts. http://ww w.roberts.ezpublishing.com/rarmory/rrifle.jpg

Anthony

January 7th, 2002, 09:51 AM

Assumbing you have a 2pound projectile with a range of 500m, your counter weight, in order to come to rest in say 50cm w ould have to weigh around 2000 pounds. I doubt it's that linear due to the different ballistic efficiencies of different size/shape projectiles. Also your counterwight would have to open to the air as air resistance robs most of a projectiles energy. If it wasn't, you'd have to stop it by friction alone which would work. Another great thing is that slow heavy projectiles (counter wight) have better energy retention than light, fast ones (projectile). So your counter wight w ould decelerate at a much slower rate than your projectile (and it's got to stop in, what 2ft). This is because as velocity doubles, air resistance quadruples.

Arkangel

January 7th, 2002, 12:21 PM

I'm not saying that the recoil on an smg is uncontrollable, or comparable with a 12 guage, especially .50 cal. Firing a burst from the sterling smg (L2A3 - as used by all the imperial stormtroopers in Star Wars if you look closely) you can pretty much keep most of the rounds on a man size target if you practice. It is, however significant and it sounds exactly the same principle as you describe for your "recoiless" weapon, w hich would at best be a reduced recoil w eapon. The physics are simple, newton's 3rd law - equal and opposite reactions. You fire a projectile, that projectile is exerting an equal and opposite force on w hatever is pushing it, either the gases pushing it from the front of an open ended tube with equal force going out the back of the tube, OR the gas/barrel system that constitutes the gun, however it is operated. Muzzle brakes are only marginally effective since they only work for the fraction of a second when the projectile is passing through the brake, and by then, most of the recoil forces have been passed to the barrel.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I have to ask questions about what you actually w ant to achieve. Does it have to be portable/reloadable etc. If portability is important, your counterweight system is not going to work. If it doesn't have to be combat reloable, then you could probably design something along the lines of a normal military weapon, just test it with different propellant loads until you get it right. Of course, if you w ant to fire it personally from an enclosed space you're fucked. Tell you what, why don't you just make a normal barrel, then wedge it up against the corner of a house or a big rock or something, that way there is recoil, but you don't feel it...... There was an interesting programme a w hile back called scrapheap challenge, w here 2 teams make something from stuff they find in a junkyard. One time they made a cannon. The best one was made from a hydraulic ram body and w as firing a steel ball about 3" diameter. They first used bp, then a commercial propellan, but in both cases, the recoil knocked the shit out of the carriages they'd built. Do let us know how you get on!

blacktalon

January 7th, 2002, 12:52 PM

Anthony, I mente inside the barrel. Once the projectile leaves the barrel, there is no more gas pushing on the projectile or on the counterw eight. (propellant gas anyway) I once saw a recoilless rifle with a similar principal to the one I am thinking of here, so it can be done guys. I think It may have been Swedish. In their design, there was a counterweight that weighed the same as the projectile, but the weight had large pop out fins on it. When it came out of the tube, it expanded, kind of like a backwards umbrella. The counterweight did however, stay w ith the w eapon. The thing w as, their design was a one shot weapon kind of like the American LAW, only without the rocket engine. I am thinking field reloadable and man portable. If you don't believe me, look in the big book of modern weapons (I think that is what it is called) It has a white cover with blue lettering. I think there is a 66 mm flack cannon on the front of something like that. It show s a cross section and everything. Maybe next time I am out I will buy the book and scan it for you. That would probably help. Arkangel, I know a regular old blow back system is by no means recoilless. The opposing force would be the vented gases. My idea would be more effective as well because you would have the vent holes uncovered w hile the projectile was still in the barrel, there by using all available gas. Also, venture increase the velocity of the gases unlike a mussel break. That should give you a little more oomph.

Arkangel

January 7th, 2002, 02:31 PM

Oooooh, nbk got to you then. Personally I thought Black Tallon w as ok, kind of sinsister/dyslexic combined. Anyway, the 66mm you describe certainly sounds intriguing, do please post something if you can. I can see what you're saying about having the gases vented further dow n the barrel and a VENTURI would help increase gas velocity (at the expense of higher barrel pressures - more force on projectile and recoiling w eapon), but really this is a variation on the traditional systems which work well in any number of configurations, you simply have a single venturi at the rear of the barrel. You seem insistent on the counterweight and I'm curious w hy, do you need to fire it from a confined space or something? If so, over what range? In WW2, British forces had something called the PIAT, a Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank. This w as realoadable weapon that looked like a weird bazooka, the difference being that the projectile was fired by a spring. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/AdamWilliams2/piat.htm Check this out, but as you can see, it was hardly recoilless. Depending what you want though, it could give you a solution

Anthony

January 7th, 2002, 02:53 PM

That's a spring/piston airgun taken up a serious level! :) That umbrealla counter w eight doodad would have had to dissapate it's energy by friction alone. Not a problem for single shot but practically impossible to make reloadable, simply because of the force required to force the counterw eight back into ready-to-fire position. Wear and tear would also severaly limit the number of shots that could be fired. What w ould happen is your counter wight system failed to operate? Would the recoil break your back? What's wrong with having your launcher use a water counter weight that would be ejected from the rear of the launcher? It would be a lot simpler to make and easily reloaded (have the water built into the round). What sort of machinery do you build this weapon? Arkangel, IIRC the homemade cannons had a bore of around 1.5" which show s that the recoil w as even more potent. In regards to the effectiveness of muzzle brakes, I was under the impression that due to the velocity of firearm rifle rounds, the projectile left the barrel before the recoil affected the shooter?

Arkangel

January 7th, 2002, 03:09 PM

Yeah, it's a bit like the old long range crossbows, where they had a screw to wind the bolt back. I'm sure something neat could be made quite simply though. A water counterweight is a much safer idea, w hat would be wrong with a balloon of w ater the same size as the projectile? Particularly if you are in a confined space. So, you saw the show Anthony, lucky BASTARDS is all I can say, I laughed my arse off when the barrel came off the one built by those those clueless Army wankers. :D I mean really, SSSB ammunition! (string stabilised, stuck in the barrel) Regarding MUSSEL BREAKS (It's MUZZLE, not MUSSEL [shellfish] NBK2000) (sorry Blacktalon, but you'll get there in the end), ALL the recoil energy has been passed to the weapon body before they take effect, but bear in mind that by the time it reaches the muzzle brake, it is at it's maximum velocity and the effect lasts for microseconds. Even if all the effluvium w ere directed rearwards at that moment (and that might sting your eyes), it would not make that much difference. They w ork, but not so much that you couldn't do without them. [ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: nbk2000 ] YIKES :eek: - I don't know w hy you corrected my post nbk, as I'd have thought you would have spotted it first in the 3 or 4 posts of B/T's that I w as referring to. Maybe if you're from the US, sarcasm is a bit baffling, but then having seen enough of your infamous work before, I don't think so. Whatever, thanks for your caring touch. ;) [ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: Arkangel ]< /p>

Yikes

January 7th, 2002, 06:14 PM

The w eapon black talon is talking about is the German Armbrust short range anti-armour weapon. This is a very interesting weapon as it has NO firing signature: no flash, no smoke, quieter than a pistolshot, yet firing a "missile" some 300 metres! How is this done: A propellant charge is sealed in a strong tube betw een tw o movable pistons. In front of the front piston is the projectile (AT-warhead), behind the back piston is a folded umbrella-shaped counterw eight. On firing, the pistons move to the ends of the tube, propelling the projectile forward and the countermass backward. The pistons actually stop at the ends of the tube, keeping all combustion gases in the tube. Projectile flies further to target, counterw eight leaves the tube at the rear. On leaving the tube, the counterweight folds open, drastically increasing it's drag. There is no backblast, so you can fire the weapon from within a bunker, livingroom etc. (Try THAT w ith an M72 LAW!), needing a minimum distance from walls of only 0.8 m.

blacktalon

January 7th, 2002, 07:39 PM

Yes, I do like the counterweight idea because it would be useful in confined spaces. Most recoilless rifles have a danger area behind them of 30m. You don't even think of firing them inside. You w ould be very dead. I am thinking of something useful out to 500m or so. I have seen the PIAT. The only problem w ith that thing is it is a pain in the ass. I have heard it w as all a soldier could do to cock the darn spring (the link said something like that too). I want to design something that can be transported, and served by one person. I don't suppose there is anything wrong with a water counterw eight. The only thing is that it would add to the weight of the shells, further limiting it's usefulness to a single person. The counterweight would add to the weapon weight, but that would be it. Water would add 2 pounds to every shell you wanted to lug around. Yikes, That's the one! Thanks a lot! What do you think? Could it be made reloadable? What if you had a propellant holder that was not a part of the projectile. Then you could refill the propellant reservoir, push the plungers back in, and load a new projectile.

blacktalon http://ww w.jed.simonides.org/support/law /armbrust_series/armbrust-title.jpg

January 7th, 2002, 07:47 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Arm-burst

blacktalon

January 7th, 2002, 07:52 PM

http://ww w.jed.simonides.org/support/law /armbrust_series/armbrust/armbrust_005.jpg here we go now. go to this web site. Arm-burst

BoB-

January 7th, 2002, 09:44 PM

Your kind've getting carried away, venturi nozzles would kick ass, but for the hobbiest theyre not really practical. The exact weight of the coins your country uses shouldnt be that hard to find, a stack of coins wrapped smoothly in aluminum foil could have there combined w eight w ritten on the side, the muzzle blast of the weapon w ould rip apart the foil dispersing the coins out the back of the weapon where they would lose velocity quickly. Pill and film bottles full of sand or shot also come to mind. Also, have you considered diameter? since recoil isnt an option 3/4" or 1" projectiles could be used, good luck finding "safe" sch. 80 pipe though.

JoeJablomy

May 22nd, 2004, 04:31 PM

The idea here sounds kind of like something I think I saw on the Army Science Conference w ebsite, or maybe IBS. It's called a rarefaction wave gun (RAVEN), the basic principle being that if you vent the propellant gasses at the breech when the projectile is already 1/4 to 1/3 the w ay dow n the barrel, the pressure drop does not reach the projectile until it's already left the barrel. I'm sure this is partly because the greatest acceleration takes place in the first few inches of barrel and the round is probably already going supersonic (probably not to the really-high-pressure propellant gasses, though) after the first foot or so. It's pretty much assumed here that by "venting the propellant gasses" w e mean putting them through a DE LAVAL or C/D (NOT VENTURI, those are subsonic and totally unsuitable for rocket propulsion) nozzle, w hich in this case would probably be nothing but an expansion cone. The army test device consisted of a 25x137 barrel (25x137 is a NATO round, for those of you who might think this meant the barrel dimensions) and a spring loaded breech block and used ammunition scored at the base to cause head seperation. The 'receiver' the barrel was screwed into had a divergent conical section that the block fit into. When fired, the block recoiled at a rate determined by the mass and spring tension, the case head tore off, the gasses vented out the divergent nozzle formed by the block and the breech itself, and the remainder of the casing Usually got ejected by residual pressure. Recoil reduction w as 40-60% , I think. The heavy breech block moves less to the rear than the projectile moves forw ard during a given time, and also w ith less energy, in proportion to their mass ratio, true. The problem is that any gun does the same, so if your breechblock absorbs recoil pressure for 1/3 of the time the barrel is pressurized, it has 1/3 of the recoil impulse< /I> a conventional gun would have anyw ay. It has much less energy than the projectile, but to move 2" compared to a 60" barrel, it w ould have to weigh 30 lbs (1 lb projectile) for your hypothetical 30mm gun, which is itself a bit too heavy to be portable. Actually, to give you an idea of w hat's going on here, the projectile w ill probably leave the gun in 1.5-2ms, which means your breechblock is travelling to the rear at 2"/.002s=1000i/s=83.33fps, which gives something like 3240ft-lbs energy. This impulse will have to be transferred to the gun, which to reduce the energy to manageable amounts would have to be enormous. Of course, as I said, you might avoid 2/3 of this by venting, and if you make a really good nozzle, perhaps even an ejector of some kind, you might counteract even more. But it still wouldn't be very practical. I guess there are two challenges that I in my crappy college apartment room can see to RAVEN design: 1. Valving. You want the ports fully closed for .0005s, then fully open within a basically impossible time frame, like w ithin another .00005s. Or you could settle for partially open at .0003s and fully open at .0006s, although the beginning of the rarefaction wave w ould definitely hit the projectile and rob it of velocity. Either way, you'll have fun. 2. Nozzles. For this to work very w ell, you'll have to design a very good path from the breech ports to the air. As few sharp bends and corners as possible, I guess (not having too much education in fluid dynamics). Then you have to have your expansion nozzle, w hich accelerates the gas to the highest velocity you can get. This is equivalent to expanding it to atmospheric pressure, although how much expansion that is depends on the pressure of gasses going in, which varies, so you have to figure some compromise. Also, w here along the length of the gun do the gasses come out? Is it a bolt action where the breech face, or, more importantly, the case mouth of the cartridge, w here you will probably be harvesting the gas, is one or two feet from your shoulder? Or is it just a single shot bullpup? You could have a blast tube going over your shoulder (it's been done), but that might take several percent off your nozzle efficiency, which could be unacceptable. What I w ould do is make two nozzles, each with a large rectangular or ovoid opening to give tw o flat exhaust streams with air access between them and on the outsides, and this cluster would be right at the place where the gas is tapped off the barrel. The exhaust/air stream would be directed through a larger divergent duct that w ould carry the gas over the shooter's shoulder. This is an ejector nozzle, where the hot supersonic gas would combine with and expand/accelerate the air in the duct and some air that gets sucked in, thus increasing the propulsion mass and nozzle thrust. It's likely that some of the uncombusted propellant gasses w ould also combust. There are a number of drawbacks to ejectors (weight, size) , and ways they're ineffecient(difficulty in mixing hot and cold gasses). The mass would just have to be dealt with; maybe it could be made from carbon/epoxy. The ineffeciency would largely be moot (assumption) because the nozzle would operate in pulses, and instead of trying to continually draw cold air into a hot stream, the hot gas simply runs into it and pushes it out the back. I saw an abstract by some russians about jet ejectors that can mix in either 50% or 150% air by disturbing or pulsing the streams; they hope this can compete with turbofans after further development. The twin flat nozzles are also intended to increase the surface/interaction area for the air that does get pulled in the front. Overall, I'd test this as a 20mm before moving on to bigger stuff. At least in America, all the necessary materials for stuff in 20x102 is readily and even cheaply available, if you know where to look. It might be hard to adapt a vulcan barrel for this, though :( One last thought on valving: if you use a gas piston to operate the valve, it doesn't have to have the same face area as the bore, w hich means it can be smaller, lighter, and faster than you might think at first.

john_smith

May 31st, 2004, 07:30 AM

AFAIK the PIAT round wasn't throw n by a spring, it had a propellant charge in its hollow tailboom. Basically it was a just gun "in reverse", the barrel was attached to the projectile and the bullet/plug/piston/rod/whatever to the weapon. The rod also acted as firing pin, and w as blown back and automatically cocked by the recoil. Do a search for "spigot mortars", there have been quite a lot of versions of them since the WWI, in all shapes and sizes. IMHO one would be a good choice for home manufacture since it allow s for more freedom in designing the fins and the round in general. Of course, recoilless it ain't...

chemofun

December 11th, 2005, 03:06 PM

Did the panzerfaust have a counter w eight or did it use a lot of propellant with a rupture disk? I have seen conflicting reports. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> In response to TINF's 'smoke grenade' Log in

View Full Version : In response to TINF's 'smoke grenade' NoltaiR

January 10th , 2 0 0 2 , 0 1 : 4 7 P M

W hy did the topic close? Anyways I have som e info I would like to put forth on the idea o f KNO3/sugar... W hen I was 10 or 11 years old (and th o u g h t t h e c o o k b o o k s w e r e t h e e n c y c l o p e d i a s o f e x p l o s i v e s . . m ore th a n l i k e l y b e c a u s e they were the easiest to get a hold of) I cam e across a 'recipe' for a sm o k e b o m b i n o n e o f t h e c o o k b o o k s ( p r o b a b l y plag uarized from the im provised m u n i t i o n s h a n d b o o k ) t h a t s a i d t o m ix 6 parts KNO3 with 4 parts sugar, let it melt on low heat, pour into container and insert matches as fuses. I tried this little 'experiment' and here are m y findings (from what I can r e m e m ber): I m ixed the 6:4 in an aluminum pie pan and set it on the stove at low heat... well after about 5 minutes of waiting I becam e im patient because it just wouldn't melt. Well co nsidering that I was in m y kitchen with the sink righ t behind me, I got a few t a b l e s p o o n s o f w a t e r a n d a d d e d i t t o t h e m i x t u re.. it turned to a white paste which I thought looked 'm e l t e d ' e n o u g h . . . h e h e I poured my mixture (approx. 3 pounds in weight) into a glass jar and in serted the m atches. By th e tim e it I got ou t s i d e a n d i n t o a n o p e n a r e a ( m y property is about 20 acres so the walk to a big op en area was about 3 minutes from m y kitchen) the p a s t e h a d c o mpletely solidified and it was rock hard. I ignited th e m a t c h e s a n d s t o o d b a c k , t h e s m oke was quite im pressive and it blew the jar to pieces.

My conclusions/suggestions: I n a g r e n a d e f o r m , you would need a tim e f u s e t h a t w a s q u i t e l a r g e ( s e e i n g a s h o w I n e e d a b o u t 8 m a t c h e s ) . ' C a n d y propellant' is a rocket propellant m ade from 74.5% KNO 3 and 25.5% sugar (you don't have to be that accu rate, but m a t h e m atically that makes fo r com ple te com bustion). [ January 10, 2002: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]

J

January 10th , 2 0 0 2 , 0 2 : 4 9 P M

The reason the other topic was closed is that KNO3/Sugar sm o k e b o m b s h a v e b e e n d i s c u s s e d m any tim es in the past. There's n o n e e d t o b ring up the topic again un l e s s y o u h a v e s o m ething new to add. J

nbk2000

January 12th , 2002, 04:59 AM

Here's another newbie NO-NO: "Why was m y/their topic closed?" If a topic is closed it's usually for one of the following reasons: 1. It's degen erated into a pointless fla me war, or a chat rooom. 2. It's a subject that has been discussed to death in a million prior postings. This is the catagory the "KNO 3 / S u g a r S m o k e Grenade" topic is in. W e're trying to advance a little, not regress to shit that's already been discussed and solved years ago. R e a d t h e ' 9 9 archives, you'll find plenty of KNO3/sugar posts to read there. 3. Pathetically kewl. Anything involving peanut butter and ajax C 10 plastique would fit in this catagory. 4. It's a whin y plea. "W ill anyone help me with m y super-JIFF C 10?! PLEASE!?" This was also one of TNIFs sins. 5 . D e e m ed worthless for any num ber of other reasons. W e don't lock threads because we feel like it, it's always for a reason. If you R EALLY think the thread should be open, you can always e-mail Mega and explain to him why you believe it should be, but don't be surprised if you try to log in later and find that you've been deleted. T o d a t e , M e g a h a s N E V E R r e v e r s e d o n e o f t h e m ods decisions to lock a thread. But he has deleted plenty of kewls who a n n o y e d h i m with whiny pleas to reopen their p athetic topics. It's your choice. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> nbk's pdf / white resistance manual Log in

View Full Version : nbk's pdf / white resistance manual FragmentedSanity

July 28th, 2001, 03:59 PM

Lo all http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif I found a website the otherday calling itself the white resistance manual... Im sure most of you will have seen it. Let me say I dont agree with the sentiments attached to the file but it does have a lot of stuff in it thats discussed here. The thing that I noticed when reading the file is its vast similarities to NBK's almost legendary PDF file (if anyone hasnt read it yet... well you should) SO Im curious - NBK - did you find the site and remove all the useless crap? or is some nazi leeching you stuff? but all that aside if you havent seen it yet check the site out. http://netzero.homestead.com/AquiliferPublications/files/WRMv2_4/MainPage/WRMMainpage.htm later FS

nbk2000

July 28th, 2001, 10:12 PM

I recently ran across the WRM and thought it better than most of the anarchist crap books out there. Being a White Power advocate myself, it would seem inevitable that there'd be some overlap. And when I made the first NBK2000 pdf, it was using net sources, so the source material was similar. But I don't think there's any plagerizing going on. -----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF. Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.

FragmentedSanity

July 29th, 2001, 08:17 AM

Lo again http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif I agree with you that its content is better than alot of the crapbooks out there.... personally I could have done without the anti non-white sentiments. but I spose thats just because I dislike everyone equally. Myself - Id replace how to kill "niggers" with how to kill mindless idiots. I did think the page quite similar to your old website tho - and was just curious as to what you thought - wasnt trying to comment on your political views - because quite frankly I read pages like yours and the WRM for the information on improvised weaponry and the like - what people do with it is there own business. FS

AR-15 Man

July 29th, 2001, 06:10 PM

I like the infomation on that site. I give it 4 outta 5. If it is accurate then I will try the 37mm launcher. [This message has been edited by AR-15 Man (edited July 29, 2001).]

AmonDin

July 30th, 2001, 04:39 AM

I agree with all you vets, it does have some good information, if you can filter through the racial slant they seem to enjoy putting on everything, you might find some new dream projects. I'm not personally an advocate of any white-power organization, or black-power for that matter, I support their right to say whatever the hell they want. Thats how freedom of speech is supposed to work, people can say what they want, and you don't have to care. -----------------"When all else fails, just light their things on fire, people hate that..." - Fred

simply RED

August 4th, 2001, 06:40 PM

I don't see why the white people are better than the black... I don't think that the niggaz must be tolerated or untolarated in the killing...

[This message has been edited by simply RED (edited August 10, 2001).]

DaRkDwArF

August 9th, 2001, 07:53 AM

most of the site is down, maybe an update... aybe something worse...

AR-15 Man

August 9th, 2001, 12:59 PM

Well I saved parts of the site on my computer incase that happened cause it was good material. I don't plan on ripping their site but one day if worse comes to worse I can hand out CDs with information like that on them.

Tony Montana

August 11th, 2001, 12:49 AM

If anyone wants that file goto: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~hand/montana/WRMv2_4.zip And save it! vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> .22 Minigun Log in

View Full Version : .22 Minigun ST

January 10th, 2002, 03:49 PM

Tried to think one up, but proved to be too hard. Got as far as the picture above, its run via a starter motor, power is given to the motor the solenoid engages the cogs together and moves the firing pin forward. The barrels are now spinning so when the cartridge reaches the firing pin it trys to force its way underneath the stationary firing pin, compressing the rim and firing. I couldn't really figure out how to eject nor load the cartridges, as it would be moving too fast. Don't know if it would work but if the firing pin was on a strong spring ( top right pic) the pressure inside the barrel might bend it back as its fired and blast the spent shell out, where its deflected out to the side.. Anyone think up a way to load such a thing? Sorry if you came in under a cool title expecting a good post, but i'm mostly posting this to see if the host will allow outlinked pictures...

nbk2000

January 11th, 2002, 03:25 AM

The picture shows up fine. I've got a bunch of scans from a book about the gatling gun that shows the operation of the mechanisms for firing, loading, drums, etc. It's being included in the heavy weapons section of my PDF. It's really quit ingenious how Gatling came up with it to make it work. He even made an electrically operated version at the turn of the century that fired 3,000 RPM. The army didn't see any need for it at the time. HA! An internet search using "gatling AND gun" will result in plenty of material to peruse through. Try "gatling AND video". ;)

BoB-

January 11th, 2002, 05:32 AM

All I found patent number 36,836 "Improvised revolving battery gun" Title; 89/12 Fucking long links, I tried to post a direct link for you but it got screwed up, so just go to uspto.gov [ January 11, 2002: Message edited by: BoB- ]

ST

January 11th, 2002, 10:46 AM

The first link for a search for gatling AND movies actually gives movies of how it works is that why there is a ;) in your post NBK :) www.gatlinggun.net/ Its not backyard simple, but still simple design...... but uses a big fat arse "cartridge" that cant be substituted for .22's. Perhaps if you add extractors and have it chamber the whole round, or a sheath around the .22 it could work, but this complicated and this small you would have better luck making the original.

ST

January 11th, 2002, 10:50 AM

For some reason no patent pictures work for me. Same goes with a number of different places, must be something up with my internet settings or something, crazy.

nbk2000

January 11th, 2002, 11:46 AM

I knew that if someone looked they'd find them. ;) They use the cartridges to avoid the Destructive Device classification a gatling using modern cartridges would have, similar to a machine gun (which it is). If one were to use cardboard tubing of the proper size as cartridges, cap gun percussion caps, Vit C propellant, and 3/8" steel shot, it should be fairly simple to replicate. But adapting the mechanism wouldn't be THAT hard. I've even seen ads in various gun magazines for plans and parts to make a .22LR gatling replica. You wouldn't want to bother with the full replica, since I'd imagine the idea is to make a portable version to carry around ala Jessie Ventura in Predator. Feed mechanism would have to be some kind of chain-link to ensure a constant supply of ammo. Maybe if you were clever, you could come up with a pnuematic device that would blow the rounds down a flexible tube into the gun which would then load them in. And you need a TIFF browser plug-in to view patents on the USPTO site. Look up "alternatiff" on the net for one.

zaibatsu

January 11th, 2002, 02:39 PM

http://www.howstuffworks.com/machine-

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

gun2.htm this might help a bit, but it may be a little simple for you

ST

January 12th, 2002, 02:15 PM

Theres no such thing as too simple, the whole point is to do it as simple as possible, i spent all night looking through that site, thanks. The problem i see is that there is a lot of parts that have to be made identical, i'd hate to try making all the springs and firing pins etc. for every barrel all exactly the same, you would end up with some working some not, its best to keep all the fiddly parts together in one action so it either works or doesnt at all so is far easier to fix. Also that many moving parts on something this fast is bound to be troublesome, may work with a gatling gun but a minigun? The whole point to using .22's is to have it inexpensive and easy to run, imagine trying to make a few thousand cartridges only to last a minute or two. From what I gather from the pics, the "cartridge" in the gatling gun isnt even chambered when its fired, its just pushed up against the barrel, so a heavy sheath around the .22 could be used, but again ... a few thousand custom .22 sheaths doesnt sound cheap. So, personally i dont think it can be done without chambering the whole round, heres what i come up with, it assumes that the case can be ejected via the pressure in the barrel on firing. http://st.9f.com/action.gif Are these pictures still working? If not, picture above is bottom pic in signature. As the round fires, the firing pin is forced back and case ejected. At the same time another is pushed into the next barrel by the other end of the "arm". You probably wouldnt be able to get the cartridge fully chambered fast enough, so a ramp could be used to gradually feed the round in the rest of the way as the barrels spin. [ January 12, 2002: Message edited by: ST ] [ January 12, 2002: Message edited by: ST ]

skumjustice

January 9th, 2004, 08:58 PM

This is how a minigun/vulcan works internally. This is a freakin awesome 3dcad video. Finally it all makes sense!!! ftp://coz-fx.com/download/CozGau17.avi

angelo

January 10th, 2004, 03:18 AM

very nice video, it shows just how complex it is. It seems if you have speed control included than you won't have to fire at full rpm, thus not wasting 4000 rounds in one minute.

DimmuJesus

January 10th, 2004, 09:34 AM

There are some people that make gats out of AK-47s and Ruger 10/22s. This idea may help in some way, I believe I saw a couple, or at least ads for people who will make them for a cost if you supply the guns at www.gunsamerica.com

Jacks Complete

January 10th, 2004, 09:49 AM

Sorry, I have to ask this... Why have a big heavy multi-barrelled minigun/gatling gun, if you aren't going to fire at 4000rpm? The main problem with all these designs is the ammo feeder. Has anyone thought of a good way to feed the beast without spending hours putting bullets into clips, belts, feeder cartridges, etc.? Also, you will want some kind of brass-catcher or collection shoot. The gatling gun design is actually very simple. Try to visualise just one barrel the whole way through the firing cycle. Forget all the other barrels, as they are exact duplicates, just at a different point in the cycle. From empty, it picks up a loaded cartridge, then the bolt gets closed by a rod pushing it forward. The firing spring is cocked as this happens, the opposite of most rifles. Once the breech is closed, the spring is released, firing the cartridge. Next, the bolt is opened and the case ejected. Then it picks up the next cartridge... The firing speed is completely user-selectable, within the range of the torque provision of the drive system at the lower end, and failing to feed or melting the barrels at the upper end.

charger

January 10th, 2004, 11:53 AM

someone has already made a 22 minigun, you can see it here http://www.montysminiguns.com/brian.htm

Jacks Complete

January 10th, 2004, 06:14 PM

montysminiguns.com rocks big time! Check out the minigun video under August! http://www.montysminiguns.com/ miniofthemonth.htm

maarten221

January 12th, 2004, 11:25 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Should make light work of jackrabbits! As for the loading chute - since it is .22, a relatively forgiving round when it comes to loading, you may want to look at a spring loaded system, much the same as on the FN P90, but without the rotation stage. This will allow the use of large magazines or chutes with minimal effort in loading since the only requirement will be that the rounds all face the appropriate direction.

foxrdkll

January 12th, 2004, 06:41 PM

I like the posts you guys. I'm new and I appreciate the fact that you all know what you're talking about and you do your research! The CAD video was awesome! It shows a fine piece of machinery. I've got a question though. Why not have a design much like what is in Bill Holmes book on the .22 machine pistol (i.e. loading mechanism w/ magazine) only with rotating barrels? It would still offer a little barrel cooling time. One person mentioned the rate of fire; is this one of your desires for the design? "Why have a big heavy multi-barrelled minigun/gatling gun, if you aren't going to fire at 4000rpm? The main problem with all these designs is the ammo feeder." So, I guess what I'm getting at is what are the objectives/desires in this design? ROF, barrel cooling, loading mechanism, weight, etc.?

FragmentedSanity

January 14th, 2004, 06:19 AM

"Why have a big heavy multi-barrelled minigun/gatling gun, if you aren't going to fire at 4000rpm?" I think the Ideal application for a multi barreled .22 would be as a sentry gun, controlled via remote - or by movement sensors when activateds. Would be quite a good defensive weapon. A couple of servos to aim the thing - or travel in predefined patterns. As such it wouldnt have to fire ultra fast - obviously it would be preferable to control the firing rate remotely as well - but even 20 rounds per minute would deter most assailants. Of course being able to up the rate to 500 rpm on demand would be helpful and not hard to incorporate in the design. 5000 rounds in a gravity fed magazine system would buy you considerable time to make good your escape while they believe your shooting at them - I spose with enough guns you could remotely defend an entire compound. Incorporating a self destruct - in the form of a big claymore - when it ran out of ammo is another defensive measure. It would be nice if the self destruct could seal the entrance it was guarding as a final act of defiance. The Main point is the a slower rate of fire would be quite efective -and even better in some situations : imagine 5000 rounds at 100 rpm giving you 50 minutes of constant firing. No one would want to enter its line of fire and if the did they would sustain multiple hits in very little time. IMO thats a much better idea than having a gun that will cut down most anything in its path but only works for a minute or so. Such a weapon would also be great mounted in a vehicle, as an offensive weapon; in which case the higher firing rate would be better. The idea being to drive in - lay out as much lead as quickly as you can then drive off. What it comes down to is that a high firing rate is more likley suited to offence, slower to defence - so the weapon needs to be designed with a purpose in mind. Having variable speeds would be the best idea tho - making the guns more adaptable. Another thing to think on is that if you make one of these you can obviously make more - so if you really feel the need to hurl copious amounts of lead around you just add more guns. 5 guns firing slower would put out just as much lead as one fast gun - but in a more random pattern assuming the guns were all set to shoot a different pattern - and without the problems of barrels overheating. 5 guns in 5 different locations is also a lot harder to neutralise than one single gun. Many other ideas for sentry guns were discussed by NBK in the BB macine gun thread, I believe most of it could be applied to a .22 mini gun. IMO even if you wanted a "Predator" style gun it would be best if you could alter the rate of fire - slow to provide covering fire and faster for attack. It just seems a waste to fire thosuands of rounds when after only a minute or so your empty and vulnerable, when you could still have a very rapid rate of fire but have a lot longer firing time.

Blackhawk

January 14th, 2004, 08:34 AM

You woudln't be vaunerable, as a you are now carying a big minigun shaped club :P Serriously though, wouldn't 50mins of constant firing overheat the barrels? at 500rpm each barrel would still be firing an average of 1.4 rounds per second (assuming 6 barrels), thats not much but I would think it would add up. Of course a simple water jacket around the barrels would help a lot. But then there is still the matter of designing and building several miniguns, say 5 to defend an area, and then loading 25000 rounds into them (5000 each) for the coming gunfight. Oh and you would have to buy 25000 .22 rounds at once and try not looking suspicious too.

PHAID

January 14th, 2004, 08:38 AM

The purpose of the minigun concept is that it keeps the barrels cool because they each have a short time that they are emty and exposed to the air. The other good thing is that they dont jam, if you have a missfire it just keeps going and drops the unfired round.

xyz

January 14th, 2004, 09:55 AM

Blackhawk, you could buy the ammo straight from the manufacture. I am sure it would be very common for them to receive orders that size from gunshops, clubs, etc. And in FragmentedSanity's example, to keep firing for 50 minutes, they would only be going at 100RPM, not 500.

foxrdkll

January 14th, 2004, 03:50 PM

What about a design that incorporates multiple barrels but with a single bolt? This could simplify design, construction and reduce weight. You could also include a separate or secondary ejector to allow for increased speed or a safety check. Then again, I don't know if this would produce too much of a problem with the bolt overheating if fired at an extremely high rate of fire.

irish

January 14th, 2004, 06:35 PM

As far as buying 25,000 round's of .22 ammo goes those 5000 round "case's" that most gunshops sell come in a pallet of

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

50,000 rounds, I'm sure if you told them you where buying for a group of mates they would sell you a pallet with no questions asked (apart from maybe how you are going to pay for it :D ).

CommonScientist

January 14th, 2004, 07:14 PM

ST "its run via a starter motor" Im pretty good with automotive parts, so im pretty sure that the starter motor wouldnt work. Reason being that they burn up often on cars. It has limitations, you should only have it on for 30 seconds or less. Just trying to help.

Blackhawk

January 14th, 2004, 09:27 PM

Starter motors in cars, especially with 6+ cylinders are under a lot of strain with very little cooling, try turning the crankshaft of a car and you will know just how much In comparison to this while heavily geared I think a .22 minigun would not be too hard. That and you could have active cooling via a fan directly attatched to the main shaft blowing air over the motor.

xyz

January 14th, 2004, 11:14 PM

Commonscientist, your sig violates the rules. Please change it to something 3 lines long or less.

ST

January 15th, 2004, 05:04 AM

Since when is a minigun going to be fired for more then 30 seconds continuously, and even then it aint the starter motor that will melt first.

Blackhawk

January 15th, 2004, 06:28 AM

Well it is firing at a very low rate, and as a constant cover fire so you can get away, it is not like you are holding it, as stated above it would be part of some kind of autonomous tripod.

Dave the Rave

January 15th, 2004, 10:58 AM

I like the idea of only one bolt and one firing pin, where the mechanics of feed and unload can be made by guiding rods. The motor rotates a endless screw, which engages on the rod of the bolt, pushing it back and forwards, thus opening the chamber, feeding the cartridge, closing the bolt and firing the gun. Then when the chamber is open, a bullet is taken of the clip and put on the port. As the bolt moves forwards, it pushes the bullet to the chamber, closing it. With the chamber closed, the firing pin is free to disengage the rod, firing the weapon. Then the screw engages again the bolt, taking it backwards, opening the chamber and extracting the bullet to the port, then the gravity do it´s trick

Or, the idea of guiding rods can be used on multiple bolts and firing pins: After the shoot is fired, lets say, on the 3rd or 4rd barrel, the bolt engages the rod on the chassis of the gun. As the barrels rotate by the motor, the bolt follows it´s guide and moves backwards, opening the chamber and ejecting the spent shell. Whit the chamber open, it strips one new cartridge off the belt or clip and disengages the guide, thrus closing tbe bolt. as soon as the now feed barrel reaches the line of fire, another rod disengages the firing pin, firing the weapon. All these steps can be acomplished by the rotation of the axix by the eletric motor, without any need of gas operated systems.

Tube

January 15th, 2004, 01:56 PM

here's a cool site you guys might want to check out if you haven't allready. http://world.guns.ru/machine/minigun-e.htm This is more of a history of the gatling gun development, as opposed to a 'how to make your own' reference. But, i saw a few references to the portable "Predator gun" in this thread, and the author of my link gives a good spin on how unrealistic the actual idea of a portable hand held minigun really is. (I understand that the predator gun was at least a .223 and this thread's about making a .22 so their would be a world of difference between the two. But, nonetheless the link's still a good read) Aside from this little minigun section, it's a great gun reference site in general. so, if you're bored it might interest you to browse the rest of the site. *this is my 1st post, so hopefully i'm not breaking any rules or getting too off topic here....

pest3125

January 15th, 2004, 03:38 PM

Might be too much to ask for, but some sort of 'hopper feed' would be good - so you can dump in more ammo into a bin without worrying about filling magazines or belts ...

CommonScientist

January 15th, 2004, 06:37 PM

Well its not that it "melts", it just burns out fires and such in it. And it has enough tourque in it to power a 40mm minigun with 6 barrels. So it might be overkill. You could use a motor from a vacume cleaner, but you would need to convert your power supply to a 120 volt system for maximum efficiency. I thought the predator minigun was a 7.62 : .308. and the terminator minigun was the same one with a different grip/handle style.

maarten221

January 26th, 2004, 09:50 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I saw an ad for a .22 Gatling gun in Shotgun news last night - if you could desigh something similar and instead of a hand crack, add a motor (low RPM) to it, it should be able to reach the 2000+ RPM ranges - taking into consideration the metals used in construction and the appropriate gearing. Looks like a Hella lotta fun though! Keep the hand crank and attach when showing the weapon off or when it is in storage, because that keeps it legal (sort of). The mag on the Gatling is a chute and the ATF doesn't seem to mind those with the higher capacities. I'll look up the website for the gatling when I get home and post it - very useful info and you can "purchase" blueprints - not that it sounds like y'all need them.

maarten221

January 29th, 2004, 10:46 AM

HEre is the link: http://www.gatlingguns.net/

Jacks Complete

February 1st, 2004, 04:18 PM

Using just one bolt and firing pin would be a bad idea! You then have a single point of failure! The iring pin breaks, and you are looking like the biggest loser! Also, I think it likely that the heat build-up might cause problems as the bolt would get hotter, and hence expand faster and further than the barrels, which could cause a jam.

tiac03

February 3rd, 2004, 11:03 PM

A few questions 1. Does anyone here actually know what their talking about? Some have had some good points but most of the stuff written was rather useless. Now I don't pretend to know what I'm talking about when it comes to gun design, but some of the crap you are offering is just that. Today lets just talk about the firing pins. A) They call it .22 rimfire for a reason the "primer" runs along the rim and this is the reason that the firing pins on .22's arn't centred. This being said all your drawings have centred "pins". B) a single firing pin any way you think of it is a stupid idea. Think of it this way a firing pin is made to hit a stationary object. This said all the strength of the firepin is due to the fact that the shock goes through its length (example of this is a nail). Now as soon as this single firing pin hits an object, that, rather than be sitting still (relative to the pin) has a side ways motion, it experiences a sideways push (take a dowel and touch it to the outer edge of a drum sander and you will see what I mean). This will have you going through more pins than rounds. Anther problem with the stationary pin is that it has to be really timed well. These things combined also ruin your "grenade striker" looking firing pin idea. Rather than fire the round it will just rip apart your cartridge or get riped off itself. (also ultimately cutting a groove (sp?) into the "face" of your "advanced thread spooler") To solve this whole problem just have pins that strike the round but rotate with the barrels. (look up the circular ramp design from the original gatlings probably the easiest)

2) Now for some of my ideas on how to make one of these beauties. A) For ejection and intake once again following the original gatling is the way to go. (where the round sits is only half a barrel but once it gets to firing position there is a block that completes the barrel). This makes for easy intake and drop out ejection (as half barrel part becomes inverted shell falls out). B) Whats the point of a big assed 6000rpm gun (the predator one only fired at 3000 because they had to hook up a 12 volt rather than a chopper 24 volt batt, and it didn't have enough juice and that was still quick). My advice is the smaller the better. (I assume since you are willing to spray that much ammo per min you arn't worried that much about accuracy). Use the shortest (practical) barrels possible, and keep the weight down. You are using .22 rimfire not 7.62 (.308). You don't need heavy or long barrels. (.22 is only good up to about 100-150 yards anyways) C) If you keep the weight down you can then use something such as an electric or battery powered drill as what drives your gun. OR for those who have seen the gas powered drills in action can think about how amazing the thing would work, look, and sound.

Contrary to popular belief it isn't anywhere near easy to build a gatling gun. To make matters worse your plans revolve around a gas operated ejection (I think). Now unless you are an engineer who specializes in weapons systems I doubt you can accomplish that kind of ejection system. ( You first off need enough pressure to allow the gas to escape out the front of the weapon rather than ejecting the shell and having the "projectile" lodged in your barrel because all the gas went out the back (probalby F*cking you up in the process). If there is too much pressure on the back of the case the round will go out but the case will either stay in the barrel or eject half way and jam your little toy. (The whole point of a minigun is that it fires quickly without barrels heating up too much, and it doesn't jam) Well I think I wrote too much already....

JoeJablomy

February 4th, 2004, 02:06 AM

Aaarrgh. 1.You cannot, or at least would be a dumbass to, use one bolt for all the barrels. Not because it would overheat -the bolt, much unlike the barrel, is never in direct contact with 2000 deg gasses @ 20KSI or whatever pressure .22 gets up to. The case is, but it gets thrown off the bolt before it can transfer much heat. The reason you don't use one bolt for all the barrels is that then that bolt would have to move back and forth really fucking fast as each barrel comes into alignment. One bolt is used for each barrel because they are not actuated by some kind of 'rod' but by a really big elliptical cam around the outside of the receiver, and if it's a gatling gun then each bolt can only move back and forth relative to its own barrel. Does this make sense? I haven't read the links, because they don't seem to work, but if you look at a good picture showing the inside of a gatling gun the above should become obvious. See

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/navy/nrtc/14313_ch6.pdf 2. As for .22 LR ammunition and its handling by a magazine: What the . are you thinking, maarten221? The P90 fires a rimless centerfire cartridge, and yes, that one is pretty easy to handle, including feeding it through a P90 magazine. The problem is that .22 is not rimless. It is rimfire. It has to have a rim. And that rim catches all fucking manner of obstacles that cause stoppages, including the rims of other .22 cartridges like the ones after it in line, which do not want to be removed from the magazine at the same time as the one first in line. In short, the magazine/feeder will be the biggest problem, if you want it to have a decent capacity. 3. As for the rate of fire: If you want a 100 rpm .22, go to your local suburbanite friendly, consumerist bitchgunshop, and buy one of the exceedingly common semi-auto .22's. You can fire 100rpm from one of those by hand. You do not need a gatling gun to do that. Also, a drone gun that fires .22 at 100 rpm will not deter -anyone- except your mom. There are faceshields that can stop .22. Also, NO ONE tries too load a gun with enough ammo for 50 min. of continuous firing, unless they think they're going to be shot dead and not be able to reload the gun and don't realize that a .22 gatling gun could be taken out by piggy with the .50 cal sniper rifle once everyone finds out where it's located. 4. Heating: .22 doesn't heat up barrels very fast. What makes to biggest difference in barrel temperature on my .22 semiauto is whether or not it's a really bright day and not really windy. Also, gatling guns are actively cooled by a very obvious mechanism: the barrels are whirling around in the air really fast. This induces the air to flow around the barrels, and cools them when their temperature exceeds that of the air. To build a .22 nanogun firing @3000rpm, about the minimum acceptable capability for such a weapon, [and 20sec. is a long time for continuous fire] you could try to make it self powered by blowback as the original post seems to imply, but you absolutely need a bolt for each barrel to confine and support the case head and rim during firing. The reason is the same reason rimfire cartridges are always small and weak: the rim has to be really thin for it to work, and thus cannot hold 50 KSI internal pressure like a good rifle round. Rather, the rim and head must be well supported to hold up to the pressure the ammo Is loaded to, and a chambering "ramp" with a fixed firing pin will not provide this support. What would is a tiny little bolt with a fixed firing pin/protrusion that would dent the rim just as the round is fully chambered. Since this is a .22, this bolt would not even have to lock to the rotor stub. A good picture of a compact gatling bolt, for the GAU-8, is at http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2222826775&category=588 But please understand that most of the protrusions at the front are for locking and are, as stated, thus unnecessary for this design. In fact, with a properly designed cam, the bolt would begin blowback as the round goes off, just as in any other gun, and would drive the rotor by driving itself along the cam. Alternatively, the cam can be designed with a slight flat to keep the bolt closed during firing, with the drawback that it would necessitate an extractor. To drive this gun, do not use a big, heavy ass car starter motor. Use a cordless drill. In this one package you have a pistol grip, trigger, battery, and geared, high torque motor. You even have variable speed. Just remove the chuck and thread a hole in the back of your main rotor for the shaft, and make the required mounting brackets. Other notes: Speed is necessary for the functioning of a fixed pin firing system. Elsewhere in the forum you will find it repeated that what sets explosives (like the lead styphnate priming compound in the ammo) off is both force and speed. I doubt you would have enough speed in a gun operating at 100 rpm to successfully fire .22 ammunition by anything but a spring loaded striker. For feeding, which as stated is a much more complicated problem, I would use a single stack/column drum, pretty much a normal one. I would make it the size of a good submachine gun drum -after all, that's what this basically is- and with .22 ammo that size could contain at least a few hundred rounds. I would really avoid the helical drum despite its much larger capacity for reasons you should find obvious (see the second half of that pdf on vulcan installation). Reasons like you could never get the f**king thing to work. As for belt feeding, .22 would have to use a pull-out belt, which is less than ideal, although the GAU19 does it. The bolts would have to have extractors on their outer edges to pull the round out of the belt, which would be pulled in by teeth on the main rotor, as the previous rounds are fired and the bolts blow back. Then again, that would screw up ejection. I don't know how you'd do it. But the belt wouldn't be that hard to make; you'd just use a flexible plastic strip for the base and maybe heat seal another strip onto that as the loops. I should warn you though: gatling guns hate belts. Miniguns especially, although newer, more advanced designs can obviously take them without jamming too bad. The problem is, we're not even to a basic design yet. Unless you can get/make re ally lig ht minimum contour barrels, I would u se ma ybe 3-5, which could make a pretty compact gun, too. It might be possible to make .22 LR barrels out of some king of stainless tubing. One other topic that would bear a lot of discussion is how to make a receiver with an elliptical cam track on the inside.

ST

February 12th, 2004, 06:07 AM

A) They call it .22 rimfire for a reason the "primer" runs along the rim and this is the reason that the firing pins on .22's arn't centred. This being said all your drawings have centred "pins".

No matter which way you look at it its going to be centred from one point of view. Now, the most logical way of positioning it is as ive drawn it, with the "firing pin" being a horizontal ridge to hit the full face of the case, thereby giving it the best chance to get a positive hit. Not to mention the main idea of using a stationary pin wouldnt work at all if I didnt know they were rimfired :rolleyes: . Stop trying to look smart by correcting your own stupid assumptions. B) a single firing pin any way you think of it is a stupid idea. Think of it this way a firing pin is made to hit a stationary object. This said all the strength of the firepin is due to the fact that the shock goes through its length (example of this is a nail). Now as soon as this single firing pin hits an object, that, rather than be sitting still (relative to the pin) has a side ways motion, it experiences a sideways push (take a dowel and touch it to the outer edge of a drum sander and you will see what I mean). This will have you going through more pins than rounds. Another problem with the stationary pin is that it has to be really timed well. These things combined also ruin your "grenade striker" looking firing pin idea. Rather than fire the round it will just rip apart your cartridge or get riped off itself. (also ultimately cutting a groove (sp?) into the "face" of your "advanced thread spooler") Now you've made another dumb assumption that the stationary firing pin is shaped the same as a conventional pin, obviously this pin can be easily made very strong as its not designed to be hit by a hammer, and it can be as wide as it needs to be. A bevelled wedge shape seems most logical. Your timing problem, thats only relative to the top left idea in first post, is solved by your first question, as the rimfire case leaves significant room for variations in the position of primer strikes. and gived the gear ratio in the picture it wont be spinning THAT fast. Everyone please remember that this was designed to be as easy as possible, with little moving parts, you seriosly think that

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

constructing multible firing mechanisms is easier and more likely to work then a single pin .... I dont think so! This is improvised and not meant to replicate a military weapon! I still havnt seen any reason at all why a single stationary pin and a "recoilless rifle" type ejection will not work, obviously accuracy and power will be poor, but seeing as the only possible use for this would be running around pretending to be ED-209 whats does it matter! Getting the round chambered is a totally different thing and very hard ... this is its only fault that I cant get around. Unless you want to just blurt off 8 shots then reload, in which point ejection isnt a factor either. Now imagine a multiple barrelled automatic revolver which is best accomplished by the moving pin (top left image in first picture). JoeJablomy, your points are also made from assumptions, Niether of us know what speeds will be needed for the stationary pin to operate and ive never talked about 3000rpm "nanoguns" only a electric rotary barreled automatic weapon to be used for personal amusement! Dont be taken into thinking the way its done in military guns is the only way to do it ... A "rimmed rimfire" case brings up its own problems but also possibilities.

tiac03

February 12th, 2004, 11:56 PM

Now lets get one thing straight, it takes someone who, at the very least knows the basic function of firearms to build one let alone a mini-gun. If you want a rifle that has only one firing pin give it one barrel. the point of the "mini-gun" is to fire rounds faster than single barreled firearms can. If you want a really slow firing one it would make more sense to just convert a semiauto rifle to full auto (less costly too). Now if you are serious about the mini-gun I would advise you to do away with the single firing pin idea, it won't work. (unless you were attempting to make one that fired like the multiple grenade launchers, which is dumb for a .22) now if you are going to take the effort to pull your head out of your ass, I have found a few links that can help you. (some may have been posted already) http://www.modelgatlinggunplans.com/pix/breechOpen.jpg http://www.denvermechanicaldesigns.com/GUN_PARTS.html http://www.gatlingguns.net/3d.htm http://www.howstuffworks.com/animation23.htm http://members3.boardhost.com/gatchat/ http://www.gatlingguns.net/ http://www.rkba.org/guns/principles/operating-systems/gatling.html notice the # of firing pins = number of barrels for each one. why I try to help people who are too stubborn to listen to others is beyond me.

JoeJablomy

February 13th, 2004, 12:20 AM

1. I didn't say I knew wnat speed would be necessary, only that it isn't slow. No, no part of that is an assumption. I've pulled several hundred dud .22 bullets for the powder, most recently by gripping a round in a pair of pliers and using another pair to wrench the bullet out. From messing with the empty caps, and judging by the number of .22 duds there are at my shooting range, I can say very certainly they aren't that easy to set off reliably. I could probably crush the base and rim of an unfired .22 casing without setting it off. 2. You may have never talked about a real gatling gun, but it's been mentioned, and the alternative seems to really suck. If you want some POS with less performance than .22 at a low rate of fire, don't waste my time talking about it. This is the improvised weapon forum, and your amusing toy seems pretty lame as a weapon unless you plan to add a bayonet ;) No, it doesn't have to be a strictly conventional gatling gun, but it does have to work. Anyway, 'rotary cannon' is another word for gatling. You Will need something to hold the rounds in line with their barrels before they are shoved into them, this is done by the fingers on the rotor of a real gun. You will need such a rotor on your own gun to make the rounds follow the loading ramp, unless you can come up with some other way of doing it, and if you're going to make a real rotor you may as well mill bolt tracks in it and use bolts for the reasons I've enumerated above. You didn't think you were going to make a high performance gun without machining something, did you? And before you come back about this not needing to be very good: a)If no good, useless b)if you don't need the performance of a multibarreled gun, use a single barreled one. You can just buy one, and won't have to fuck around with the 50+ parts you'd have to make with a dremel tool for the rotary. Speaking of which, if you only want something with barrels that turn, you could make a barrel rotor and cam/lock system to align it with a stub barrel on a semi-auto .22. Use backward movement of the bolt to actuate the barrels, get a 50-rd magazine, and learn to shoot really fast. Your friends will never know the difference :))

ST

February 13th, 2004, 01:58 AM

I will say again, this was only designed to be THE EASIEST way of getting automatic fire off, the multiple barrelled design was only chosen as it is the EASIEST way to do it. If we disregard magazines and chambering new cartridges, I challenge anyone to come up with an easier way to get 8-20 rounds off in automatic fire. As soon as everyone gets the "cutting down trees with blazing beams of lead" idea out of their minds we can get back to it being IMPROVISED. You may of noted that this original topic was posted over two years ago, so I have no intention of actually doing it. The feeding problems were mind boggling, and i'll say improvising it is near impossible, this was a major problem with the blowback ejection, if it fails to fire a major fuckup jam would be guaranteed as a new cartridge trys to force its way in. I'll admit that the way its drawn will never work as a magazine fed automatic weapon. You would have to rely in the amount of barrels you could fit into it, which for a .22 would be about 20. You can talk of "toys" and not a real weapon ... but then who here would actually use an automatic weapon for anything but amusement, same goes for the rest of the things discussed in this forum. How can you call your ideas "improvised" if it takes a gunsmith to accomplish it! I choose to only talk about ideas that will be within the capabilities of most people, if that means *its* capabilities suffer - so be it! Also, improvised doesnt mean going out and buying a semi-auto rifle, even if it accomplished the same thing ... cant you see the difference! With this said, Tiac03 & JoeJablomy you can continue your discussion on weapons that are out of reach for 99.95% of people,

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

but stop directing insults towards me as we are talking about two very different things.

Rhadon

February 13th, 2004, 08:32 AM

Let's not start a smack talk, I don't want to threaten to ban someone.

tiac03

February 13th, 2004, 06:07 PM

I wasn't posting with the intent to be insulting I was posting to inform you that you're idea of "improvising" is what "Macgyver" is known for. You think you can strap a couple of things together spin them and you have an "automatic rifle". That is dangerous thinking. The amount of work you are willing to put on the project is only enough to make a single barreled single shot POC (piece of crap). The ideas I put forward apply to anyone who is willing to put some effort, patience, and possibly a few bucks into making their own as Joe said "rotary cannon". (As simple as it can be made, and yet still be functional.) Now if you want to build one with a pocket knife, a soup can and a lemon as a power supply, I advise you to go to the MacGyver fan site. So anyone who is serious about it follow the few links I added before, and use your imagination (logically).

JoeJablomy

February 13th, 2004, 11:21 PM

Tiac: I finally did look at your links, and the 3d images page was pretty good. It's nice to see the carrier block (I was calling it the rotor) fleshed out. I've been thinking about it, and you're right about 'blowback ejection,*' it wouldn't be reliable at all. One detail of the RG-G models is that the extractor is on the outer side of the bolt, I guess for the obvious reason. It seems strange to me that the bolts extend clear out the back of the carrier, which seems to have a lot of wasted volume. I guess that's OK if you want a $10K gun, but for a lighter, cheaper version I would of course use SMG style percussion as I said (the firing pins are bumps on the bolt faces). This would eliminate the need for most of the stuff behind the carrier, and if the bolts were only held to the carrier by their tracks, with no tunnels, the whole cam assembly could be moved forward, too. The GAU-8 is said to be extremely compact, and from the size of the bolt I can't doubt it! The bolt is about a third of a cartridge length long. We probably can't achieve that without ending up with finicky little parts that won't work, but we can definitely do better than the 5-length bolts RG-G uses. Specifically, we probably can get away with 1.5" long bolts, which would be exactly 1.5 length. They could probably be made from 3/8" bar stock, and it would probably be most practical to screw the cam lugs on. It seems most likely that the RG-G gun had the bolts going through tunnels in the carrier to hold them to it very firmly. The alternative is to have the bolts be partiallly submerged in their tracks. It might also make sense to use square or hex bar for the bolts, although that could make it harder to mill them. (I don't really know much about machining, either) I think if you used 3/8" square stock with one edge facing out and one toward the gun central axis, it would be plenty big enough to hold a .22 round and still have enough metal on either side to hold it securely in the track. One other possibility is to have the main cam track be inside the carrier, instead of around it, as a stationary cylindrical thing with the track milled in it. It would be a lot simpler that milling it in the inside of the outer casing. This would mean you'd need more barrels to have a core space big enough for it, and the cam-core would have to be supported by the back plate, but it would definitely make the receiver a hell of a lot easier to make. I think this might be the approach used on the GAU-8; in the pictures you'll notice the cam follower is on the opposite side from the extractors. ---Just checked, and the outside casing seems like it might have the track in it, but the pictures are all low resolution or have the feed guides in the way. Interestingly, the rotor is driven at the front of the receiver instead of the rear. See the bottom of http://www.military-page.de/waffen/mk/gau8/gau8_01.htm ---Anyway, it likely doesn't have the cam inside the carried because it would be much harder to incorporate a clearing cycle if it were. It might not matter if the extractors are on the inside edge and the follower is on the outside; the ejector is probably some thing that catches the casing in the middle and throws it out as the carrier rotates. There seems to be a groove to accomodate such a device on the RG-G carrier. ---In fact, my used 30x173 durable dummy has a ring of nicks about 3" from the base, and a fired shell has one. They look like they came off the squared corner of something about .07" wide.

*I should have called it blow-out ejection; blowback guns use extractors so it's a distinct variation.

tiac03

February 14th, 2004, 05:56 PM

Yea they based their design off of the "classic" gatling guns, so that is why it is built that way. Your design ideas seem good. and the Idea of using the firing pins as really a protrusion off of the total is also a good idea because it would allow for less small moving parts to have to worry about. But you proved my point. The best kind of posts in these forums are the kind where people look something up and add their own thoughts on improving it. Almost like reverse engineering. By the end you take the best ideas from everyone involved and design one from that. I just wish I remembered the name of the site that had the video of the inner workings of a black powder gatling gun in motion. If I ever find it I'll post it.

Marcus

February 14th, 2004, 08:39 PM

I uploaded the video I think you are talking about to a geocities account here: http://www.geocities.com/marcuschurch2001 Unfortunatly as it is quite large one download appears to exceed the free allocated data transfer.

tiac03

February 15th, 2004, 01:29 AM

From what I remember yea that seems to be the one. Thanks. You remember what site it was from?

ST

February 15th, 2004, 05:08 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Im pretty sure that vid originally come from gattlinggun.net (now dead). It shows how feeding and extraction were not an issue with the original gat, as the cartridge was also the chamber, therefore was as simple as letting it fall in and out.

JoeJablomy

February 18th, 2004, 03:32 AM

A few other thoughts: The GAU8 does use a cam track in the receiver casing like any other gatling. You can see it in the picture at the bottom of the German page I linked to, right next to the feed mechanism by the orangish band on the main drive shaft. Also, feeding won't be as much of a problem as I thought. A gatling gun should take cartridges by pushing them out the side of the feeder rather than pushing them straight forward. The rim can get in the way of a cartridge going forward, but shouldn't be a problem it it's pushed to the side. What we do have to do is come up with a magazine that retains cartridges while allowing them to be moved out the side. I can think of a few ways to do it, but don't have a way to post images. Anyway, does anyone know about gatling magazines and how they worked? vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Improvised AAA: FLIEGERFAUST Log in

View Full Version : Improvised AAA: FLIEGERFAUST Ragnar

July 31st, 2001, 12:51 AM

This was ,what I believe, to be the first shoulder-fired AAA weapon. If my history is correct, It was concieved very late in WW2 by Germany and a few( I think) actually seen combat in the closing months/weeks of the war. The weapon consisted (final model) of nine 20mm rocket tubes that resembled a gattling assembly. The ammo were standard 20mm aa projectiles with proximity fuze crimpt onto a rocket motor that had two slanted venturi inorder to impart a spin for stabilized flight. upon firing(which is electric) the rounds left in two groups spaced in miliseconds. I don't recall the velocity, but I believe it was quite high- effective range was supposedly at 2000m. It was felt by the Allies(;I don't like that term) that this weapon would have made a considerable impact on the outcome of this war. A simple, straightforward design. These weapons used in groups could place a lot of danger for low flyers....especially for whirlybirds.

NightStalker

July 31st, 2001, 06:51 PM

yeah right, i remember this weapon... i got a picture and a short description of it in a german book... i think i'll scan it during the next days and post it (text translated). but what i really wonder is how to built such a weapon. any ideas are welcome.. -----------------Death stalks silently....

BaDSeeD

August 2nd, 2001, 02:33 AM

FLIEGERFAUST? I remember reading somewhere about an experimental weapon that the germans had placed on their bomber interceptors. It was called jaugfaust (probably spelled horribly wrong), anyhow, it was placed on the ME163 Komet. It was a vertically mounted rocket, that had a light sensor built into it. Basically, it was designed for the interceptor to fly under an incoming bomber, and when the shadow of the bomber crossed this sensor, it would then fire the rocket, up and into the plane. Sorry i can't provide any more info on this, but my time online today is rather limited. Feel free to add anything to this.... especially the proper spellinghttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

Jumala

August 7th, 2001, 09:50 PM

Perhaps it is this what you mean? http://unsere-luftwaffe.de/inhalt/motoren/hasag.htm

[This message has been edited by Jumala (edited August 07, 2001).]

Ragnar

August 10th, 2001, 01:26 AM

Yep, thats it.

simply RED

August 10th, 2001, 02:19 PM

How do the proximity fuse of that weapon operate? I know only the electric prox. fuses which transmit signal(infra red, high frequency, etc.) that mirors from object, it is recieved from a reciever in the bomb and detonates it...

dmitrieff

August 17th, 2001, 04:53 AM

You'll find information on Fliegerfaust in the last 2 paragraphs of the below listed website: http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust2.htm vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> How to make homemade mortars Log in

View Full Version : How to make homemade mortars kaylen

April 12th, 2001, 11:52 PM

Please tell me how to make homemade mortars or a sight that tells me how. also try this fill a sprite can with any fast burning oxidizere black powder,flash powder nitro, hmtd ,acetone peroxide so on so fort put on a 1 ft visc fuse bury it leaving the fuse out and see wat happends (a miniture earth quake ) cool

CragHack

April 13th, 2001, 12:05 AM

did you know that metals can react with HMTD and acetone peroxide to form heat, heat enough to cause the peroxides to explode? didn't think of that did you? get the fuck out of here. try and seach the net yourself asshole. -----------------"If you must, do it with intelligent people, at least they know how to talk to the cops."

Pyro

April 13th, 2001, 12:14 AM

Honestly, with a post like that this topic should be immediately closed. You think you'd get helped for a mortar, go here www.wierdpier.com (http://www.wierdpier.com) and goto their forums, ask someone there, they'll tell you a procedure.-Pyro

Cricket

April 13th, 2001, 01:03 AM

NBK2000's PDF. If you ask about where to get this, you don't need it.

Bitter

April 13th, 2001, 09:57 AM

It's also in the wrong section, but that's another story. (Improvised Weapons, mister).

Anthony

April 13th, 2001, 02:29 PM

I know HMTD is incompatible with nearly all metals, but I thought AP was ok with metals? Kitchen Improvised Blasting Caps agrees. Just wondering because I got some 10mm Al tube for caps thinking it'd be OK with AP.

BoB-

April 13th, 2001, 06:27 PM

I dont know man, in a can theres a lot of room for the AP to "rattle", I dont understand the need for a high explosive, actually....I cant really understand your post as all.

shady mutha

April 13th, 2001, 06:32 PM

The paladin press book 'professionals guide to pyrotechnics' has a firework mortar design made from strong cardboard.As for military grade the IRA used gas bottles filled with A.N based explosive for mortar rounds.They used blackpowder for the propellant.Delta press has a 'beer can mortar'book for $5.

Anthony

April 13th, 2001, 07:13 PM

Home made mortar - length of steel pipe (preferably seamless) threaded at one end and an end cap. Simple.

Foodos

April 13th, 2001, 07:14 PM

Kaylen: If you have the means to make AP, HMTD, and otherwise then you should have no problem finding plans, or improvising your own mortar. Anthony: I was thinking along the same lines, especially since many people dream of using Brass empty shells with AP as small crackers, ive read a few posts on how people used aluminum shells as well.

blackadder

April 13th, 2001, 07:37 PM

HMTD is corrosive to metals, because of its extreme excess of oxygen. Why isn't AP corrosive to metals? They are both triperoxides, and both have the same amount of oxygen atoms according to "Improvised primary explosives". AP formula: C<sub>9H<sub>18O<sub>6 HMTD formula: C<sub>6H<sub>12N<sub>2O<SUB>6 Now that has to be some faulty information, hasn't it! I think the AP formula is wrong, because in another pdf I read that AP has a formula of: C<sub>6H<sub>12O<sub>4. I believe that the latter formula for AP is correct. Can anyone fill me in on this? What is the correct formula of AP and WHY doesn't it corrode metals as well as HMTD, if it has the same number of oxygen atoms than HMTD does.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter [This message has been edited by blackadder (edited April 13, 2001).]

blackadder

April 14th, 2001, 03:25 PM

OoTSCoO, you are still given respect for having the right attitude towards the forum (which you have demonstrated in your previous post), but please improve your spelling, there is a spellchecker to help you as well.

CodeMason

May 16th, 2001, 05:49 AM

blackadder: Both those AP formulas are right, it's just that the former is the trimer, and the latter is the dimer.

Gollum

May 17th, 2001, 12:59 PM

The problem with mortars like that is that they generally offer very poor accuracy. If you know how to build proper mortar rounds, and are knowledgable in meteorology then you can get pretty accurate.

CragHack

May 17th, 2001, 02:10 PM

meteorology...? what are we trying to predict the fucking weather? (::licks finger, sticks it up in the air:: "hmm, might rain") also after rereading the posts no one has mentioned how unstable AP and HMTD are when considering shock. you try and launch a can, with AP or hmtd in it, with a mortar and you will be picking the tube of the mortar out of your skull for weeks to come. -----------------"If you must, do it with intelligent people, at least they know how to talk to the cops." [This message has been edited by CragHack (edited May 17, 2001).]

Gollum

May 17th, 2001, 02:25 PM

Meteorology is important because the rounds will have different courses depending on the air pressure, ambient moisture, altitude of the round, and so on. This is why meteorologists can always be found travelling with artillery. Big guns with big shells need big knowledge. Just firing at random angles could end up in you or one of your comrades being hit by shrapnel from the round (Provided you're using a proper round).

PYRO500

May 17th, 2001, 09:04 PM

uh... humidity? I dont think that will matter seing our cannons are improvised, in fact the only major deciding factor that matters here is the wind, and it dosent take a meteroligist to figure how that will effect your morter

BaDSeeD

May 18th, 2001, 01:40 AM

LOL Ohh my god. I can't believe how technical everyone is getting here. How fucking accurate do you think a mortar is going to be when you use a "beer can" for a projectile, or a piece of gas line or sewer pipe for a launcher. Get real people. Does anyone here have any practical use for a mortar anyhow? What ya gonna do.... go hunting? The only practical use someone here might have for a mortar... is as a terror weapon. Any kills from it would only be a bonus.... how accurate does it have to be then?

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

Gollum

May 18th, 2001, 01:07 PM

Well if you really are using it as a terror weapon, you should make the beer cans special. Make them explode on impact with the ground and send Willie Pete flying everywhere (White Phosphorus, see NBK's post). Or if you have electronics skill make it explode 50 feet above ground to kill and maim everyone within a few hundred feet. All you need to do is have consistant weight and shape for your mortar round, and a consistant ammount of quality propellant launching it. With geometry and proper weather knowledge you can get it to be quite exact. PYRO500: Moisture in the air is important because it adds resistance to the movement of your round. On a foggy and windy day it can mean the difference between the round flying 500 feet or landing right at your feet. Here's a good read for anyone who likes this kind of stuff: http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/23-90/toc.htm And remember, if you're going to do it, do it well!

PYRO500

May 18th, 2001, 04:40 PM

ok, humidity is never gonna make that big a diffrence, your beer can is likely to tumble in flight witch will eliminate the need for accurate calculations, granted geometry is useful here, the only factor that will effect the tdj. of your cannon is wind.

madman

May 28th, 2001, 05:04 AM

A variety of grenade launchers can be fabricated from metal pipes and fittings.Ranges up to 600 meters can be obtained

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

depending on length of tube,charge,number of grenades,and angle of firing. Material required. Metal pipe,threaded on one end approx 2-1/2 in. in diameter and 14 in.to 4 ft long depending on range desired and number of grenades. End cap to fit pipe. Black powder,15 to 50 gm Fuse(any)or Electric initiator grenade(homemade) rags about 30 in.x30 in. drill string Method. 1.drill small hole through center of end cap 2.place blackbodies and fuse in paper bag and tie with string. 3.thread fuse through hole in end cap and place package(blackpowder)in end cap.screw end cap into pipe,being careful that the package in not caught between the threads. roll rag wad so that it is about 6on. long and has approximately the same diameter as pipe.push rag into open end of pipe untill it rests against package 5 pop in the grenade. On another note I saw the Australian army mortars,they can fire almost 5 km,the fire controller has a hand held computer that works everything out.

Demolition

May 28th, 2001, 06:18 AM

Madman,how do you manufacture your grenades? Demolition

madman

May 28th, 2001, 10:03 PM

Demolition I have never used that devise and have never produced a grenade.The information I have is. Material required. Iron pipe,threaded ends 1 1/2 to 3" diam,3" to 8"long. Explosive or propellant nonelectric blasting cap. fuse. drill. Just screw the cap on one end ,make sure the blasting cap is in the middle,fill her up cap it. An improvised method of launching a standard grenade 150 yds or an improvised grenade 90 yds using a discarded ammunition container. Material required Heavy cardboard container with inside diameter of 2 1/2 to 3" and at least 12 in. Black powder-8 grams. fuse grenade Rag,approximately 30 in x 24 in paper. 1.Discard top of container.Make small hole in bottom. 2.measure off a piece of fuse at least as long as the cardboard container.Tape one end of this to the fuse from the blasting cap in the improvised grenade.Be sure ends of fuse are in contact with EACH other. 3. place free end of fuse and blackpowder on piece of paper.Tie ens with string so contents will not fall out. 4place packasge in tube.Insert rag wadding.Pack so it fits snugly.Place pipe grenade into tube.Be sure it fits snugly. 5.Insert fuse through hole on bottom of launcher.Make sure it goes INTO blackpowder package. 6.bury container about 6" into ground at 30*degree angle. 7.fire on enemy.

mark

May 30th, 2001, 09:03 PM

Weapons of error? killing and maiming? Who are you fighting? Keep the hell out of the east bay, if you dont mind. A thick cardboard tube with a 3/4 inch diameter inside can be used to launch cratermakers so they go off in the air. This isnt a "weapon o terror", just something cool to aim over the ocean at the beach. Also, birdbombs are quite cool. Theyre flying m80s that go for 100 feet. You shoot them from guns.

ST

June 25th, 2001, 07:59 AM

The mortar is just a pipe sealed at one end, the ammunition is the hard part,what described above are simply cannons. Mortars are effective because they are capable of putting a lot of explosive in the air in a short time, therefore the round must not leave anything within the tube once fired, this allows the ammunition to be continually fed into it. The picture shows a round that leave nothing behind and is fired out of a simple steel tube. As the round hits the end of the tube, the shotshell full of powder is forced beack onto a firing pin igniting the powder charge and firing the round. -----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html)

PYRO500

June 25th, 2001, 09:53 AM

I would have a thin piece of metal holding the main impact hamer to strike the primer, so that when it smacks the ground it will crumple and not slide back and strike the primer prematurely

Mr Cool

June 25th, 2001, 06:03 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Blackadder: how can you have the formula for HMTD in front of you and claim that it has an ecxess of oxygen?!?!!?!?!?!??! It needs 12 more oxygen atoms to even have a neutral oxygen balance! (sorry, I don't know anything about home-made mortars, or why you'd want one)

Agent Blak

June 25th, 2001, 07:24 PM

ST, Is this just an Idea or has it been proto-typed and tested? Also you could try a fused system; this would be great for employing an Arson or shrapnel. -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

10fingers

June 25th, 2001, 10:34 PM

When the relatives are over there are a lot of beer cans flying through the air and I can say with certainty that they are not very aerodynamic or accurate.

ST

June 26th, 2001, 04:00 AM

Agent Blak, No, its just an idea, i for one would never push something like that down a tube next to me .. I dont know what casing/ propellant combinations would work, it just seems like a feasable idea that can be worked on.

-----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html)

SawedOff8gaugeman

June 26th, 2001, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by Agent Blak: ST, Is this just an Idea or has it been proto-typed and tested? It's not his idea. Can be found(with more detailed istructions and no idiotical bugs, fused version) in "Ragner's book of homemade weapons" as well as in NBK2000 pdf. There's not any bleed holes in the picture around the upper portion of the shotshell chamber. BIG MISTAKE!!! I bet if it would work, at least it could leave the empty shell behind in the tube =(

ST

June 26th, 2001, 04:42 PM

I thought i had thought it up.... but id never claim it as everything this simple would have been done before. Tell me what these "bleed holes" are for? i can see any need but you seem assured with yourself that its necessary. And what the fuck do you want the shotshell left in the tube for, the whole point is for it to not be there. What do you want a fused shell for? hits the ground and waits a bit before exploding? explodes in air? surely its best to go off as soon as it hits. -----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html) [This message has been edited by ST (edited June 26, 2001).]

Mexican Pizza

June 27th, 2001, 04:45 PM

ST, SawedOff8gaugeman was refering to how your design would leave the shor shell in the tube, I think. Bleed holes are nessary for the gasses from the burnt powder within the shot shell to escape the confinement of the tube.

ST

June 28th, 2001, 05:39 AM

no more comments from me until someone actually looks at the picture. -----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html)

PYRO500

June 28th, 2001, 07:47 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Why would you want bleed holes? they would make the morter loose power! you waant as much gasses as possible behind the morter to launch it.

nbk2000

June 28th, 2001, 10:35 PM

This is a picture of a stokes mortar bomb showing the bleed holes. It too used 12 guage shells of propellant. http://oldguns.net/5189.jpg -----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF. Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.

Anthony

June 29th, 2001, 12:10 AM

But if I'm looking at that picture right, the 12ga cartridge is base down unlike ST's pic. So the only way out is through the bleed holes, whereas in ST's the cartridge is base up so the open end points straight down into the mortar, so I'd think no bleed holes needed. Simplier design cartridge down though as the firing pin in the mortar acts directly on the primer of the cartridge. I'm guessing that wide ring keeps the cartridge from being ejected on ignition and leaving the empty cartridge in the mortar. I wouldn't have thought a standard 12ga propellant load would have enough umph to fire something that big and heavy a long distance - you learn soemthing new everydayhttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

ST

June 29th, 2001, 12:32 AM

OK, thanks Anthony for noticing. I just downloaded the NBK pdf and see what you lot are talking about, and where the confusion was, bensons design looks much the same as the picture NBK has posted. Problems i see from an improvised viewpoint, the shell must be made perfectly to have any hope of working if the firing pin is at the bottom of the tube. The body must be a perfect fit for the tube, "nipple" welded perfectly centered and firing pin in centre of end cap to have any hope of working. Ragnar also doesnt mention if the shotshell stays in the tube or not. Ragnar mentions how the endcaps constantly need replacing, Using a design that doesnt use a firing pin in the mortar itself would let you build up the base with welded plate steel, taking away the need to replace it.

-----------------ST posted pictures (http://server3004.freeyellow.com/stx/forumpics.html)

SawedOff8gaugeman

June 29th, 2001, 10:35 AM

Now I "actually looked at the picture" and noticed it's a good construction!! I couldn't see the cartridge was downwards at first. I think the cartridge would be ejected more surely on this model and again, Ragner's construction actually sucked http:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/tongue.gif

kingspaz

June 29th, 2001, 06:40 PM

has anybody thought of re-activating deactivated mortars? it could be a better option as the tube would be designed for the purpose and able to easily take the pressure.

Ragnar

July 29th, 2001, 05:12 AM

As far as sighting is concerned, a good rout to go would be that similar to the swiss 60mm Commando(?) mortar which uses a sling with ranging incriments printed on it. To adjust range the firer simply places his foot inside the sling on the appropriate range mark and pulls firmly up on the tube. Good Idea for on-the-go firing. Of course.....a lot of experimenting for consistency with semi-prescision rounds would be required.

SMAG 12B/E5

July 29th, 2001, 11:12 PM

I don't mean to offend anyone on this post, however the material presented appears to indicate little experience in actual mortar construction. My dreams indicate that an improvised mortar of two inch bore launching a round fabricated from 1 1/4 pipe nipple, cap and bell reducer with 3/8 inch tail piece containing a shortened 45 long colt cartridge containing 1/2 tsp FFG BP and the powder from one 30/06 cartridge (in tissue paper) wrapped around the vent holes in tail piece will travel approximately 250 m. AP is unsafe to use in rounds, ignition cartridge must be retained in stabilizer tube, stabilizer tube (base tube) must be vented, main propellent can be attached to exterior of tail, fuse must be sealed from propellent gases and should be boresafe, if point detonated, round must be flight stabilized The 60 mm mortar used in WWII by allied forces is an excellent device to dream about. It is simple, easily manufactured, practice rounds and unloaded rounds are available, the bipods and sights are still available at a reasonable cost, blueprints of

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter the M52 (???) fuse are available... Dream safely...

SATANIC

July 30th, 2001, 01:52 AM

In regards to the commando mortars, they are not very accurate (even less accurate than most) and even if you do get a good shot in, there is no guaruntee it will happen again. the mortar is thrown off every shot, as it is not 'bedded in' properly. Also, the commando mortars have the tendancy to break legs, as the shock of the propelant blast is enough to break legs, when on soft ground or sand etc.

Hex

August 1st, 2001, 07:42 AM

I wouldn't try that mortar round design of ST's if i were you, kids. A firing pin set in the front of a round like that would be very likely to "set back" on firing - and set the round off inside the mortar tube. Think how you get pressed back in the seat when someone floors a car from a standing start, and then consider how much faster a mortar round will be accelerating up the barrel. Even with a spring or a shear wire holding it in place I wouldn't go anywhere near that sort of design. The British Army tested a simple rifle grenade design in WW1 with a front mounted firing pin - and abandoned it immediately as it kept killing the firer. I'm afraid you're going to have to use an inertia pellet/creep spring arrangement if you want detonate on impact rounds.

Brushburner

August 1st, 2001, 10:17 AM

Does anyone think this sounds feasible? you can make a impact-detonator by having it so a nail, that is in the front of the mortar round hit a fixed cap (forget what you call them, not into guns a lot) that would ignite whatever explosive that is in the round, I would suggest something as weak as pyrodex in this case, as it is not very shock sensitive (someone reply how to post a pic in a message and i do that, im not good at putting ideas into words http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ smile.gif) P.S. Hex, i would'nt have this so it was loose,possibly put it in something tight-fitting, like a rubber stopper. Then it would need to hit something, and just being fired wouldnt set it off (please correct me if im wrong but dont bash me lol) [This message has been edited by Brushburner (edited August 01, 2001).]

Anthony

August 1st, 2001, 03:53 PM

A person is considerably more massive than a firing pin and primers need quite a lot of force to set them off. Was the rifle grenade in question one which catches a bullet? If so then the propulsion of the grenade is a different kettle of fish to a mortar.

Demolition

August 4th, 2001, 10:57 AM

Instead of having such a sensitive primary like AP what about having a tube with a secondary explosive,eg,RDX,PETN,Picric acid in the bottom.Half way up use a weak glue to hold a solid metal pipe (which slides up and down the larger tube easily).This would then of course be poking out the front of the mortar shell so when it hits the ground it would break free from the hold of the glue and slide down onto the secondary explosive setting it off (like hitting it with a hammer),this then would set off the main charge,something like ANNM/Al could be used for this. Could look something like this, ###_____ ####II ####II -###|II| |----|II|----| |***|II|***| |***|II|***| |***|@|***| |***|@|***| |***|@|***| |***===***| |*********| -------------# = ignore these | = walls of mortar shell - = base of shell @ = PETN,RDX,Picric Acid * = ANNM/Al explosive = = Metal plate at base of pipe I = Solid metal pipe _ = Plate at top of Mortar round (damn picture,I'm sure someone would be able to dram up something similar in paint) -----------------To be untouchable one must first surround himself with the strong. Demolition [This message has been edited by Demolition (edited August 04, 2001).]

Hex

August 6th, 2001, 02:08 PM

That rifle grenade I was talking about was fired by a blank cartridge rather than a bullet pass/trap mech. If you look through textbooks, you will hardly ever come across devices with front-mounted direct impact fuzes in anything except (hand launched) grenades. Don't underestimate inertial effects - shells containing cast TNT have been known to

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

detonate in the bore because of tiny air pockets undergoing adiabatic heating due to acceleration. This is obviously unlikely to happen in a much lower velocity situation like a mortar, but I'll say it again - there's no way I would stand next to a home made mortar which was about to fire with a direct impact firing pin in the nose, no matter how stiffly it was held in place. Armies like simple weapons - but none of them have ever wanted to use fuzes like this in a similar weapon. Why???

Lagen

August 6th, 2001, 04:46 PM

I agree with Hex on the inertia effects - the pressure generated is mainly a function of acceleration and density/shape of the object being accelerated. Thus a small metal object could well generate more pressure (over a smaller area) than a large human body.

simply RED

August 6th, 2001, 07:35 PM

What is the construction of the military mortar rounds? What primer do they use in the detonator? What is the construction of the detonator? I think a home made mortar is something super dangerous, it could be improvised but the construction must be copied from a real military one. The main explosive must be something insensitive like RDX/PETN plastic, urea nitrate, ANNM, TNT. Never peroxide or nitroglycerine must be used... I also would feel a real FEAR standing to firing home made mortat...

zaibatsu

August 6th, 2001, 07:47 PM

PETN is still pretty sensitive, you can detonate it with 1mg of lead azide.

Anthony

August 6th, 2001, 08:11 PM

Fair enough, can you suggest a more suitable method?

Hex

August 7th, 2001, 07:26 AM

The simplest military impact fuses generally consist of a striker mounted on a heavy pellet, which moves in a tube. The detonator assembly is at the forward end of the tube. On launch, the pellet is held back by acceleration at the rear of the tube. On impact, the shell stops suddenly, but the pellet doesn't. It travels up the tube, overcoming the resistance of a creep spring between it and the detonator and the striker impacts on the firing assembly. There will always be a safety device which locks the striker pellet in place until it leaves the barrel. In mortars, this is often a bore riding pin which is spring loaded and is ejected to release the striker.

Tony Montana

August 7th, 2001, 08:16 AM

If your serious about weapon systems check this out, it takes fucking ages to load but is worth it: http://www.isr.ist.utl.pt/library/incoming/math/www.pdox.net/%257Ededekind/books/Physics/ Principles%20of%20Naval%20Weapons%20Systems.pdf

Anthony

August 7th, 2001, 06:33 PM

Sounds like a good system Hex, it'd be difficult to fit into small devices but for mortars it would be good.

irish

March 8th, 2004, 09:37 PM

Silverleaf, you have got to be a fucking idiot is you think nitrogen triiodide is a good thing to use as a primary in anything let alone a mortar shell :mad: . Edit= just ignore the above it seems the post I was referring to is gone :confused: . To add to Hex's post, I know someone who did a limited amount of experimentation with 10 Cm long Copper tubes with a precussion cap (from gunshop) in one end on an Iron anvil (made to fit the tube, with a hole drilled through it and a nipple for the cap), and a steel striker that would slide up the tube in the other end. These where attached to an arrow and "fired" into the air to test with good results ie they fired the cap most times on contact with firm ground. No safety was tested nor was a detonater attached to the cap but this is on the long list of things to do (oneday :rolleyes: ).

majik

March 12th, 2004, 02:58 PM

Hi there all. I have a tried and tested method for constructing a (fairly accurate) mortar. I used to steal co2 canisters from fire extinguishers at school; the kind that have a separate co2 canister screwed on. This canister is in the shape of a bullet already so that's a bonus for aerodynamics. On 1 end of the canister is a hole with an aluminium cap that needs to be pierced (by a nail for example) to let the co2 out. around this is a screw thread which was originally used to attach canister to extinguisher. you use this to screw on a short length of tube to which you weld 4 fins that do not exceed the diameter of the canister itself. This way you can stick the shell in a launch tube. I was lucky to find a tube of the same diameter (roughly) as the canister. You fit the launch tube with an end cap, to which a steel nail is welded exactly in the center on the inside, long enough to reach the aluminium seal through the screwed-on pipe. The launch tube is welded to a sliding hinge(made with a curtain rail system) which in turn is attached to a wheel jack (or whatever you call the thing you use to lift a car up when changing the wheel) which you use to adjust elevation. The whole assembly is mounted on a studded heavy steel plate (studs on underside for grip) Recoil is considerable but nothing compared to an expl. charge as a large part of the propellant is expended in flight and not all inside the tube. Drop the projectile in and it comes whooshing back out with a billowing cloud of gas in it's wake! 1 problem i encountered was that sometimes the seal didn't break and i had to wait around for ages to get the projectile back out again (carefully) for fear of the thing going off! I suppose a longer tube would have given it that necessary extra bit of momentum needed to ensure seal breakage.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I never attached an explosive of any kind to the projectile but i'm sure there are enough effective methods to do so relatively easily. I was thinking of using a bulletprimer, nail and spring system for impact detonation, the spring being of the necessary strength to prevent the nail from hitting the primer at launch. The furthest i ever shot this thing was +/- 100 meters which is surprising as the co2 canister itself weighs quite a lot. Guess there's something to be said for compressed air eh? I reckon if someone who knows what they're doing with acces to a machine shop put their mind to this, they would get the thing to fly a lot further. I am but an amateur i'm afraid. When i fired 3 consecutive rounds, they all landed within a square of 10x10 meters +/- 100 meters away. The IRA employed a similar device in a mortar attack on 10 downing street. They didn't count on bomb-proof curtains though. If anyone is interested i can put up a rough sketch of the design. ++++++++++++++++ How about you edit this post yourself so it's not a 26 sentence monoparagraph? You know, those little spaces between groups of sentences that allow a person to seperate a though group from another, but different, thought group? You may wish to do this quickly, before I next visit this thread, or I'll do it myself and remove you while I'm wasting my time correcting your crappy grammer for you. NBK ++++++++++++++++ [No need to create a separate post for the following. Rhadon] Sorry about the grammar, got a little overenthusiastic whilst typing :o Hope the edit has made it easier to read.

tasm

April 12th, 2004, 11:32 PM

I am new here and trying to avoid HED, but I felt this thread left a few things unanswered. Terms: cant - the deviation from level of an object mil - unit of measurement used in mortars. 1 degree = 17.777 mils Aiming: First, to have a semi accurate mortar you need to be able to have a definite way to measure the cant of the tube. Probably the easiest way to this is with a surplus M2 Compass (has a level bubble with mil increments). The compass is simply laid sideways against the tube and the cant can be read in mils. This information with a consistent charge can be used to create a charge book for different ranges. Second, to aim the mortar in a "direct lay" type scenario, aim the tube at your proposed target and fire. Observe where the round lands and move your tube the in the direction of the target (and past the target) so you are now aiming approximately the distance between the target and the miss further than the actual target. Creation: I would highly recommend using scrap oil field drill pipe with a threaded end cap. Plumbers galvanized pipe just reminds me of a big pipe bomb. Ammunition: Rounds should be created in such a manner as to have a lip at least 1/8 of and inch around the primer if possible. This will prevent rounds from going off if dropped. The vent holes in the shaft are necessary to insure that the charge will stay in the round and not be spent in the tube. Also, the vent holes are used to ignite secondary "bag" charges you may choose to attach for longer ranges. Safety: Upon a hung or dud round slowly lower the tube to level with the ground, remove the end cap or retract the firing pin if applicable. Lean the tube forward gently shaking to dislodge the round having someone to catch the dud. Never attempt to remove a round with your hand or with a ramrod. Finally: I am no expert on mortars, but I do have extensive experience on the 60mm, 81mm, 4.2 inch, and the 120mm gun systems. If you have any questions I would be more than happy to answer them to the best of my ability.

MMIV

September 5th, 2004, 01:44 AM

u could have look at WRM(white resistance manual) on improvised mortars it found usually on the net or p2p networks such Overnet, Edonkey2000 or Imesh. the mortar look like a mean bit gear and they the approx range is about 700 yards. :)

nbk2000

September 9th, 2004, 07:17 PM

You can buy surplus mortar tubes and rounds. The tubes have a hole punched in them, and the rounds are drilled, but you can cut the tube short above the hole and fix that, as you're not trying to get 6KM range out of it, as 1KM would be more than adequate for urban warfare, and the rounds can be repaired to be functional with an improvised fuze.

Lawrence

September 12th, 2004, 12:53 PM

Just a thought on impact detonation devices, on some old film of bombs being dropped from airplanes I have noticed that there is a small propeller on the nose of the bomb,I have always assumed that this is a safety device that would screw the fuse, or some activating part of it into alignment,thereby rendering the bomb "safe" untill it is actually dropped. It would not be hard to construct such a system for a mortar round,the prop would be driven by the airflow and would be attached to a screw thread inside the body of the round,this would then render the round live several seconds after launch by completing an electrical circuit for example,is this a viable idea?

Bugger

September 12th, 2004, 01:39 PM

If your serious about weapon systems check this out, it takes fucking ages to load but is worth it:

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

http://www.isr.ist.utl.pt/library/incoming/math/www.pdox.net/%257Ededekind/books/Physics/ Principles%20of%20Naval%20Weapons%20Systems.pdf I only get "403 forbidden". What log-in name and password did you use on that site in Portugal (Technological University of Lisbon, I think)? Did you use a proxy server? Or, do you think you could e-mail it to me at [email protected] ? Thanks. Bugger.

festergrump

September 12th, 2004, 01:51 PM

Lawrence, I suppose that's a pretty viable idea. I'm wondering if the added drag would send the projectile off course, though. In the example of bombs being dropped from aircraft this wouldn't pose a problem at all because they're guided by gravity and not really intended to require a direct hit due to the massive charge of HE or incendiary. If the prop was in the rear of the projectile this would perhaps stabilize it some, but make the projectile much more complicated to manufacture. (problems with prop and propellant charge). Another manner in which fans or props can be used (PMJB Vol 1, I think) is in the ignition of the propellant charge. This would be for anti-helicopter mortars. The idea is to have a fan facing upwards in the bottom of a tube (to avoid wind turning the fan) which would turn a generator or alternator in the event of a helicopters "wash" being too nearby. the alternator would generate enough electricity to ingnite the propellant charge and launch the projectile towards the heli. I happen to like NBK's idea from his PDF to have a beer or soda can filled with cement as the mortar's projectile and attached to a steel cable to entangle the heli's props rather than trying to get a HE charge to take it out of commission. Read both PMJB and NBK's PDF...Great reading and both on the FTP. (NBK's is following every one of his posts, also).

Bugger

September 12th, 2004, 11:19 PM

"Principles of Naval Weapons Systems.pdf" can be downloaded from: http://books.pdox.net/Physics/Principles%20of%20Naval%20Weapons%20Systems.pdf It is one of many PDF ebook files in the Dedekind physics and mathematics archives, on this site, the root directory of which is http://books.pdox.net/ . Bugger.

Tinton

June 15th, 2007, 01:00 AM

ST got it. Tube Nail on endcap of tube Nail strikes primer, primer initiates, launches out, lands, detonates. I would probably make the projectile out of something able to withstand the forces of the propellant. Just so you don't actually hurt anyone.(yourself!)

GNAB

June 17th, 2007, 06:50 PM

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=78351 215.9mm Black powder mortar. Launches 16# bowling balls to 200 meters. Built from an oxygen cylinder. Check out the photos, especially the gallon ziplocs full of gasoline!!! This would be great for hunting rednecks in trailer houses. Ya'll com'on down to Oklahoma and we'll punch some holes in Bubba's doublewide. Now who wants to bore out a bowling ball and discuss what kind and how much explosive would be appropriate for entertainment value.

eelfland

June 19th, 2007, 08:25 PM

When I was a kid a made a good many pipe-bomb grenades that were actuated by a roofing nail taped in position on the leading end, with the pointed end of the nail resting on the primer of a 12-gauge shotgun shell held inside the 3/4" pipe by a cap with a hole drilled through the center to hold my firing pin. A long rag tied to the other end of the grenade served both as a launching device and a flight stabilizer, making sure that the round landed on its firing pin. They worked great, as long as the grenade landed on a hard surface. The road in front of my house was pockmarked. I used six-inch nipples, mostly, with various charges, usually shotgun shell propellant, and not a lot of that. A mortar to launch such a grenade could use a shotgun shell blank as its charge. I would highly doubt that the acceleration imparted by the charge would be sufficient to detonate the primer in the nose of the grenade, especially with the rag wadding to pad the shock, but I'd want to fire a good many empty pipe grenades, or ones loaded with just a primer and a simulated charge, before trusting a fully charged one not to detonate in the barrel of the mortar. It might be safer to glue the firing pin in place, but not so firmly that the shell's impact wouldn't dislodge it. Some experimentation would be in order. The beauty of a mortar is that it is able to lob a shell over fortifications, rather than just busting through them. With the long rag streaming out behind these shells, it would be fun to practice firing dummy shells to gain accuracy before firing live ones, and it would be very cheap, too, since the dummy shells could be reused, and the propellant for the mortar could be just cheap black powder or Pyrodex. In the right hands, such a weapon could be a good way to keep the riff-raff out, too. Sounds like fun to me. Takes me back 45 years to when I first started playing with fire.

corz29 I use the M5 homemade military propellant it is the formula: -nitocellulose 81.95% -nitroglycerine 15.00%

June 21st, 2007, 08:20 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter -barium nitrate 1.40% -potasium nitrate 0.75% -ethyl centarlite 0.60% -graphite 0.30% (the % are by weight)

Bacon46

June 26th, 2007, 12:28 PM

Now who wants to bore out a bowling ball and discuss what kind and how much explosive would be appropriate for entertainment value The links are to video and images of a 15lb bowling ball frag that I made a couple months ago. I used 2oz (56.5g) of KnO3/ Al flash and an electric match for ignition. It would be easy enough to replace the electric match with a timed fuse and fire it out of a mortar. The chunks of rubber/plastic on the scale are all I was able to recover of the ball. The largest piece weighed 6.8oz (192.77g) and was thrown over 50 yards (45.72 meters). http://img531.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bowlingballfragcutuq3.flv http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/2892/15lbimprovisedfragow8.th.jpg (http://img234.imageshack.us/my.php? image=15lbimprovisedfragow8.jpg) http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/7876/15lbfrag005sr1.th.jpg (http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php? image=15lbfrag005sr1.jpg) http://img452.imageshack.us/img452/9034/15lbfrag002sa6.th.jpg (http://img452.imageshack.us/my.php? image=15lbfrag002sa6.jpg)

wetpowder

June 26th, 2007, 12:37 PM

ST got it. Tube Nail on endcap of tube Nail strikes primer, primer initiates, launches out, lands, detonates. I would probably make the projectile out of something able to withstand the forces of the propellant. Just so you don't actually hurt anyone.(yourself!) You are answering a post that is 6 years old.:rolleyes:

209

June 26th, 2007, 11:17 PM

Yeah, I went and looked at the date when I saw that Craghack posted a reply, I haven't seen him for a while.......

megalomania

June 27th, 2007, 11:55 AM

The contribution of knowledge will always be appreciated by the future generations who have yet to discover this thread. Adding new info to an old thread is far better than asking a question out of the blue of someone who has not been around for half a decade (the Forum crime of necromancy, punishable by HED).

Zer4tul

June 28th, 2007, 03:31 AM

ST got it. Tube Nail on endcap of tube Nail strikes primer, primer initiates, launches out, lands, detonates. I would probably make the projectile out of something able to withstand the forces of the propellant. Just so you don't actually hurt anyone.(yourself!) As it is almost forth of July, and loud noises are not unusual, I have started experimenting with several mortar ideas. An idea i tried that builds on the one above was simply cutting a 1-2" slot in both sides at about 6" from the top of the mortar pipe, inserting a piece of lexan that matches the slot, and attaching a string/cord to the lexan piece. As with above, a nail or so is attached to the endcap. The round consists of a shotgun shell that has been emptied, filled with propellant, and sealed. The shotty shell is then attatched firmly to the projectile that is about to be launched. (which in my case was simply a golf ball in a playdoh canister) The round sits on top of the removable piece of lexan, and when the string is pulled, the piece pulls out, and the round falls on nail. All at a nice safe distance. :)

SuperScience

July 2nd, 2007, 04:04 PM

This zip file contains two documents; one includes detailed plans for homemade mortars: http://rapidshare.com/files/40548618/requested_files.zip.html Hope this helps! vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Knife Techniques Log in

View Full Version : Knife Techniques Eliteforum

September 2nd, 2002, 07:50 PM

Firstly I’d like to point out, that if this isn’t the correct section, then please move it to where is. There are different knife fighting styles, but in today’s world it’s more about intimidation than the actual fighting. If an attack springs out on you, and you pull out a knife, and start flicking it around, tw irling it this way and that, the attacker is going to think twice before attacking you, as it looks as though you know how to use a knife. Well taking that thought into mind, I’ve made two little short video clips showing you what you can do with the most basic of knifes. The butter knife and a normal steak knife. The low frame rate on the butter knife video misses out most of what can be seen with the eye, but you get then general gist of it. The steak knife one, is a little more advanced, w hich although lacks any real use in a knife fight or attack, it looks visually pleasing. Well, I was just wondering if anyone else could make some videos as I have demonstrating different styles of “knife tw irling” and/or fighting styles. Please bear in mind, in both videos I slip up a few times, after all we can’t all be experts! :p Files are on the ftp, links are below , they are active untill crtl_c moves them to there relevent folder. Butter Knife< /a> Steak Knife

Ctrl_C

September 2nd, 2002, 09:01 PM

shoulda put them in your hosted images folder. They are there now and you can update your links.

zaibatsu

September 2nd, 2002, 09:06 PM

Moving topic to improvised weapons...

Eliteforum

September 3rd, 2002, 01:13 PM

Does anyone have any tips or techniques with butterfly knifes? Some stuff that can be done with them are visually stunning. As well as having some use in a knife fight.

sph3ric pyramid

September 3rd, 2002, 01:36 PM

For tips and techniques: < a href="http://ww w.balisongxtreme.com" target= "_blank">http://w ww.balisongxtreme.com It's where I started out, and has video clips to go along with the written instructions. It concentrates mostly on opening technique. However, most of the techniques illustrated w ithin the site have no practical combat usage, asides from a possible intimidation factor; the quickest and easiest opening is the best (IMO the windmill). If you look a little further, you can find sites w hich show the use of a closed balisong as a kubotan. Asides from this, don't know of any practical usages of a balisong (apart from it's use as a knife, of course) departing from conventional use. Edit- Double sig. <small>[ September 03, 2002, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: sph3ric pyramid ]

Machiavelli

September 3rd, 2002, 05:41 PM

If someone pulled a balisong against me I'd probably hurt them real bad before killing them even badlier :D These knives may look impressive but most of them are cheap dull toys and even the better ones are no combat knives. While most people don't know it, the balisong is no ancient mystical weapon that sprung outta some philipino gods asshole or something, it's a fucking fishermen's knife and the only reason that it's so widely used in their martial arts is that everyone was carrying one all the time. So these funky whirlings may look mighty impressive but to use it effectively you have to train with it a lot and even then it's not that good, since it doesn't have a stable grip, no hand protection and the fixation of the blade sucks, too, it wasn't made for combat after all. Your steak knife is far superior, decent grip, you can't slip on the blade that easily and it's probably quite sharp. Remember, when you're pulling a weapon you'll have to be prepared to use it, trying to impress others with nonexistant skills is fucking dangerous. You're threatening to attack with a deadly weapon after all, life or death. You might get a seasoned thug who'll spot you for a poser, since you've draw n your blade he's justified to do the same and he know s how to use it. Maybe he's even got a gun. Later his buddies w ill testify that he just slapped you a little bit and you suddenly drew a knife and tried to kill him so he had to defend his life. You might get a little stupid punkass who panics seeing your blade, pulls out his $5 garbage knife and does an instinctive attack. This usually means arm stretched out wide, attack in a circular motion against the rib torso. Compared to other techniques it's extremely slow but it has one big advantage, if the attacker manages to stick you, most of the time it's straight to the heart. And keep in mind that if you do the twirlie stuff, the attacker just needs to brush your knife maybe with the tip of his knife or his sleeve pulled over his hands and your knife flies aw ay.

PYRO500

September 3rd, 2002, 08:25 PM

While some bailsong's might be dull and shitty I had one that was a real sturdy piece of technology, the flipping may be showing off a bit but to the average person with a "5$ garbage knife" this will show them they have had some practice, of course as with magicians the bailsong user can pull some fast dangerous moves on the other person. For example, I've seen some pretty fast tricks with the knives that w ill distract an opponent ant then they throw the knife to there other hand and the opponent is caught of guard is going to be suceptable to some hurt if he isn't careful. <small>[ September 03, 2002, 07:27 PM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

frostfire

September 3rd, 2002, 09:20 PM

aah, the "urban" style knife technique...yep, balisong is an impressive w eapon...to watch. Carrying balisong the medium/large one around will surely cause you some consequences, w hile carrying steak knife with your steak lunch will only get you in trouble if you're eating in library :) Eliteforum, not sure what your technique looks like (can't see the video), but I'm assuming it's flipping the knife from the traditional pointing position into the blade pointing downw ard (or at enemy) while the hand position is like a jab in boxing/ psycho stabbing position(beh, hard to describe w ithout drawings) Anyway, like I mentioned at another thread, w ith tons of practice, you can throw these things pretty accurate; give me 3 steak knives (farberw are, tramontina etc) and 10 feet distance, w hether you're moving or not, I'm pretty sure I can inflict a lot of pain if not fatality <small>[ September 03, 2002, 08:21 PM: Message edited by: frostfire ]

Eliteforum The files w ere moved by ctrl_c to: Here The films are the two RAR files. Below are direct dow nload links. Butter Knife< /a> Steak Knife

September 3rd, 2002, 11:41 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The "style" I do in both of them, isn't really something I learnt, just something I do, learnt myself kinda thing messing about wasting time w hile im cooking and what'not. Looks fancy though, wouldn't have any use in a attack though. Well not unless the person your attacking is tied up.. Edit - hmm, tried to click on links after posting, but im getting a "/550 error. Permission Denied" error, so use an FTP client, if you want to dow nload the videos. <small>[ September 03, 2002, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: Eliteforum ]< /small>

AmonDin

September 4th, 2002, 12:19 AM

Just remember that any w eapon you bring into a combat situation can be taken and used against you. Be prepared for that man. I've only drawn a knife once, and even then, I left it inside w hen the fists started flying. Wonder what the legal requirement is for carrying around a 5-foot long katana. Gotta have something till I can get a concealed carry permit. Ah well, just a thought. Most dangerous animal here is the wannabe-ghetto whiteboy, and I think that a sw ord longer than he is tall might make him think tw ice about throwing rocks through my fucking window s. If not, hell, I've dealt with that trash before. No trouble at all to put a knee to his nads and a few swift punches to his nose and throat. If you're going for intimidation, go for the gusto.

Keref

September 6th, 2002, 11:49 AM

I like balisongs because they're fun to handle and impressive. BUT it's not a fighting kinfe, meaning it's bad metal, not sharpened enough... But you can't say it's bad. While it takes several seconds to open a normal knife, it only takes 1 for balisongs, this time can be useful to save in some cases. And if you want a good quality one, just check on Benchmade website you must have heard about it. They have high quality knifes ( 154 CM metal, strong alliage) and there's a balisong in their catalog. But expensive... Price for quality ! And you can have 2 balisongs, it's not like one-hand opening knives but it is a far more fun knife to have... But I gonna buy a real fighting knife from Benchmade when I'm old enough to buy one...

link

September 8th, 2002, 07:27 AM

I dont mean to disrespect any people who have posted to this thread, however "here it comes" some points needed to be said. 1. the balisong how ever great it looks in practice is not a viable fighting knife other than intimidating ten year olds. i love my balisongs i use them regularly and am proficient in their use. however in a combat situation i wouldnt be without my cold steel SRK decent blade length reversible hand grip deep blood groove and serration along one whole side of knife. Saying that i am not in a combat situation walking around the street. Therefore i dont carry one!! 2. If attacked by some idiot w ith a butterfly knife or steak knife or butter knife, first rule of knifefighting as told by experts and lil old me is dont panic, prepare to be cut along the arms if even only slightly its ineviatable. Better to be cut slightly on the arm than deeply stabbed in the chest. 3. improvised weapons that surround you every day can out do that knife weilding drop kick for example a garbage bin lid cracked into assailants face or a starpicket or peice of pipe stabbed through assailants head, can work w onders. 4. go learn a real martial art or join the military not the bullshit military as a cook or clerk but as infantry recon or special forces i believe after ten years special forces you will have the confidence to not have to carry a knife around in any circumstance other than w ar. 5. I apoligize if i hurt anyones feelings but i feel i had a valid point if you are a predator you dont fear your prey.

chemwarrior

September 8th, 2002, 04:48 PM

If I get around to it once I have an FTP account, Ill upload guide to knife fighting that I found in some old millitary goods store.

chemwarrior

September 10th, 2002, 07:18 AM

Damn, I cannt seem to so much as even find the file...

nbk2000

September 10th, 2002, 09:12 AM

If you're using a knife as a deadly weapon, you're going to be stabbing that bastard deep into the sternum angled upwards under the ribcage, kidneys, or neck (sawing it out). Slashes look pretty gruesome, but that doesn't finish the fight. Waving it around with fancy moves is just asking to having it whacked out of your hand and stuck up your ass by someone using a coat as a flail. Someone like me w ho has a pound of lead shot sew n into the bottom hem of his coats for that very use. :) A triangular spike is better than a knife. Not the plastic crap you can buy for $5, but an 8" steel/aluminium spike with bloodgrooves and razor sharp edges. This is w hat the OSS issued during WW2. The w ound stays open to bleed, and the weapon can't be used for slashing, only stabbing, thus the only attack mode is the most fatal one. With a spike, you can stab through a ballistic vest that would stop a regular knife, or through the skull for an impromptu field lobotomy. :D As a defense against knives in countries that are really into that sort of thing (Spain, mexico, france), you could buy a set of kevlar sleeves (used by meatcutters) and sew them into your coat sleeves. Then, if attacked, you can use your arms to shield yourself without getting them sliced to ribbons while you draw your ow n weapon or retreat. Oh, and don't forget the lead shot in the coat hem.

link

September 10th, 2002, 07:39 PM

Quoted from marc animal macyoung When the conversation quoted above starts to head down that direction, I begin to feel an overw helming urge to put my forehead into my hand and shake my head, because I know I am about to get a long dissertation on how great of a knife fighter this guy is. Yep, he's a knifefighter alright -- his business card even says so. And I *know * that I am going to be regaled w ith awe inspiring tales of all the knife fights that his instructor not only survived - but gloriously won - using this awesome knife fighting system that studmuffins now knows. Not to put too fine of a point on it, but this is like a virgin telling me he knows everything there is about sex because he's studied porno movies. The only people who are going to be impressed are other virgins. And all the cocky arrogance the world about his training isn't going to change the fact, that such a person is still a virgin -- therefore NOT a knifefighter. And those of us who have been there -- having faced the horror and the terror of having someone actually try to kill us --take a dim view of this kind of sw aggering arrogance. Not only is it dangerous to teach, but it totally ignores the awful realities of facing a knife in the hands of someone w ho wants to kill you. And if you ever find yourself in a situation involving knives difference betw een reality and fantasy can - and will - either kill you or put you in prison. end quote who cares, really if this technique works better than that w here talking about an edged weapon an instrument that will kill your opponent very quickly, or have you dead just as quick. in the combat sense if the fuckin towelheads come chargin i aint gunna be relying on my knife but good gun drills, and some pretty niffty chem warfare equip respirator etc, if it came dow n to a knife fight.im in some serious shit 1st and 2nd who cares my job is going to be to kill another human being as quickly as possible so i will use w hats available. what is anyone thinking carrying a knife for self protection, its a w eapon to kill if confronted with some one w ith a knife in a street CONFRONTATION i will say again, w hatever i see around me i can use as quickly and as violently as possible through there fucking skull, this negates the legal process by removing the victims claims to compensation. what more needs to be said. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> A-BOMB got a digital cam era! Log in

View Full Version : A-BOMB got a digital camera! A-BOMB

S e p t e m b e r 4 th, 2002, 01:22 PM

W ell I've gone and done it I got myself 3 digital cameras (1 bought 2free), well you m ust be wond ering why this is in I m p r o v i e d W eapons, well I've been just taking pictures of all m y gear lately. These are the specs for the differnt cam eras www.aiptek.com the first cam era is a pocket DV, the next a m ini pencam 1.3meg rather nice for some thing that I got fo r free, now let m e e x p l a i n while I was out at bestbuy looking for m e m o r y I f o u n d t h i s o p e n e d p a ckage fo r the mini pencam so I gave it to the guy at the cam era cou nter, well he asked me if I wanted it because he was just going to through it away because it was missing the cables, software, and instructions and was kinda be at u p s o I s a i d y e s , t h e n I f o u n d t h e p o c k e t D V c a m e r a h a d t h e s a m e cable as the other, an d was on sale so I bought it. So I got two cam eras for the price of one. And the other one is a junky one from the bargin bin at officemax it was only $15 dollars but with a gift certifficate I had it was free to. So on to the pics. next a cherry bom b cherry bom b m y m odified flare guns

now one of m y 2 0 g a u g e f l a r e g u n * now a few of my long barrel 12 gauge flare gun 12 gauge action closed * * 12 gauge action open now a pic of the binder in m y grey-tak * now what you all bin waiting for a pic of m e! * More pictures to com e ! --------------i strongly suggest re edit this post to be less revealing. this is for your own good. once you have m odifed certain pictures you are welcom e to rem ove my edit with your own edit fucntion. - kingspaz <sm a l l > [ S e p t e m b e r 0 4 , 2 0 0 2 , 0 9 : 4 8 P M : M e s s a g e e d i t e d b y : A - B O MB ]

Keref

S e p t e m b e r 6 th, 2002, 11:32 AM

W as there you identity card as a ladde r just near all your stuffs ? :D I was wondering about buying a sm all digital camera, since it's pretty good to take photos of those illegal stuffs; furtherm ore, getting your photos d e v e l o p p e d , w i t h e x p l o s i o n s o n t h e m wouldn't be a good thing :) But they're pretty expensive. Maybe i'll once take a shity one with sm all reso lution... 128*56 :-) vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> W hite Phosphorus Grenade Log in

View Full Version : White Phosphorus Grenade Holotex

S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 06:37 PM

S o m e testing was done for designing a W P G r e n a d e . T h i s w a s d o n e o n s m all scale,quantities varie d from 7 .5 to 18 gr WP. HMT D was used as explosive,quantities varied from 3 to 0.6 gr. To be more specific WP/HMTD; 7.5/3 , 10/0.6 , 18/0.6 . The bodies were m ade of the closed part of Al sigar container,diam. from 15 to 24 m m , l e n g h t m a x . 4 c m . T h e i n n e r c o n t a i n e r ( s ) consisted of the sam e t y p e s i g a r p a c k a g i n g d i a m . 1 5 m m and for 0.6 gr HMTD a plastic lim onade drinkstra w was used. The HMT D was loaded into the same type of inner container,only a fraction smaller,resulting in a device with a seperated explosive c h a r g e / d e t o n a t o r . T h e s e c a n c o m b i n e d i n a s e c o n d w h e n the tim e is righ t. Unfortunatly the results were not really satisfieing. The WP pulverised into dust leaving a thick cloud of white sm oke in the first test.Later some burning fragm ents were observed but they didn't touched the ground. It's a fact that the size of the fragm e n t s a n d t h e i r r a n g e d e p e n d s o n t h e G r e n a d e b o d y , construction,am ount of W P , a m o u n t o f e x p l o s i v e a n d t y p e o f e x p l o s i v e . T h i s v a r i a tion can be observed with different m o d e l s o f W P Bom bs from different countries,from different times. I will soon post a link with all the pictures I found on the in ternet. Has anyone som e suggestions about a better(less brisant)e xplosive and the % WP/expl. to m ake less and bigger fragments with a larger range ?

nbk2000

S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2002, 11:35 PM

P r e - g r a n u l a t e t h e W P a n d e m b e d t h e g r a n u l e s i n a r u b b e r c e m ent matrix. This is known in the military as PWP (Plasticized White Phosphorus). Furthur details are in SIPRI's "Incendiary Weap ons" PDF on the FTP. You could get a copy from a m e m ber who already has it.

chemwarrior

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 07:20 AM

I f I m n o t m istaken, isnt there only one particular way to rem ove p h o s p h o r u s o n c e i t h a s e n t e r e d y o u s k i n ?

a_bab

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 07:44 AM

W hite P doesn't "enter" into your skin (like mustard gas), it only burns the skin. It is sim ilar to a liquid which burns very hot, because it m elts at about 40 degrees C. It can be neutralised with a co pper sulphate solution, which will react with phosphorus.

nbk2000

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 09:17 AM

C o p p e r s u l p h a t e a s a phosphorus burn treatm ent is asking for kidney failure. Wh en poured on a WP burn, it'll stop the WP from burning , but the n the copper is absorbed through the woun d where it's transported to the kidney and destroys it. The treatment can kill you where the WP burn wouldn't have. S.O.P. in the m ilitary is simple washing with water and covering with wet gauze till the wound can be debridded under a UV lam p to get all the W P particles. For W P grenades, a standard #8 detonator was sufficient for a pound of W P to be scattered over a 30+m eter radius. So your ratios were m assive overkill. W P m ay m elt at 40*C, but it burns at over 1,200*C. O h, and it VERY toxic by absorbtion through the burn. Something around 5 0 m g will kill a man.

xoo1246

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 09:37 AM

I rem ember when I was in chemistry class 15 years old, our chem istry teacher descided to burn som e W P. W e were hanging out of the window after that coughing.

a_bab

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 10:12 AM

Y e a h , t h e l e t h a l d o s e of white P is around 100 m g. So, with the phosphorus contained by a human (in the bones) you can kill 10,000 people ! I personally don't think that there is a danger in using copper sulphate for treatin g the phosphorus burns since the reaction takes tim e quite fast (like a n eutralisa tion) and the cop per sulphate is not that toxic. The lethal dose is over 5 grames as I remem ber. So there isn't enough time to be absorbed enough. ...But only if we are dealing with sm all areas (like a accidental burned hand). Actually I know this a s a urgent m e t h o d t o b e used in a lab in case of a phosphorus accident. Y e s x o o , t h e f u m e s p r o d u c e d b y t h e p h o s p h o r u s b u r n i n g are phosphorus pentaoxide, a very toxic chem ical which will form with the m oisture from the lungs p hosphoric acid. Q uite nasty. Chough chough !

vulture

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 11:17 AM

IIR C, P2O5 is NOT toxic by itself, only corrosive because it form s p h o s p h oric acid in contact with water. EDIT: Holotex, as you have acces to white phosphorus, why don't you collect your P2O5? You could be dehydrating glacial acetic acid into acetic anhydride! <sm all>[ September 10, 2002, 10:18 AM: Message edited by: vulture ]

a_bab

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 01:02 PM

Yeah Vulture, you are right. It's not toxic as stated here: http://ph yschem . o x . a c . u k / M S D S / P H / p h o s p h o r u s _ p e ntoxide.html

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

T h e r e a r e d u m b a s s e s s o m e who are labeling chem icals with "VERY TOXIC" if these chems are corrosive or irritants. Is just like labe ling sulphuric acid as "toxic". Now I remem b e r t h a t t h e f u m e s f o r m e d by the burning of P in clorine are toxic, and not P pentaox ide. Talk i n g a b o u t P p e n t a o x i d e , w h a t a b o u t m aking an instalation for producing P from apatite or bones (with coal and sand) ? Maybe a new project ? In this way it can be produced in large quantities.

vulture

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 01:19 PM

I know, there are just plain morons who would ban hydrogen hydroxide, just because they don't realize it's water!

chemwarrior

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 04:03 PM

From what I found ou t from m y father today, white phosphorus can only be stoped once it becomes covered in blood. Then you have to take a special gel stuff and but it on the wound and then you can pull whatever is left of the phosphorus. (You have to use the gel so that the phosphorus wont com e into contact with the air because, acording to m y da d, it will reginite...of course what the m ilitary uses m ight not be just phosphorus, but a m ixture of a couple th ings causing that.) Any co m m e n t s b e c a u s e I a m curious a bout what that gel likely is.

A-BOMB

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 04:30 PM

Its just petro leum jelly, nothing special about it.

chemwarrior

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 05:35 PM

Ahh, the way m y d a d m a d e i t s o u n d , I t h o u g h t t h a t i t w a s s o m e t h i n g m o re.

Holotex

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 06:08 PM

S o m e nice pics of Phosphorus Bom b s / G r e n a d e s f r o m W W1 to Vietnam are posted on this link,just take a look... Pictures click on "afbeeldingen" to see them.

nbk2000

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 06:31 PM

Usin g Any petroleum product on WP is BAD. W P dissolves in petroleum , including vaseline, making it liable to absorbtion and/ or ignition of the petroleum. Straight wate r only on W P . A - b a b , r e a d t h e S I P R I b o o k p r e v i o u s l y m entioned for why using copper is bad.

chemwarrior

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 06:37 PM

NBK, is there anything other than water that can be used and that is safe ?

Anthony

S e p t e m b e r 1 0th, 2002, 07:41 PM

W ell, by the way he said "water only", I'd guess not... W o u l d u r i n e b e o k i n a n e m ergency, being m ostly water?

nbk2000

S e p t e m b e r 1 1th, 2002, 05:24 AM

Urine can be used too if that's all you got. Intense mechanical treatm ent (scalpel, forceps, and pads) unde r irrigation or im mersion with a 1% Potassium Perm a n g a n a t e in 5% Sodium Bicarbonate water solution should be perform ed till lum ino usity under UV lighting ceases, indicating a ll the W P has been nuetralized. This treatment is extremely painful and is best done under anaesthesia. T h e K p e r m o x i d i z e s t h e W P into acid oxides which are nuetralized by the bicarb into harmless phosphates. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Penetrating thick skinned targets? Log in

View Full Version : Penetrating thick skinned targets? Zyklon_B

September 10th, 2002, 03:59 AM

With the invention of reactive armor and super alloys found on new Tanks, Is there any possible Rocket or cannon that could be created by a civilian with limited resources? I know of the new "rail" technology using magnetic fields to propel flechette like projectiles at terminal velocities, but these seem a tad too fragile and expensive for field use or practical construction. Not to mention the vast electricity required. I did see a television special on a remote controlled robot fitted with a huge explosive device and large copper plate as a projectile. The robot is of course one time use only.

hodehum

September 10th, 2002, 04:39 AM

S h o u ldn t this be in im provised weapons or detonation and de molition? Well to combat reactive armour military anti-tank missiles are now being fitted with dual shaped charges (one destroys the reactive armour blocks while th e other penetrates) that are pla ce d at slightly different angles. However I m no t sure how something like this would be improvised, it would most likely have to be placed on the armoured vehicle by hand as a missile system of such design would not really be viable on the civilian market, and good luck placing it by hand :rolleyes: . The robot you saw was called Fire Ant , I believe there was a large post a while ago abo ut this and a lot of the theo ries about improvising a such device where discussed here. It uses a EFP (Explosively Formed Projectile) to defeat armour and is destroyed upon detonation, but I believe they are able to make designs that are reusable now.

Machiavelli

September 10th, 2002, 06:54 AM

Baka. Moving to improvised weapons.

Anthony

September 10th, 2002, 11:27 AM

Doesn't matter what armour tanks have, knock the tracks off and they're still fucked! :)

Bitter

September 10th, 2002, 11:55 AM

Knock off the tracks like Anthony says and shove something down the barrel. It's not only unable to move, it's now unable to do any serious damage. Knocking off the tracks can be a problem, though. The tracks on some of the lighter tanks and APCs look pretty pathetic- the sort of thing you could damage with a hand grenade, although the tracks on something like a challenger or an abrahams would need a large quantity of C-4 or equivalent or a gun of at least 20mm calibre to damage. In the unlikely event of anyone being able to get close enough, there is always the option of spraying over vision slits with a can of paint.

Anthony

September 10th, 2002, 07:36 PM

I still think the old idea has some credit to it - lure the tank into an enclosed area, such as an alleyway in an urban environment, or a wooded area, or highsided lane. Have on either side, an oil drum of ANFO, or maybe even 5gal bucket would do it is was close enough to the tracks. Wait for the tank to pass between the drums and detonate them simultaneously. I'm sure the colliding shockwaves would kill the crew instantly. The massive overpressure may well collapse the tank. Heavy resource usage and certainly not portable, but easily improvised. If you're in a rural farming area, there's going to to be tons of AN and diesel everywhere. Another possibility is an explosively launched projectile. During WW2 a 1lb iron cube was propelled by 10lbs of TNT. It would penetrate the side of the tank and then bounce around inside turning the crew into cho suey :D . I'm not sure if it would be at all effective against modern tank armour, and 10lbs of TNT a shot is kinda costly. One thing I've always wondered, is when do fired tank shells arm? If they arm by the rotation of the round as it's fired through the rifling of the barrel, then it should be armed before it leaves the barrel. Thus may be susceptible to a rock jammed in the muzzle :) I always remember a part of film, or TV program set during WW2. There's a battle going on in an urban environment and a sniper in a clock tower (how cliche). A tank spots the sniper and raises it's gun to blow the sniper away, the sniper sees the inevitable coming and just sort of gives up. Personally, I'd be running for my life down the stairs... But I did wonder, would it have done any good for the sniper to have fired down the tank's barrel? If not to try and detonate the round in the breach, possible to damage so that it possibly doesn't function properly when fired. Or possibly to simply obstruct the barrel with the fired bullets, possibly detonating the round in the barrel, or splitting the barrel/destroying the round upon firing? Rather a last ditch attempt at survival than a strategy really :)

Eliteforum

September 10th, 2002, 09:45 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Wasn't Saving Private Ryan was it? Was on not long ago on C5.

Southern Warrior

September 10th, 2002, 10:18 PM

Hell, the armor on top of the tank is usually the thinest. Or, you could put a "culvert bomb" in any possible path of an armoured column, and set it of as the armoured vehicle passes over it, blowing off the treads.

Eliteforum

September 11th, 2002, 05:40 AM

Instead of learning how to break through it, learn how to protect it! By "kit car armor"! http://bulldogdirect.com - Has more. <small>[ September 11, 2002, 04:42 AM: Message edited by: Eliteforum ]

Microtek

September 11th, 2002, 10:04 AM

How about using a fairly large amount of heaving explosive such as ANFO to flip the tank onto its back when it drove over the mine. Lifting a 60 ton tank 4 meters into the air would require 2400 KJ assuming 100 % efficiency. 210 g EGDN with 70 g Mg will supply that much energy. Then you just need to take the inefficiency into account.

Mr Cool

September 11th, 2002, 02:08 PM

50 gallon ANFO drum should do it then! If I wanted to destroy a tank I'd preferably use an EFP, just because I think they're neat If not, then relatively big charges of a cheap HE like a cheddite or AN based comp to fuck the tracks, and shove one down the barrel too if you can! But I'd imagine that would be very hard to do, assuming that you're trying not to die. Realistically, I think the best way would be to set mine-like devices (using lots of ANFO) somewhere that you know that tank will go.

kingspaz

September 11th, 2002, 05:30 PM

what about a shaped linear shaped charge land mine? i made a design for one a while back using easy common materials and no metal work tools :) ...i'll upload it when i re-scan it.

Zyklon_B

September 11th, 2002, 05:34 PM

Wouldn't a manhole be perfect for killing a tank? Since in a urban situation the streets are filled with them I would think they would be a perfect place to put a mine. The manhole cover would itself become the projectile penetrating the tank from underneath. A few small drums of ANFO would probably do the job. Also from this idea I think in a more forest area the same type of setup can be applied. In the middle of the road, a tunnel could be dug and filled with anfo and a large steel or copper plate could be put over the top and the hole could be closed back over with gravel or earth and a triggering device could be improvised using a device deer hunters use to take pictures of deer passing near their location: I am not sure if this device will not funtion on fast moving large vehicles, but it would defenetly also be viable for anti-personel traps or a Home-Made Fire Ant.

Spudgunner

September 11th, 2002, 06:44 PM

That would work, however, whenever anything of a decent size (deer, people, dogs even) went by, you would set off TONS of explosive. Kind of overkill for a deer and makes it rather obvious you were trying to take out a tank. Best way to solve that is either use a pressure switch that is set for anything over 2 tons (for tanks and APCs) or 500 pounds for vehicles, OR, use an infrared motion dector that is set for LARGE amounts of heat that a tank would put out. Otherwise you get a big hole, no explosives left, and you can't even eat the meat of the deer you killed because particles of it have landed three counties over. Spud

Mick

September 12th, 2002, 12:08 AM

doesn't it seem stupid that one company build a super tank with impenatrable armor, then they release the details of the tank. so the company next door builds a rocket launcher to defeat next doors tank... so they build another tank...etc etc etc has anyone heard of a "monopoly"? good to see your billions of tax dollars hard at work :D .

J.T.Ripper

September 12th, 2002, 09:58 AM

Firstly this is a really cool thread. I would take down a tank like an Abraham with paint, petrol,cement, sniper, and 25 pounds of ANFO . This is a general plan that could be used with variations to certain parts.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter first, day or night have lots of people throw water ballons filled with black paint at the tank trying to get the windows. If this seems to risky try luring the tank down an ally way and have garbage bags full or paint hanging so they will burst when the tank tares them. Second, The tank has hopfully got no vision, and it can't move is main gun because of the ally on either sides. {the M60 on top is only design flaw with the abrahams a man has to be out side the tank to shoot it.}So they open the hatch to get a man up there maning the gun and directing the tank. sniper shoots him and makes it bloody to add to the panic inside the tank. Third, the 25 kilo sack of ANFO is used to close the end of the ally the tank has already come down leaving it only one entrance. down the other end. Fourth, The tank meets a nice deep semi-thick patch of wet cement thats covered with old carpet(or camoflaged to the souroudings). it goes in and can't move. Five, hatch is still probebly open pour petrol in and throw in a match. The is a sprinkler system in the tank but the crew will still burn or die from breathing smoke. if the petrol doesn't work drown em out and use the sniper to kill em as they come up for air. a bit complex but for a small gurilla outfit it shouldn't be that hard to get all that organised.

A-BOMB

September 12th, 2002, 10:15 AM

Trust me the the only thing taking down a M1A3 (abrams) is a M1A3 or a massive excess of explosive like a 1/4ton. I mean they have a a 5-6" layer of of DU/composite/Ti armor, a 120mm main gun, 2 7.62mm m240's a .50 m2 HB on top and some times a mk19 in 40x53mm HV grenade launcher and other goodies. And they can go 60+ mhp with the speed controler disabled and they weigh in excess of 70 tons. Oh and I almost forgot They Can fire the M2 on top from inside. <small>[ September 12, 2002, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: A-BOMB ]

Spudgunner

September 12th, 2002, 01:15 PM

Wow, a quarter ton eh? 500 lbs is an awful lot (not financially, but just a lot period). Oklahoma city was only like 2 tons and you saw the damage that did, I imagine a hundred pounds SHOULD be sufficient if it were right next to the tank. Then again, I wouldn't know as I have never seen ANFO go off, much less in 50-500 pound quantities. Spud

john_smith

September 12th, 2002, 01:43 PM

As much as I know, Platter charges have a size limitation. Can't remember exactly what it was, but a manhole cover is far beyond that. However, I guess that a couple of drums of ANFO in a manhole would fuck a tank up badly, Platter or not.

xoo1246

September 12th, 2002, 02:41 PM

Why don't you have a look at kinepaks ftp then, there is a video showing 50lbs going off. Throwing paint at a modern tank/APC will do little, and a tank crew will avoid urban areas if they don't have to enter, and then infantry and artillery will strike first. A modern tank/APC will see your heat signature at a long distance and if it suspects an ambush it will get of the road, and drive as fast as it can in your direction(trying to run you over)spraying machine gun fire and H.E. shells. A modern tank can take many well aimed hits from shaped charges projectiles(most likely it wont affect it much). Want to se what an AT-mine does to an old civilian vehicle? http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/ mine01.jpg http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/ mine02.jpg http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/ mine03.jpg http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/mine04.jpg Images are from my time in the military(what made me an anarchist), oh, the fools. Edit: Oh, and if you don't remember, palestinans has destroyed one of the high tech israeli tanks. There has been a post on the subject. <small>[ September 12, 2002, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

EP

September 12th, 2002, 09:46 PM

quote:

---

Fourth, The tank meets a nice deep semi-thick patch of wet cement thats covered with old carpet(or camoflaged to the souroudings). it goes in and can't move.

---

I don't think that's a practical method of trapping a tank. First of all, the patch of wet cement would have to be the length of the tank and very deep because those tanks can go through deep water and mud just fine... *** edit: and you'd have to know the tank was coming so you don't pour it and just have it get hard... You'd probably need multiple cement truck loads, hardly practical for urban warfare. *** Seems like it would take quite a bit of ANFO to take out a tank because they are hardened on the bottom to protect from mines. The Israeli tanks are called Merkava's, I'll have to look for that thread, I don't remember how it was destroyed.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

<small>[ September 12, 2002, 08:47 PM: Message edited by: EP ]

J.T.Ripper

September 12th, 2002, 11:01 PM

Your right about the cement. You just need some way of traping the tank so you can go to work on it. Im not sure what the abrhams armour is made from but maybe using lots and lots of thermite might be and option. just burn a hole into that section of the tank that hold the shells set one off and there's a deadly chain reaction. or destroy the engine somehow. This won't work on Abraham becasue of there great f***ing design. check out http://www.howstuffworks.com/m1tank.htm

Zyklon_B

September 12th, 2002, 11:30 PM

Can someone post a link to the Palestinian tank killing thread? The Palestinians have the advantage of being forced to fight in the streets. Back on subject, I was told by a person in the military that if a tank has its optical sight damaged, it will be forced to retreat every time. A tank that cannot fight, isn't much of anything. In this picture you can see the IR/targetting device on the turret of the tank: If you want to atleast remove the tank from the battle feild, you must atleast crack the glass with either sniper fire or heavy machinegun fire, two things a tank would engage first and from LONG distances anyways. If you could pull this off while the tank is at base at night lets say, you could take the tank out of operation for awhile. Still, not exactly what I was hoping for but I hope this helps some other people interested in this thread.

vulture

September 13th, 2002, 12:21 PM

How about blowing pure oxygen into the tanks air intake? the chemwarfare sensors won't alert for oxygen and the oxygen percentage in the tank will rise steadily. If you manage to get the O2 percentage to above 70%, a little heat or a spark will ignite anything(crews clothes, papers, traces of ammo) in the tank leading to a very hot fire. Remember the Appolo ground test accident, the crew was in 100% oxygen en burned to cinders.....

xoo1246

September 13th, 2002, 01:06 PM

FAEs commes in mind, so does destroying the tracks with mines and at the same time setting it on fire with a barrel of slow burning napalm. But I don't know how the ventilation system of a tank works, are there some sort closed system, to protect the crew from sudden overpressure or fires?

leonvios

September 13th, 2002, 01:42 PM

Why not find where a tank is stationed place aim a small pipe at it with a timed trigger system that will fire a metal ball bearing at the tank. The tank will turn its attention to the pipe and maybe the turret as well. Then run up to the other side and place explosives on the other side of the tracks and run or fire some powerful rocket launcher at the tracks to damage them. Or get one or two people to fire at the tank with guns then run down a street where you have some other people there onto of the roof to fire at the tank with home made powerful rockets then through down as many grenades as possible be fore the crew of the tank knows what has happened then the one or two people fires runs around the long way back to the other side of the street and places mine there. Then the tank will try to reverse back out onto the mines and hen they will try to go foreword into more mines so they are trapped then the guys on the roofs if not dead run as well as the people on the ground. (Don’t push your luck if the tank has not been destroyed already).

vulture

September 13th, 2002, 03:13 PM

The M1A2 has an air filter system which screens for chemical or biological agents present in the air and filters them out. Wow, that must be somekind of mini gaschromatography lab with filter systems and all... Unless it measures the oxygen percentage, it could be possible to gas the crew by simply replacing the oxygen by N2 or CO2. EDIT: Anybody consider EMP as a possibility? It's a high tech tank so it's packed with electronics. However, if it is protected against indirect nuclear blast effects or it has a full (no large openings or open structure, faraday principle) metal cage inside an improvised microwavegun (see www.powerlabs.org) might have no effect. If it penetrates you could maybe cook the crew inside..you would need a very powerful microwave though... :D <small>[ September 13, 2002, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: vulture ]

john_smith

September 13th, 2002, 04:36 PM

As far as I know, UK and US armies have both tried to develop a guided/heatseeking mortar shell in late 80's, and both actually got it working to some extent, yet the price/efficiency ratio of these sucked, hence no serial production. However, if you don't need the thing to have more range than a block or two (as opposed to 2-3 miles) or to be easily produceable, or idiotproof, and so on, it probably wouldn't be too hard to improvise. The IR-homing control system could be replaced by a simple model aircraft RC and a miniature wireless surveillance camera. They ain't very expensive, these days (of course, you'd need some sort of amp). Jamming would be a threat, but since RC controlled weapons are rare for this very reason, and your opponent likely wouldn't be aware of your armament (if you're smart :D ), and it'd be a one-off operating at unknown frequency, your chances would be pretty good. As for the shell, it probably could be done just like a model sailplane, just with smaller symmetrical profile wings/tail and of

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

sturdier metal or GRP construction, and launched either from a spigot mortar, or have a dowel attached like a bottle rocket or anarchist crapbook's shotgun-propelled molotov cocktail. I guess this would be quite accurate, and could hit a tank on the weaker-armored top of the turret, or even the hatch... :D

kingspaz

September 13th, 2002, 05:34 PM

right, heres the landmine...the writing may be a little hard to read... just one thing to add is that the explosive should be right up against the right angle section but i drew a gap because i hadn;t considered everything :rolleyes: http:// www.angelfire.com/mo3/kingspaz/linearshapedchargelandmine.JPG copy and paste link.

MrSamosa

September 14th, 2002, 11:05 PM

Here's how the Palestinians took out the Israeli Merkava-3 tank: With a big freaking bomb of blackpowder. Yes, that's right: BLACK POWDER. In one incident, they lured the tank to the area by ambushing a bus. When the tank came, it ran over the big 110 lbs black powder bomb, and blew the tank to pieces. I'm pretty sure it was blackpowder, that's what I remember reading off HAMAS's website. However, there have been a few widely-publicized incidents where tanks have been destroyed; i don't think all of them used big big black powder charges...

ENGINEERKILLER

September 15th, 2002, 02:26 AM

The picture that Zyklon posted was taken out at where I am stationed The pod on top is of the commanders thermal image finder and the glass is 3 inches thick and coated with thorium so are all the vision blocks.The abrams has redundant every thing 2 sets of tracks on each side if the electronic sites fail it has a straight optical backup and if that fails the m240 coaxial machine gun becomes the spotting rifle for the 120mm main gun .There is a regular blasting machine to fire the round off if the electricity dies.The breach for the main gun is three inches thick and runs from the breachblock to the trunion which is mounted just inside the three feet of armor thatis the front of the turret hull.The fire extinguisher is a flame sensing automatic halon purge system and that has a backup manual and an extra halon bottle.The nbc system is an overpressure system that just pushes filtered air through the track constantlywith 2 filters and blower motors.The thinnest part of the turret is three inches thick and is over the the main gun ammo rack which is only held in place by 4 bolts so if the ammo goes the rack will give out before the crew compartment can be breached.It can cross a 9 foot trench climb a 4 foot wall it is 12 feet wide and 19 feet long weighs 72 tons combat loaded goes 300 miles on a tank of gas and has a 1,500 horse power diesel turbine engine . It's sop for the crew not to chamber a round in the main gun until its ready to fire. The HEAT round for the gun is a fin stabilized piezoelectric graze sensitive fuze that is not fully armed until the round leaves the barrel and begins to deaccelerate additionaly the tank has six remote fired WP grenades on each side.Getting a tanker out of his track is like asking him to give up his first born and if the do come out each soldier carries an M-4 and plus the M240s can be dismounted and carried.

xoo1246

September 15th, 2002, 04:53 AM

MrSamosa: Blackpowder? Blew the tank in pieces? The source doesn't feel reliable. Kingspaz: Wouldn't the mine need some sort of standoff to give better effect? It could easiely be fixed by placing another box on top of the liner, with a thin layer of metal covering the opeing to keep dirt and water out. Edit: did a fast search and found this.

quote:

---

Three IDF soldiers were killed and two more wounded when a tank drove over a land mine on the Karni - Netzarim road in the central Gaza Strip shortly before 7:00 a.m. Rescue forces had difficulty in freeing the bodies of the victims trapped in the tank. The families of the fallen soldiers have been informed. One of the wounded was standing outside of the vehicle, which was escorting a civilian convoy. Both sustained moderate wounds in the blast. An IDF helicopter evacuated the wounded to Soroka Hospital in Beersheba. Terrorists hiding in a nearby mosque detonated the powerful 50 kilo (110 pounds) remote-controlled explosive charge beneath the armored vehicle. The area was closed to traffic as a giant crane was brought to the scene to tow away the remains of the Merkava 3 tank. The force of the explosion reportedly blew the turret off the vehicle. The attack took place one month to the day after Palestinians blew up a Merkava 3 on the same road, also killing three soldiers. As in the Feb. 14 attack, the blast went off beneath the $3 million, 60-ton tank, ripping through its relatively vulnerable underbelly, military sources said. The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Fatah's Aksa Brigades both claimed responsibility. The DFLP, in a statement released in Damascus, said the attack came in reprisal for recent Israeli military strikes against Palestinian targets. In the wake of the attack, Palestinian Authority security officials and witnesses said 15 armored vehicles and three bulldozers headed towards the nearby Nuseirat refugee camp and demolished eight houses and a security post. The armored vehicles also destroyed crops and irrigation systems in the area, the officials said. Witness Jamal Wahedi, 35, said Israeli troops indiscriminately fired machine guns toward the neighborhood, and that

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

residents were not permitted to retrieve belongings from their homes ahead of the demolitions. Following last month's attack, the first time a Merkava-3 was destroyed, the army said that its armored units "will learn the relevant lessons" and it spoke of the need to reassess operational practices in the light of the new methods of attack being used by the Palestinians. Military commentator Ron Ben-Ishai said it was not clear if the army had indeed learned from the experience. "Apparently not," he said. "Or if it's learned the lessons it hasn't yet implemented them. It needs to be understood that if the army is too sluggish (to adapt) it will take losses. This is bad, very bad." According to London-based defense publisher Jane's, the Merkava is the only battle tank with the engine in front of the turret, to give the crew extra protection against enemy fire from the front. The cannon shells are not stored in the turret but inside the hull at the back, and the fuel is also at the rear. However, the underside of the Merkava, like that of all main battle tanks, is the least protected. This is because the weight must not exceed about 60 tons for the tank to cross bridges and be transported on flatbed trucks

---

More...

quote:

---

The French analysts also note that they, too, not only the Israeli defence planners, are quite surprised that the Palestinians were able to deploy an explosive device which in their estimation had an explosive force of at least 100kg, as it sent the 60-ton tank flying into the air and left an enormous crater, estimated to be over a metre deep and measure several metres in diameter.

---

quote:

---

The army said it was preparing to respond to the attack, which marked the first time a roadside bomb managed to seriously penetrate an Israeli tank's armor in the territories. Even in roadside bomb attacks in Lebanon over the past decade the armor of Israeli tanks has never been hit hard enough to strike an entire tank crew. Military officials said half an hour before the tank was hit, Palestinians opened fire on a civilian convoy guarded by soldiers and set off a bomb that damaged a bus but caused no injuries. The army sent a tank into the area and a huge bomb exploded under it in what appears to have a planned two-stage gun-and-bomb ambush. Hamas and Fatah claimed responsibility. The tank was toppled on its side and the turret blown off. The only surviving member of the tank crew was evacuated by helicopter to Soroka Hospital in Beersheba. Channel Two television reporter Sagi Bashan was lightly injured by shrapnel when Israeli soldiers opened fire on him for trying to circumvent a checkpoint while covering the rescue operation. Basham told the soldiers they did not have the right to stop him from entering the area unless they had a written order from the Southern Command indicating it was a closed military area. The soldiers said they did not have such an order, so he told them he was going in, got into his car and drove by. They then opened fire. The bomb, an unusually large and sophisticated one weighing perhaps scores of kilograms, apparently hit the Merkava 3 tank - the most sophisticated and best protected model used by the IDF - at an unusual angle. It thus managed to penetrate the armor, according to an initial army investigation of the incident.

---

Maybe a large dug down hollow charge? <small>[ September 15, 2002, 04:15 AM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

vulture

September 15th, 2002, 06:11 AM

50 kilo of blackpowder in a strongly confined metal shell could cause a desastrous explosion according to me. Also, if the media says it's blackpowder, they mean something improvised. Thus it could as wel be flashpowder or another highly energetic pyrotechnic mixture. The heat of 50 kilo pyrotechnic composition escaping all at once from a shell could maybe even melt or vaporize the weak underside of the tank, no?

kingspaz

September 15th, 2002, 09:31 AM

xoo, it is a VERY rough drawing but i think with some improvements such as what you suggested it could have some good potential.

xoo1246

September 15th, 2002, 11:06 AM

Yes, bascily a linear shaped charge with a pressure trigger. Don't linear shaped charges need a startup distance before they function properly? I would decrease the angle and make it a plate charge. <small>[ September 15, 2002, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

Asger

September 15th, 2002, 02:56 PM

Again, if one has the possibility to get close to the tank a considerable amount of thermite down the main barrel could be effective. Ofcourse it should be ignited right away. Or thermite could weld the tracks together with some wheels. In either case it is the awesome power of the tank itself that will cause its own destruction. Or at least some damage.

the_unbound

September 15th, 2002, 06:34 PM

Actually as far as I can remember from my time in the army is, that you can knock out a tank with only 1 shot with a sniper gun yo u have to hit the Exhaust arrange ment with the correct projectile ( consis ting of uran, wolfram or s.th . like this can t sure remember). The position from where the shot comes is important, too. And one has always to keep in mind which type of tank it is and where the thermal image camera is because as soon as they know your position you ve lost.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

We trained it and it works quite good with nearly every tank as long as you know where exactly you have to hit, because it differs from tank to tank. I think you can't get close enough to the tank and place thermite down the main barrel. In reality it would hardly be possible.

Anthony

September 15th, 2002, 07:57 PM

There seem to have been some rather kewl ideas brough up in this thread... First let's forget about covering the tank in paint, or trapping it in quick setting cement as this isn't a Home Alone film, not a Willy Coyote production... Burning the tank with Napalm is unlikely to work, owing to it's huge thermal mass and the fact that it can drive out of a fire. Burning through the tank with thermite is impractical, even if it could melt the armour, as we're talking about high melting point metals and ceramics here, it would take a large amount of it. The tank crew isn't going to sit still and let you climb on top while your mate tries to hoik a 50kg sack of thermite up to you. Grenades aren't going to do shit to tank, so throwing them at it from above is going to be a waste of time. If you've got a rocket launcher capable of damaging the tracks, why do you need to divert it's attention with a pipe projector to use it? "Powerful homemade rockets", ah just the kind of technical and practical ideas we need... Modern armour piercing shaped charges have trouble penetrating tank armour, but it's ok, we've got a COB filled with double base taped to an estes...

zaibatsu

September 16th, 2002, 03:47 AM

Anthony, grenades aren't going to do anything from above? What about the shaped-charge hand grenades, with the cone at the base of the grenade? Surely using these would be effective against the top armour of a tank, as it would be attacking some of its weakest armour. However, how its actually going to manage to hit the tank is another matter.

Eliteforum

September 16th, 2002, 04:07 AM

A large tri-grenade sounds like a good idea about now :)

Bitter

September 16th, 2002, 12:11 PM

That wouldn't work either.

Anthony

September 16th, 2002, 12:14 PM

I assumed he was refering to a standard issure frag grenade. Even with a SC one, I wouldn't depend on it working, there's not a lot of explosive in something typically hand grenade sized and modern armours are darn resilient. Plus even with a sticky or magentic weapon, what's the odd of it actually attaching properly if you're throwing/dropping it onto the taregt from a height?

kingspaz

September 16th, 2002, 05:19 PM

now what about a rocket from above? with some experimentation i'm sure a decent rocket could be improvised. one capable of penetrating tank armour is unlikely but it would still be useful against light targets such as hummers and civilian vehicles.

Asger

September 16th, 2002, 05:59 PM

Can I just ask a question here : Is the armour alloy of modern tanks magnetic ? Is attaching magnetic devices an option at all ?

zaibatsu

September 16th, 2002, 06:04 PM

There was a German WW2 "hand grenade", I use the term loosely. It weighed around 1kg and penetrated between 13 and 15cm of armour. Now, a 1kg hand grenade is a little heavy I think, and this was designed to be placed by hand on the tank However, I think you could rectify this by having the shaped charge grenade stabilised with streamers and having a BP charge to propell it upwards upon contact with the tank (to give it adequate standoff) like the landmines that explode at waist height. However, there would be problems with getting the grenade to land flat on the top of the tank, but I'm sure there'd be ways of fixing that. While a 1kg grenade would be heavy, I'm confident you could cut that weight down using powerful explosives such as PETN pressed to a high density.

kingspaz

September 16th, 2002, 06:21 PM

any delay at all would result in the grenade angle being altered from flat if landing on an uneven surface. when he grenade flies up it will do so at a non perpendicular angle to the ground and thus tumble, etc. even for a split second this could screw stuff up. generally tanks are not too flat. most russian tanks infact have a hemishperical turret. also the tank surface is litered with irregularities. http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/ 5index.htm

zaibatsu

September 16th, 2002, 06:40 PM

True, but the main objective (in my eyes) is to punch a hole through the top into the crew compartment. Then a well aimed

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

FAE/WP incendiary/Chemical weapon could be very effective at taking care of the crew, or at least confuse them. Then you will have time to do more to the tank. While they are confused, blow the tracks. The best air filtration in the world will have a bit of a problem when the seal is broken :) IMO of course.

Anthony

September 16th, 2002, 07:37 PM

How are you going to counter the reactive armour if attacking with a SC?

nbk2000

September 16th, 2002, 11:23 PM

Attack from above with multiple SCs. First one will set of the ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor), the rest will attack the tank armour directly. You're not likely to get a TK (Total Kill=Tank destroyed and crew dead), but more likely an FK (Functional Kill=Tank immobilized or unable to use its weapons). An FK will do, especially if you can pick off the crew as they try to escape, or use them as bait to lure more of the enemy into an ambush. A kilo sized SC dropped on the engine compartment would almost certainly immobilize a tank.

john_smith

September 17th, 2002, 05:10 PM

Dropping a SC grenade on a tank would probably work, but only if you have a conviniently placed high-rise building to do it from. And better forget it about placing anything on the tank by hand. Unless the enemies are a bunch of braindamaged idiots they won't send a tank without infantry to watch it's six. Building rockets at home is THE bitch, at least in mmy experience. Too many variables to get everything the same every time. I've never even got one flying straight, let alone hit a target. And you'd still need the building. However, the guided mortar shell described above would theoretically have a good chance of working...I think. If it works it could hit with more accuracy than any $XXX.000 heat-seeker, and you even don't have to be in enemy's visual range to use it. Just place the "mortar" on other side of a building or whatever, launch it, and take over when it has passed it's apogee and starts falling. Building these would be expensive, but not extremely so. And I guess it'd be easier than making good rockets. Just my $(or EUR :D )0.02, any comments welcome.

vulture

September 17th, 2002, 05:19 PM

You can stabilize rockets by making a spudgun/rocket combo. The rocket is placed in a closed tube with some NC as cannon propellant. (checkout powerlabs) After the rocket leaves the barrel the engine is ignited. This way a high velocity (up to mach 2 atleast) and straight flightpath could be achieved. It's also easily improvised. A 1kg projectile at mach 2+ packs an insane amount of kinetic energy. If you add a charge to counter reactive armor, you could do some serious damage to the weaker parts, especially tracks.

xoo1246

September 18th, 2002, 01:35 PM

You could start by getting into basic rocket theory. http://members.aol.com/ricnakk/th_intro.html And when you are propperly skilled, has aquired all the materials and done extensive testing you could create an unguided inpact detonated SC rocket accurate up to maybe 100+ meters. And thease Israelian tanks obviously has weak bottoms, so why not use the time to construct a remote controlled or magnetically initated(so you don't blow up other vehicles passing/ doesn't have to rely on a track passing a pressure initiator, only problem is to properly calibrate it) shaped charge mine and ambush the tank. Since I assume we are speaking of things like urban and rural guerilla warfare, where one party has major advantage. I don't belive in the handgrenade idea, although it might have the capacity you will not able to get close enough. Hitting a moving target with an improvised rocket will not be easy either, it's hard enough when using military unguided rockets. Another idea is to demolish a bridge as the tank, tanks(!) passes it, that is if they belive the area is clear and they don't check the bridge. Since the tanks are heavy it might be sufficent to strike a few columns(or maybe a single bearing detail, depending on construction). http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/ Bridge01.jpg <small>[ September 18, 2002, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

vulture

September 18th, 2002, 03:24 PM

Does anyone know how tanks are refueled? Because the fuel reservoir inlet has to be a considerable weak point. A fast rocket with enough mass could fuck up the tracks without having any explosive onboard. Think of the SABOT round.

BoB-

September 20th, 2002, 05:21 PM

No matter how thick the armor, no matter how good its defense weapons are, a tank can still fall into a 15'- 20' hole in the ground. Since we are talking about urban enviroments, a backhoe should be available to steal. A crew of men, armed with backhoes should be able to dig, and move enough dirt to form several tank traps in a days time. These giant holes could be used to keep tanks out of certain areas, or the hole can be covered in 2"x4"'s and plywood, then disguised with dirt, gravel, or leaves. The hole could even be covered in cement and/or asphalt, so troops, and LAVs can pass over it. This is also where napalm, and thermite can now be highly effective. The men would ether leave the tank, or be cooked alive.

Zyklon_B

September 21st, 2002, 03:25 PM

The hole idea seems interesting if you can force a tank to have no choice but to go over it. And if the tank crew is forced to abandon their tank, that means a free tank for you, well if they leave it intact and don't call in air support.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter PYRO500

September 21st, 2002, 03:44 PM

And how during a time of war do you think your going to pull a tank out of a 20' hole in the ground?

Zyklon_B

September 21st, 2002, 03:48 PM

Dig a ramp. If you where able to dig the ho le I think dig ging a ramp shouldn t be impossib le.

EP

September 22nd, 2002, 02:54 AM

Here is an interesting method of creating anti-tank ditches. Won't work in an urban enviroment however. http:// www.dres.dnd.ca/ResearchTech/Products/MilEng_Products/RD95008/index_e.html

xoo1246

September 22nd, 2002, 03:25 AM

Check FM 5-250 for more info on tank ditches.

irish

September 22nd, 2002, 07:16 AM

EP, that is one very impressive ditch . it`s a small diameter pipe to make a 8 meter wide trench I see it says that they fill it with nitroparaffin or (mostly) nitromethane . have any of you had any experiance with nitroparaffin. I didnt see it on mega`s site but I did find this Irish sorry kingspaz I dont know why it did that. ---------------------------link had been removed for screwing with the page layout. to go to what hes talking about try patent number 4925505 kingspaz <small>[ September 22, 2002, 08:13 AM: Message edited by: irish ]

Sparky

September 22nd, 2002, 12:54 PM

I think it would be much more effective to disguise the anti tank ditch. Or even better, if you can build an underground cave (lots of cities already have huge holes under the sidewalk) then when the tank is crossing, collapse the roof of the cave, and bring the tank down. The turn on the radio jammers and send over some napalm to the tank.

MrSamosa

September 22nd, 2002, 10:10 PM

Sorry if I'm suggesting some bizarre impractical idea, but theoretically, railguns could be used to take out tanks. If you were to build a high quality railgun, comparable to that of the Department of Defense's (yeh, right... but does anyone know how much theirs cost though?). The DoD used high-quality, new materials; but the amature or guerilla almost certainly would not. Therefore, the costs would be greatly reduced. If you have a decent projectile material, surely you could be able to penetrate some thick armor. If not, a projectile moving 4-6 km/sec would still cause considerable damage to a tank. One big advantage I see is that railguns will allow multiple firings at incoming armor, opposed to one time use explosive charges. The main disadvantage though is that you would need to replace the rails after every few firings, since they tend to warp from the massive magnetic fields. Still, ultimately it should be cheaper and less time consuming than synthesizing insane quantities of high explosives; considering the fact that railguns are hardly one time use weapons. If one could find a source of the necessary materials, or perhaps improvised them (improvised capacitors, metal workshops to provide the copper rails, etc.), then the guerilla force could set up multiple railgun-turret-weapon-friends to defend a location or town from armor. Yes, I know railguns and their physics are far more complex than I make them seem, but it's just an idea. :) <small>[ September 22, 2002, 09:11 PM: Message edited by: MrSamosa ]

Zyklon_B

September 23rd, 2002, 01:04 AM

Rail guns need energy, that s the first major problem I see. Genera ting enough power right at the time you need it is no easy task, especially in a warfare situation. Secondly, you have to set it up on some sort of turret, figure out a sighting system, and take long shots, further then the range of the tank, cause if you don't, well the tank will spot you and blow you up. Also building a large enough rail gun, getting it to a source of energy strong enough and reliable enough for you to use, all ads up to one big easy to hit target from the air. It isn't a weapon that lends well to practical field carry or even as a booby trap. Until the technology is better developed it is still not as viable a manner of destroying/disabling a tank, especially not under adverse conditions. We still have yet to see the military with billion dollar contracts and nuclear power sources to come out with a viable gun.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 23rd, 2002, 02:25 PM

A REALISTIC approach must be made to this subject, as one day you may be the only person that can be called apon to help stop the troops of the NWO (new world order), in order to do this we must analyze the threat. it divides into 4 areas for vehicles 1. LIGHT vehicles (i.e land-rover/hummvee) these are more for transporting troops and acting as weapons carriers (i.e swing-

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

fire for land-rover and tow/stingers/.50cal for hummvee) and are cheap for what the governments usually pay for troop carriers. these offer varing protection from virtually none to up to 7.62/.50 cal fmj for a bolt on system on a hummer. I would advise the simple viet-cong tactic of flushing/drawing the vehicle (or along known travel route) into driving through a trip-wire with hand-grenades strung on the end, the lever being held within a cardboard/steel tube. if the wire is suspended at about radiator height then the grenades will be pulled in towards the side of the vehicle and should take-out the tires and occupants, leaving a (possibly burning) hulk. Caltrops spread across the road would allow for the capture of the occupants if so inclined. (note that i said inclined, as i would advise no survivors/pow's unless absolutly needed) a quick kill with high-cal weapons into the windscreen (i.e. a good shot with a G3 or AR10) to disable the driver, and if possible the front-seat passenger, and another shooter ready to deal with any pintel-mounted weapon crews. (i.e 50.cal/mk49 gren)this offers the resistance the ability to use the weapons of the enemy against themselves (fulfilling one of the points from 'the art of war') so much for light vehicles. 2. MEDIUM vehicles. these are lightly armoured transporters that can tote a serious amount of fire-power (90 mm low-pressure cannon or 30mm cannon) the armour is little better then the light vehicles with protection only up to about 20mm (even this being rare), examples of this would be the american LAV,french PANHARD,german FUCHS and the english FV432. they come in either flavour, tracked and tires. the tire versions i would advise the same approach to light vehicles, maybe with a larger charge (i.e. small beer-keg of anfo/annm and a home-brew cannon) the tracked version however requires a different approach (duh ) Concrete blocks about 4/5 feet high with steel RSJ'S (rolled steel joists/steel building beams) sticking through, these should be light enough to have 3 or four able to be towed by a truck, this will allow for a lightning-strike against enemy convoys (allowing for opportunities to be exploited) as a lone vehicle that is spotted could trapped if a concerted effort is made with multiple trucks/tank traps) after the vehicle is grounded, grenades should be used. NOT for destructive purposes but more to stun the crew (quite easy in a big steel box)then either a call can be made to surrender or the cannons can be used (heavy stainless-steel shot from home-brew cannons or from a .50cal rifle at CLOSE range, like 50 yards using APIT rounds)these are good vehicles to have burning, as the large amount of ammuntion cooks-off easily from the fires usually created from apit rounds. the tank-tracks are flimsy but still need a lot to dislodge (even in ww2 it took a few pounds of plastic to disable) these weigh about 20/30 tons. On another note these vehicles are the lightest to use NBC systems (as they are totally enclosed) so chemical weapons wont work. 3.HEAVY this is the range that is reserved only to the elite countries. always with tracks and is armed with rapid fire cannons (about 30/40mm) these will chew through walls rapidly, and the on-board ATGW's will demolish any building/bunker. these also have the VERY dangerous ability to allow the occupants to fire from inside the vehicle, having 8+ m16's firing is enought to put anyone off. the armour is still far from being that of a true tank, but with reactive armour allows for a greatly enhanced threat (also the reactive amour will shed anyone nearby if caught out in the open when the panels go off). due to these points i would advise the tank-traps in conjunction with a barrel or two of anfo prepared, this could be dropped or if possible it needs to be placed underneath the tanks "belly" as this is the second weakest point on any vehicle (first being the roof/top) it's only due to the direction of a larger proportion of the blast towards the tanks belly that allows an easy kill. The only option i can see is to immobilise and to destroy. Best point to aim for would be fuel tanks or ammunition cases/ATGW rockets (usually armoured so a minimum of a .50 should be employed against this area) the burning fuel will rapidly heat the internal crew compartment to a uncomfortable level, due to the thin nature of the armour used this will only work on light-weight vehicles as true tanks have SO much bulk in the armour department that it would take a _VERY_ long time to get the same effect. 4. SUPER this vehicle type is more common then the HEAVY, as its easy to weld together/cast a big lump of metal into a hull and mount a 105/120mm cannon on the sucker. Personally i would rate this a low threat as they are made purly to destroy other tanks, and as such are poorly made to take on a prepared populace. the only real danger is if they are used as ersatz artillery (against buildings) and as such can destoy fortified buildings in 2 or three hits (see film from ww2 to see effects), these will not be travelling alone and will avoid travelling in narrow streets. the sheer weight (upto 70 tons for the M1A3 ABRAMS) often destroys weak bridges and makes many roads nearly unusable. the best bet would be to locate likely bridges that these tanks would use and to rig these up for demolition (i have uploaded the military manual onto the ftp for the demolition of bridges if it wasn't there before) these tanks drink fuel like no-tomorrow and often utilise tank transporters, these are when tanks are particularly vulnerable as rarly do crew travel in the tank (to my knowledge) while being transported. My advise is more to immobilise and use these as bait for the barrels of anfo that you have cunningly hidden all around the avenues of aproach to the tank, then let the troops draw in and BAMBAMBAMBAMBAM!!!!!! you have death-valley, the enemy is extremely unlikely to napalm/bomb the tank or the rescue crew (i advise that the tank "falling" into the ground be made to look like an accident with no assult on the tank, this creates a false sense of security and makes the call for evac easier and may draw out more enemy troops to hit :D the only real way to diable these things is to aim for the optics (e.g night vision/thermal) to reduce effectivness at locating you, the turret-ring (THE MOST vulnerable point on any tank, but thats in comparison to about 400/600mm of steel :p ) so if you happened to have a immobilised tank and a while to spare you could pack a large amount of hi-explosives into the turret ring, it may do something :D if it was an abrams tank then you could place explosives around the blast-off panel on the turret and blow this off, detonating the stash of 120mm rounds. wont do much damage to crew as this is what it is designed to do, but it means that there will be no ammo for the crew to expend on your suicidal asses. p.s. please dont think of me as KeWl because i suggest the idea of using a "home-brew" cannon, as a well made steel cannon using NC as a propellent, and with some stainless steel shot you may be able to deal considerable damage, (i guess about 3cm penetration? correct me if wrong) even an improvised HESH (hi explosive squash-head) round would provide LETHAL spalling (metal chunk flying around at high speeds in a confined space ) <small>[ September 23, 2002, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: vir sapit qui pauca loquitur ]

vulture

September 23rd, 2002, 03:39 PM

If one is thinking about railguns, why shouldn't we consider induction cooking? :D Since the tank has alot of steel, a powerful magnetic field could cause the body to heat up fast and hot. Electrical systems will suffer and the tank will be too hot for the crew to be functioning normally. (I've been sitting in an APC once, in regular situations you almost get cooked by the heat and the diesel fumes). Also, were always talking about penetrating armor by firing high velocity rounds. This way lots of energy will be lost by friction and reactive armor etc. If one would use a projectile which is halted to complete zero when it hit's the tank, it might have more effect. A 20kg round at mach 5 coming to a complete halt in a millesecond liberates an insane amount of energy all at once. The tank will be unharmed the first few seconds after impact, but then the energy can't find a way out anymore resulting in massive damage. I remember a simulation video of this effect. The tank just vibrated a few secs and then got smashed away like it had been hit by a 90mph train. <small>[ September 23, 2002, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: vulture ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter john_smith

September 23rd, 2002, 04:12 PM

I still like guided weapons... Maybe a wire-guided missile (like on old french attack choppers, or the original '45 nazi AAM)?

Anthony

September 23rd, 2002, 05:50 PM

Induction heating? Let's see... Specific heat capacity of steel = 450J per kg per *K So let's say we want to heat the tank up to 100*C (373*K) (373 x 70 000kg)x450 = 11749500000J = 11750 mega-joules. Presuming the tank isn't trapped (if it was there are easier ways to diable it!), so let's say we want to heat up within a minute. 11750/60 = 195.83 megawatts of power required. Assumbing that the efficiency of your source is 100% and 100% of the power it outputs is imparted to the tank. Which of course it won't be in reality. Plus of course, the tank would be dissapating energy into the atmosphere, meaning you'd have to pump in even more energy. I really don't think a railgun would be any more practical... I was looking at a webpage of a light gas gun t'other day, using a powder charge as propellant, it acheives a muzzle velocity of 8km/sec. Railguns can do better, but not *that* much better!

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 23rd, 2002, 06:47 PM

i dont think that its possible to have anything that offers complete inelastic collision (or elastic... its been a while since i did A level physics :p ) wire guided is an idea, but first a high-power HEAT round/warhead for the missle, and then sort out the detonation system (piezo electric maybe?) and if the tank has reactive armour then a probe with a small charge is needed, and to wire guide it... man that would be one HELL of a project, with a flare in the rear of the missle, servo's for the rudders and a joystick to work it all, and wires long enough....... now i say it it sounds almost possible :D still i would need a few bits and pieces that are beyond my knowlede to do a wire-guided missile, best bet would be a heavy unguided missile, on a stand alone bipod/tripod. <small>[ September 23, 2002, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: vir sapit qui pauca loquitur ]

Zyklon_B

September 24th, 2002, 02:40 AM

Wire guided missile? Please, save your money and make a multy launcher with several rockets so you could shoot a cloud of them at the target. Alot of rockets in a confined group would mean the reactive armor could get some, but not all.

nbk2000

September 24th, 2002, 07:49 AM

Why not use the tanks own reactive armor against it? Small shaped charges are attached to the tanks ERA, limpet mine style, which can be set off at a later time by R/C. Later times being when enemy troops are near the tank or when the tankers have opened up their hatches in what (they think) is a safe location. Once the ERAs exploded a few times during inopprotune moments, the enemies infantry will tend to stay away from the tanks for fear of getting killed by the exploding ERA, thus leaving the tanks vulnerable to close up attack. Also, anyone trying to remove the SC would be risking death, thus making it an unpopular task. :D Getting in or out of a tank could be a very risky proposition.

john_smith

September 24th, 2002, 10:27 AM

Well, a wire guided missile with an onboard camera could be aimed at some weaker spot of the tank... nah... actually, how much does it take to make the reactive armor go off? These things are directional charges with a detonator and an ignition system, not just packs of high-ex, right? I once heard something about setting off reactive armor with .50 sniper rifles, and then using the RPG-s. It was in Yugoslavia, if I remember correctly. Now, a rocket-propelled grapeshot charge (aka claymore) detonated at a predetermined distance from tank (onboard laser range finder? Shit, $$$ again, maybe parts from old autofocus cameras would do...), followed by SC rocket(s)... hmmm... On the other hand I don't think the reactive armor is the biggest problem at all. It's either having enough power to do considerable damage regardless on what part of tank the round hits, or having the accuracy to go for the weak spots. Hence the whole guided weapons stuff.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 24th, 2002, 12:17 PM

the reactive armour is actually the simplest idea imaginable, its a lump of insensitive plastic exposives with a 4/5 mm sheet of steel over that. 50 cal will set it off, and so will 7.62mm but im not so sure about 5.56... it might but i wouln't want to do the test. I do know that whenever (and this is a RULE) a tank/apc has ERA, infantry tactics are severly altered to avoid even the slightest risk of fraticide from the armour. As the shrapnel is quite nasty, and what you dont want is your precious men being cut down by your own weapons ! At close range a good shot could pick out the turret ring with an RPG. This area, (as i said) is the weakest on a tank, unfortunatly the easy countermeasure to this method is to have chains hanging over the turret and dangling down, this prematurly detonates the RPG and dissapates the jet from the HEAT round.

vulture

September 24th, 2002, 01:47 PM

Anthony, something's wrong with your calculation. You only need the temperature difference, as the tank hasn't got a

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

temperature of 0K. So when it's 20C outside and you want to heat it to 100C you multiply it by 80; (80*70000)*450 = 2,52x10^9 J Also, the tank isn't made of 100% steel, but also of carbon/glassfiber and tungsten alloys with other metals. This would lower the to be cooked mass and the heat capacity. Besides, with induction cooking, you can focus the energy on a certain point.

chemwarrior

September 24th, 2002, 06:12 PM

If I remember correctly, the fuel is kept in the back on the right hand side. A rather large landmine should be able to take out the tank if the explosive is detonated at the right time, and if it doesnt blow the fuel tank, it will likely damage the tracks enough that they would be useless.

Anthony

September 24th, 2002, 06:26 PM

Good point on the temperature, I had overlooked that. I did consider that the tank is not 100% steel, but simplified. I wouldn't assume that the other materials would lower the overall specific heat capacity, the fuel would raise it, as would anything with aluminium in it. I suppose we really should take into account the rate at which heat spreads to other parts of the tank away from the aim point. As like you said, the entire tank wouldn't need to heat up to 100*C to raise the crew compartment to this temperature. But it's all academic really. Even if I was off by a factor of 10 it'd stil be very unfeasible.

EP

September 24th, 2002, 08:30 PM

Another idea worth at least thinking about is aquiring real, weapons-contractor produced AT rockets. I was looking around at 37mm launcher suppliers and came across a place that sells to law enforcement and carries AT weapons: http://www.att-tactical.com/DD.html Suppose you were to "borrow" a few? It would probably be difficult to get them, but once in your possesion, would be far more effective than just about any homemade device. Military bases would be another potential source. I've heard of F-16 jet engines being stolen ( ) so I would assume a few launchers like an M3 or a LAW would be possible. Then there is always the international arms black market that we all dream about, yet would probably have no clue how to connect with. At least it's more possible than building a rail gun!

MrSamosa

September 24th, 2002, 09:32 PM

Hmm...I don't think you all are very creative with my railgun idea . While you may be right on some aspects, simple design changes could dramatically cut costs. I don't remember what the design is called, I think a "Compound Railgun," but it essentially has two railguns to fire a single shot. That is to say, instead of having two rails at 180 degree angles from each other, they have 4 rails at 90 degree angles. Instead of having 1 power source and 1 capacitor bank for a single railgun, the design would have half the original power source and half the original capacitor bank per rail. Therefore, it is the same amount of electricity flowing at the same speed, but recharge rate is effectively cut in half. A dense armature could also contribute to the gun's ability to penetrate thick armor. Lead would be ideal. I brought the question of railgun recharge times to "Mouser" of www.railgun.org , he gave me the simple answer that the recharge rate was "negligible." Also, the gun does not necessarily have to charge up and fire WHEN you pull the trigger; as was implied in an earlier post. The operator could charge the weapon when he sights the target, and then fire when ready. I don't imagine the total costs to be more than an expensive computer; maybe $3,000-$5,000 dollars for a gun using new capacitors (according to Sam Barros' estimate of each cap being $50/piece). The real expenses come from all the experimenting in high-quality labs. Albeit, railguns would still be expensive. Nevertheless, if you can fire 8 km/sec with a gas rifle, the hell with railguns! If you could give us that link, I'm sure we'd all be very much interested. Hmm, a high explosive charge crashing into a tank at 8/km a sec...think about it. If I know explosives properly (actually, I have very little knowledge of explosives; not really my thing), the impact would be sufficient to set off the high explosive without a blasting cap, no?

PYRO500

September 24th, 2002, 10:01 PM

It's not worth fooling with multiple rails in a rail gun mainly beacuse it is so hard to get even decent efficency with just 2 rails. with 4 rails your going to have more problems and with a decent HV capacitor bank it would discharge faster through 1 set of rails alone. As for as rail gun as an anti tank weapon, I read somewhere a scientist said what a decent rail gun would do to a tank would be like comparing a 44 magnum being shot into a soda can.

Mick

September 24th, 2002, 11:29 PM

the rail gun idea isn't worth entertaining, because it relies on one thing, electricity. which is more then likly the 1 thing your not going have in a war. i think everyone seems to be thinking "complex", some of the ideas like wire guided rockets and laser sighted RPSC's are just to complex and rely on to many things that your not going to find in a war.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter the best idea i have seen so far is a dirty great big hole. once you start having vast and elaborate schemes to take down a tank, your fucked. because it only take one little thing to screw up and your whole plan goes out the window.

PYRO500

September 24th, 2002, 11:59 PM

For the most part he's right, a M1A1 Abrams tank is equiped with a 6Kw generator and that translates directly to joules (watts per second) in 6,000 J per second. now lets say they have a relitively small rail gun. say 1 mega joule. 1,000,000/ 6000=~167S=~ 2.8Min. charging time. For a real large gun assume the cap bank is 30 or so mega joules, not only is this gonna be huge but it's gonna take a while to charge. <small>[ September 24, 2002, 11:03 PM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

Bander

September 25th, 2002, 01:35 AM

I'm not sure if I came up with this or have simply forgoten where I heard the idea, but if one only wishes to disable a tank and remove it's destructive power a simple bolo-grenade setup might work. Just fire the improvised bolo with explosives on the ends at the barrel of the tank. It then wraps around and if you're lucky, dents in the barrel. Of course there's still the machine gun likely to be mounted on top, but they have to come out to use that.

john_smith

September 25th, 2002, 06:18 AM

@Chemwarrior Diesel won't blow up in tank. In fact an armored vehicle -escapes me which exactly- has fuel tanks arranged in front of the crew compartment to dissipate the SC jet. And they all have multiple tanks. @Bander They don't have to come out, it was somewhere earlier in this thread. As for the complex stuff, the "mortar shell" I wrote about would be much like a model aircraft. You'd need a 4-channel RC and servos, a wireless surveillance camera (<$100) and an RF amp for the latter. The shell itself shouldn't be too hard to build. Much easier than a wire guided missaile anyway. <small>[ September 25, 2002, 05:41 AM: Message edited by: john_smith ]

chemwarrior

September 25th, 2002, 07:16 AM

You dont want it to blow the tank up, you merely want to stop the tank in its tracks. Thats how blowing the fuel tank comes into play.

Eliteforum

September 25th, 2002, 07:18 AM

I thought tanks have reserve fuel?

Anthony

September 25th, 2002, 11:25 AM

Here it is: http://hitf.jsc.nasa.gov/hitfpub/testing/ lightgasguns.html Not exactly portable, but then neither is a railgun. I made a bit of a mistake, MV is up to 7km/sec, not 8km/sec. Sure you could build a railgun like Sam Barros', but I doubt his will produce more muzzle energy than a handgun round. So in an adaption to pyro500's analogy, it would be like firing a .44 magnum at a tank!

chemwarrior

September 25th, 2002, 03:55 PM

They do have reserve fuel, but its located less than 4 inches from the other tank, and it isnt very well protected.

kingspaz

September 25th, 2002, 05:30 PM

i just think its important to note that statements like the above are not going to hold true for all tanks, only the ones he has experience with or has studied. i think we need to focus on areas which all tanks have in common such as the barrel, turret ring, tracks, etc.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 25th, 2002, 06:24 PM

If one was prepared to go to extreme lengths, then a few pounds of thermite on the wheels/tracks would immobilise the tank quite well. I cant particularly think of common faults on tanks, because the designs vary so wildly, as the com-bloc tanks always have auto loaders and ammuniton stored in the hull, this is the main weakness of the T55/62/62/72/80 and all the copies by china, but with western tanks it's a whole new kettle of fish. With the varied design philosophy's of the different nations, the french tank being the most inefficient as the french WOULD have to try and make a "third generation" tank :rolleyes: the abrams and possibly the challenger mk 2 are two contenders for the ultimate tank. the only hope that you could have is to dig holes/ditches and to harrass the sappers that are sent to bridge these ditches. You could always do what south korea/america has done and deploy the nuclear mine :D apart from this extreme measure only a few barrels of anfo/annm would do the trick, it's what has worked in the past and it would work in the future for anyone that

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter would be willing to try it.

The problem with immobilising a tank is that you now have a machine-gun emplacement with infra-red to spot your stupid asses and able to blow away that pathetic hill in-between you and them (what occured in the golf war with abrams shooting through sand dunes to destroy iraqi T-72's)

MrSamosa

September 25th, 2002, 09:54 PM

quote:

---

A 20kg round at mach 5 coming to a complete halt in a millesecond liberates an insane amount of energy all at once.

---

- vulture Continuing this idea, why not use a projectile that instead of penetrating shatters on impact? A possible material could be copper, which is quite easily obtained and molded. Ideally, it will NOT penetrate the armor, and therefore be stopped in a matter of milliseconds which would better utilize its energy; of course, with some of the energy wasted on flying fragments from the shell shattering. Ideally, you would like to be able to flip the target vehicle onto its side. This is, of course, referring to an armored target that is NOT a 75 ton tank; but rather an armored VIP car or something. However, the trouble arises when you try to fire such a huge shell as would be necessary to cause the said effects. Therefore, a "functional kill", but not necessarily a "total kill."

Anthony

September 25th, 2002, 10:21 PM

The "golf war"? Ah yes, the infamous battle of the 18th hole! :D Only kidding For an improvised pure KE weapon, I presume we would be using something like a HE propelled, single use weapon? I'd imagine that a reloadable cannon capable of such performance would be hard to build and probably quite large.

Zyklon_B

September 26th, 2002, 01:04 AM

Another Idea I have is getting a old GMC van, placing a few barrels of ANFO and a large metal plate on each side. When a tank passes by it parked by the side of the street it could be remotely set off by a person dressed in plain clothes watching some distance away with a spotting scope. Its would be MUCH easier then any improvised missile, but would only be successfull maybe once or twice since the technique would quickly get out. Anyone know if there are any rules or regulations that the Army will follow before driving a tank down a certain street or thru any urban environment? This plan would be ruined by infantry moving ahead of the tank to make sure that there are no enemy traps or soldiers ahead. However in a occupied area where tanks just slowly drive around on patrol, this would be quite the anti-tank weapon in my view. Using fairly large shaped charges in vehicles may be the way to go. There is also making remote controlled cars using actual full sized cars. These could be driven down a street with a dummy in the front seat just to make sure it could get close eneugh for a real kill. <small>[ September 26, 2002, 12:04 AM: Message edited by: Zyklon_B ]

hodehum

September 26th, 2002, 08:59 AM

Despite extensive searching I have been unable to find any information on an interesting anti-tank mine I read about a while ago. The concept was simple in design, but looked like it had a lot of potential. Basically it consisted of about 4 or 5 tubes containing an explosive (I would assume T.N.T or Tetryl) that where about 3 meters long, each arranged in parallel, atop of which was the detonating pressure plate that was about 2.5 meters long and extended just before the edge of the tubes. Such a mine would easy to improvise and would have some advantages in an urban built up environment. The mine would be placed perpendicular to the sidewalk and hidden well with debris or other coverings and when the mine is detonated it would stand a good chance of cutting both tracks.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 26th, 2002, 12:24 PM

this link may be of interest, http://angola.npaid.org/ minelist_complete_angola.htm it details nearly all known anti tank and anti personnel mines and offers the explosive composition and weight and the detonation method! All in all its a good website to see how easy it is to create an anti-tank mine (wood mines). as being honest here, if it came down to martial law then i think the local chemical supply store would be ransaked to keep me in supply to fight my own war the 50/50 mix of TNT and RDX is within the reach of even me for a few mines, but i'm sure that i'd end up making 100% RDX and maybe a bit of filler from captured munitions (which i would advise anyone to do). On this website it also tells us that the earliest AT mines were simply tank shells (HESH) with a pressure fuse. Can I add here that tanks ONLY work in conjunction with infantry cover, as that is the way that it has been since the molotov was invented, as the infantry gain heavy weapons capability and the tank gains the protection of many eye's when buttoned up (to ensure against snipers) this has been re-inforced time and time again, as the locals in every city dont take kindly to tanks rumbling through and often grab a few RPG'S and start popping them off at anything that moves. this is a bit disconcerting to even an ABRAMS driver/crew as the tank "rings" after a direct hit, and who knows how unlucky they maybe, a lucky shot or two would leave a tank stranded (and that is what tankers DONT want.

vulture

September 26th, 2002, 12:28 PM

The problem with the KE weapon is that the material should not shatter, melt or even vaporize on impact because much energy get's lost that way. Thus a high density and strong metal with high melting point is required. I'm not going to pay for

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

20kg of osmium you know...

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 26th, 2002, 01:24 PM

from what i remember of osmium, wouldn't 20 kg only be the size of a large cigar (i think its about 45kg for a brick-sized lump) On the subject of K.E. weapons, why not load up an armoured juggernaught (articulated lorry) with a few concrete/steel blocks and get up to speed (about 80mph) and aim it at the tank, and have some form of ejection system to evacuate yourself (bail out JUST before hitting)i'm not too sure about this, but if a sharpened steel beam was welded into the frame of a heavy ( total weight about 60 tonne)lorry, travelling at about 100kph we would have about 24 MJ of energy crashing into the tank? i think that we would have a kill even if we didn't destroy the tank, we would have made it functionally inoperable due to damage to the weapons systems. it would be pretty cool to see this :D :D <small>[ September 26, 2002, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: vir sapit qui pauca loquitur ]

Eliteforum

September 26th, 2002, 01:35 PM

Don't know if it's of any use or not but: http://www.emsdiasum.com/ems/ chemicals/osmium.html

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 26th, 2002, 01:57 PM

quote:

---

(Gr. osme, a smell) Discovered in 1803 by Tennant in the residue left when crude platinum is dissolved by aqua regia. Osmium occurs in iridosule and in platinum-bearing river sands of the Urals, North America, and South America. It is also found in the nickel-bearing ores of Sudbury, Ontario region along with other platinum metals. While the quantity of platinum metals in these ores is very small, the large tonnages of nickel ores processed make commercial recovery possible. The metal is lustrous, bluish white, extremely hard, and brittle even at high temperatures. It has the highest melting point and the lowest vapor pressure of the platinum group. The metal is very difficult to fabricate, but the powdered or spongy metal slowly gives off osmium tetroxide, which as a powerful oxidizing agent and has a strong smell. The tetroxide is highly toxic, and boils at 130C. Concentrations in air as low as 10^7 g/m^3 can cause lung congestion, skin damage, or eye damage. Exposure to osmium tetroxide should not exceed 0.0016 mg/m^3 (8-hour time weighted average - 40-hour work week). the tetroxide has been used to detect fingerprints and to stain fatty tissue for microscope slides. the metal is almost entirely used to produce very hard alloys, with other metals of the platinum group, for fountain pen tips, instrument pivots, phonograph needles, and electrical contacts. The price of 99% pure osmium powder - the form usually supplied commercially - is about $100/g, depending on quantity and supplier. The measured densities of iridium and osmium seem to indicate that osmium is slightly more dense than iridium, so osmium has generally been credited with being the heaviest known element. Calculations of the density from the space lattice which may be more reliable for these elements than actual measurements, however, give a density of 22.65 for iridium compared to 22.661 for osmium. At present, therefore, we know either iridium or osmium is the heaviest element, but the data do not allow selection between the two.

---

damm, $100/g !!!!! hehehe, 20kg would be 2 MILLION dollars !! but the tetroxide sounds interesting, i doubt that anyone would test for the poisoning, not with a price from that website of about $30 a gram,

Anthony

September 26th, 2002, 03:49 PM

A lorry would make a very interesting KE weapon. I wouldn't imagine that the armour would be breached, but the shock would almost certainly kill the crew. If shock damage hadn't taken too much of a toll on the tank's various components and devices, it may even be usaable after capture.

vulture

September 26th, 2002, 05:23 PM

At that density, 20kg of Os would take slightly less than a liter, which could be shaped into an artillery shell like design with a hollow point of another weaker metal to ensure aerodynamics. The total kinetical energy of 20kg of osmium at mach 5 (340m/s*5) would be equal to (20*(1700)^2)/2 = 57800 kJ Now let's assume the projectile comes to a complete halt in 0,01s and 20% of the energy is lost by shattering, friction and heat output: (57800000*80%)/0,01* = 4,624*10^9 W = 4624 MW Wow, try to pump that into a rail gun! I think the word wreck for the remains of the tank wouldn't be appropriate here, I would rather use the word "plasmatized" armor... :D (if I didn't make any calculation mistakes... :confused: ) <small>[ September 26, 2002, 04:27 PM: Message edited by: vulture ]

Gr3yscale Hi everybody, I can finally post :D been reading the forum for like 3 months.

September 27th, 2002, 06:35 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I heard about a guided mortar that was used to destroy tanks, actually I think it was a rocket, it was remotely controlled on descent. it was just a big pointly lump of steel with a camera, control system and a boost stage that discarded just before apex was reached. I think this would be fairly simple to improvise, once you have the transmitters and reciever.. hehe, you could use military (or whatever) band radio to transmit the control signal, as inaudible sound and thereby use their own systems against them, and they wont jam you..... oh, also, I have to say; why would you try to fight a tank anyway? put on your sheeps chlothing and hopefully itll leave you alone why not take out the fuel tanker? or any type of resupply or demoralise the crew OR just not be there when it comes around oh yeah, wouldnt all that ANFO be better used collapsing a building on top of it? if its an urban setting. Im just guessing but I think that would be more a efficient use. I personally will try to avoid confrontations with tanks alltogether they are lots bigger than me.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 27th, 2002, 10:06 AM

the military does not use one channel as this would be easy for another army to jam, they use a system known as signal hopping, where the frequency used is changed mulitple times a second (up to 100 times a second for secure lines) so if you can find a way of using the same frequencies (at the same time) then i do belive that you would have the technology to listen in on the transmittions (descrambling) the reason that we are trying to figure out a way of destroying a tank would be so that if we were ever in the position of martial law (military becoming the De Facto ruler) and we believed that this was either unfair or was for the reason of rounding certain peoples from the general populace (a'la Gulag time) then we would be able to immobilise/destroy what is the most powerful symbol of modern military might, this in turn _could_ discourage the military from invading further into a city and might save our lives or the lives of our loved ones one day. we prepare therfore we are prepared. blowing up buildings reduces the places that we might be able to operate in, and i dont think that in a residential zone (with little if any tall buildings) we would be able to use that method. BUT in a commercial/industrial zone that is a valid method. Also we don't like the idea of waiting for anyone to remove that foot off of our throat, we would rather blow the foot :D (idea of waiting for them to leave) and destroying/immobilising the tanks demoralises the crew, and strains the supply lines as more fuel has to be used to transport that new powerpack/tank track/thermal sight. and i'm glad to see that my idea might be a good one, but i am concerned as to how we are to get this 20 kg lump up such speeds to hit if the target is moving, as the firing mechanism looks long-winded and complicated. If you could make it recoilless and shoulder portable then you my man are amazing as that would be beyond a doubt an amazing weapon. the us army were experimenting with scramjet hyper-velocity missiles that would do the same thing, the only problem they could see is in the missle/shot passing straight through the target! and it would be a waste if you were shooting say an apc, thats 2million dollars a shot gone on a half-million machine :D one idea that i do propose for another thread is: "how would you make a tank" :D as we could take our knowledge from this thread and construct an easy to make vehicle that would protect us and offer a means of attack. a NC powered potato gun firing tungsten rounds would do some mean damage ! We could combine the idea for a remote sniper system and have a turret/remotly controlled gun platform :D

Gr3yscale

September 27th, 2002, 11:11 AM

how do they coordinate the hopping? embedded signal? can you give me more info on this system? do they transmit and recieve all their channels even though they only use one to communicate at any given time? cause no hopping would be needed to control the shell. sure, I just meant that easier targets might be plentiful. if you deprive the tank of an enemy to fight, what can it do? "shoot the flesh, save the steel" -that dude of MW2 Mercenaries hehe :) the weapon I described would be fairly simple, I will give a more detailed description; 3 parts, the launcher, the shell and the controls. the launcher is just a homemade mortar, simple. the shell is a chunk of something dense, like whatevers on hand with the tip made of something really hard, stainless steel is readily availiable. it has a B/W camera and a transmitter + powersource its guided in descent by fins actuated by standard model aircraft servos and a reciever. the control signal could be sent on the same band as the video and a single tranceiver used? thats the head of the shell. there are also one or two boost stages, which are just pyrotechnic rocket motors that discard after burning. they can be bought, you need a liscence for the big ones though. the control system is just a tv screen, transmitter, reciever and control panel, doesnt even have to be portable if you were using the enemy radio, they wouldnt find your control station.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

the launchers and shell could be placed anywhere, the best place would be where the smoke and flame of the motor wont be too easily seen.(surprise attack) like on top of a tall building. oh theyd also be remotely launched. but they would have to be activated shortly before cause of small battery in the shell. ok, so its fairly complex but for me this would be easier to make than it would be to aquire any HE by the barrel. most of the parts are readily availiable, minus the rocket motors, and the penetrating tip might have to be machined somehow. yeah..

Anthony

September 27th, 2002, 11:12 AM

If you use HE propulsion, IIRC you will get upto a quarter of the explosive's VoD in projectile speed. Unfortunately, that's only going to be about 2km/sec using even the best explosives :( An existing solution might be on of the so called "super guns". I believe the Iraqi's were playing with some recently. Fair simple and crude in construction would pack enough ME to throw a 100kg shell halfway accros a country. Definitely not portable, nor recoiless though :) How do existing field guns fare against modern tank armour? Maybe something like a 155mm howitzer? They don't seem to be too uncommon. BTW, I wouldn't build a tank, I'd buy one and reactivate the gun. Then find some fools - I mean, "crew" and go have some fun :)

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 27th, 2002, 11:50 AM

HAHAHAH ! thats the right idea, i'd want a few of the english FOX armoured cars, the 40 mm cannon is sweeeeeet! it would do a dam lot of damage if APFDS ammunition was used (armour piercing fin stabilised discarding sabot) and its fully automatic (but low rate of fire) heheh, i want one of those :D . modern howitzers (about 155mm) with some anti-tank ammunition would be devistating, but to my knowledge NO-ONE builds anti tank ammunition (like APFSDS) as they are far too wimpy and expensive to have on the field of battle. they also have a slow rate of fire/and are slow but these would be moot points when that enemy tank gets hit with about 30kg of hi ex !!! i do know that no tank can take a direct hit from a howitzer and survive. The super gun is along the lines of the german air-gun (phnematic (sp)) that, as the shell was moving along the barrel had further charges detonated behind it (very exact timings here as premature detonation would result in LOWER velocities) the long barrel and multiple charges could have allowed saddam (CIA codename: sand-man :D ) to put satillites into low orbit ! (or reach england with hi-ex) you guess which one he'd do first :rolleyes: the idea of using a stainless steel penetrator on the guided mortar wont be the best of ideas i believe, along with the low weight, high cost and low speed at point of impact it wont do much. the military can pin-point radio emissions quite accuratly and when they do trianglulate your position i would think that's cutains for you... the radio hopping is achived by the transmittion from radio A to radio B, A then transmitts a code that is recognised by B and this then codes for what frequencies that they operate on (it is a LONG but mathematically based theorum) so you could brak the code but it would take so long that it's not even an option to your grand children. the sending radio hops to a seperate channel (it does not use any other channel at same time) at a random time, and some new radio's change the scrambling system at every few hops. they work on a restricted range of frequencies (about 100hz range i.e 10001100hz) and use sub-channels of these (1000.001hz etc) so you would have to monitor all these channels at the same time and piece them together... not a nice job ! the us army tried something like your mortar, but it was deployed from a 155mm cannon shell, it could listen for tanks/low flying helicopters and it would throw a AT mine at the target :D the thing was called SKAT or SKEETER and about 20 were in a 155mm shell, it was for inteligent minefields, blowing up if infantry came across it, right out of terminator 2 man..... EDIT: this time i make a bit more sense <small>[ September 27, 2002, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: vir sapit qui pauca loquitur ]

Gr3yscale

September 27th, 2002, 03:44 PM

I didnt want to decode their transmissions, just use their radios as relays for my signal so they probably wont trace the signal nor jam it. just an idea. yeah those scout cars are *so* cool.

MrSamosa

September 27th, 2002, 04:05 PM

A big problem I see with guided mortars is their rifling. You DO want the mortars to rifle in the air, to have any hope of accuracy, right? So, when they are coming down, it becomes difficult to control with your model airplane servos. "Right" may not steer the mortar right, "Left" my steer the mortar away from the tank. If this idea is pursued, then this problem must be dealt with. As for motors for rockets, that is no problem. You don't necessarily have to buy commercially-made ones. In fact, it seems many rocket enthusiasts build their own motors from PVC pipe and a filler. The filler, for high-power rocketry, is usually Ammonium Nitrate based. I don't know why I didn't think about this before, but rockets do seem the best way to deliver a KE weapon. HAMAS's (You know, the Palestinian guys?) "Qassam-2" rocket is basically just water pipe filled with a propellant, and it carried 11 kg. Their design was very basic, and any rocket enthusiast could find many ways to improve upon it; perhaps to the point that we are able to deliver our beloved 20 kg loads at high speeds? Hah, a cement lorry ramming a tank would actually be funny, especially if it were effective. That is along the lines of a guerilla tactic... The guerillas commandeer a tractor trailer, go top speed, and ram the thing into the target. Tractor Trailers have amazing saftey systems, so it may not even be necessary to eject. After ramming, the driver (if he is alive) escapes into a

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

get-away vehicle that accompanies the tractor trailer. <small>[ September 27, 2002, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: MrSamosa ]

Anthony

September 27th, 2002, 04:11 PM

Dispense with the rifling and use fins. Simpler and the thing doesn't spin. The safety systems aren't that good. I've seen footage of a lorry hitting a bridge pillar at motorway speed and there is *no* way anything in that unit would survive!

john_smith

September 27th, 2002, 04:14 PM

A projectile can't come down at greater speed than it went up (and commercial rocket engines won't help much) so the KE mortar round would need as high or higher muzzle velocity than, say, a tank's main gun to be effective. A mortar capable of such feat probably wouldn't be too different from the 155mm towed howitzer mentioned above :D Neither very portable nor expendable. Also, a mach 5 shell is a bit harder to aim by joystick than a mach 0.5 version, and acceleration during the launch of the former would crush the said off-the-shelf electronics to begin with. I'd go with the SC.

ENGINEERKILLER

September 27th, 2002, 04:21 PM

sincgars. single channel ground air radio systems the radios won't repeat unless you program to do so the radios are timed together and loaded with the same freqs before they are used and this requires a special encryption tool and the radios we use hop somwhere along the lines of 2,000 times a second. Unless you have alot of indirect fire weapons your chances of being able to drop a round on a moving vehicle is pretty slim.The army has fielded the copperhead which is a laser guided artillery round that can hit a moving tank .Also the w.a.m. wide attack munition wich deploys a antitank mine over anything that meets its criteria for a threat.The problem I see with a tank hole is that the weight of the tank falling in the hole usualy makes a landslide and this gives it way to climb out under its on power and it can climb a 60 degree slope.

vulture

September 27th, 2002, 06:26 PM

quote:

---

A projectile can't come down at greater speed than it went up (and commercial rocket engines won't help much) so the KE mortar round would need as high or higher muzzle velocity than, say, a tank's main gun to be effective.

---

Not necessarily true. If the mortar round gets shot into the air using normal mortar ammo and is then directed downwards before it reaches apogee and along with that a rocket engine ingnites you could get an amazing bit of speed. Also, making sure the projectile still accelerates till impact, can compensate for too low speed. Ofcourse the highest achievable speed would be a rocket launched from a jetfighter at mach 1,5, but that ain't exactly improvised...

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 28th, 2002, 04:02 PM

one thing that i have ALWAYS dreamed of was building a heat-seeker, well after many years of school/university and looong and pointless chats with people who would know the theory of how to do this, i stumbled on to an idea.... IF model rockets can be made to seek the sun (called sun-seeker guidence noless :rolleyes: ) then why can't I swop some infra-red sensitive receptors for the LDR's that the sun seeker uses, or on failing that use a receptor that seeks something like intense ultra-violet (or if possible a wavelength that the sun does not transmit on) and have some form of laser/emmitter that would "paint" the target. I realise that this is exactly what the military uses. So if i was to build this sun-seeker guidance system, attach it onto a home-made missle launcher (AND the powered fins), with another person "painting" the target with the correct frequency of light i should in theory be able to aim at anything within range with a HIGH probability of hitting said object. this would solve the problem of using highly expensive gear for the control of the mortar, as the targeting team would just call in an "air-strike" :D of sorts, with the laser painting the target... you get the rest If i had to use LDR's i would just need to attach a flare or such other light source and use it at night.... Or if it was infra-red then i would be the owner of a homemade stinger :D i always knew i was smarter then any IRA techie :p (mind you they did make a few interesting gadgets) I had another idea relating to the articulated lorry idea, if you were to load up the trailor, wire out the annoying brakes (airpowered) and near to the target you release the trailor and make a 180 and piss off as fast as that lorry can go. The trailor should speed off into the target, with only a small loss in mass and velocity and you can drive away without having another vehicle ready and waiting, and you can drive back to the RV and pick up another trailor!! :D You could carry on until you believe that your ideas have been figured out.. thats when you break out the home-made copper head :p <small>[ September 28, 2002, 03:08 PM: Message edited by: vir sapit qui pauca loquitur ]

vulture

September 28th, 2002, 05:40 PM

Flares containing PTFE as an oxidizer are used as infrared decoys. Especially at night they should attract heat seekers.

Gr3yscale

September 29th, 2002, 04:06 PM

I had an Idea the other day; a tripwire. well, a piece of fishing line strung across a road (or whatever) where a tank is expected to pass, it hangs below barrel level but above cassis level.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

when the tank moves into it, it pulls it along, and pulls up a piece of parachord, which pulls up a long bag or tube of HE... onto the turret ring :D not sure how to detonate it though, electronicly sensing the metal body of the tank? some kind of mechanical system with a magnet? or more simply, another length of chord on the other end of the bag that activates a det sortof like the things in party poppers, you know? what do you think?

Anthony

September 29th, 2002, 10:08 PM

Not a bad idea, and pull-string initiation would probably be the easiest and most reliable. Since we've had ideas like railguns, induction cooking and covering the tank in paint... An adaption to the above idea is to string some *really* sharp cheese wire across the street and use the tank's own driving force to slice itself in half! Ingenious! :D I think those sun-seekers work because the source they are seeking is so strong. A laser or even a flare isn't a whole lot for what is probbaly a very basic circuit to detect.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

September 30th, 2002, 01:43 PM

all you need to do is to boost the sensitivity of the LDR's (if using visable light) or to boost the range of movement to the fins (but not the sensitivity) so that they can track sources over greater arc's. if i was to improve on the sun-seeker guidance then i would probably use ultra-violet sensors and lasers (it WOULD be difficult to avoid rockets flying at the sun, but common sense would help. at night it would be easy, as v.little man-made light generates this unwanted wavelength, and the fact that the wavelength is so low means better accuracy when targeting. if i damped the sensitive receptors to a degree, then i would help to reduce the other less-powerful UV sources that might confuse the war-head I am intending on making this btw, in conjunction with a few friends we have the know how and equipment. but i wanted to get opinions before starting so that any forsee able problems could be side-stepped

Zyklon_B

October 7th, 2002, 07:35 PM

Modern tanks use a 120mm smoothbore cannon. This seems to be the standard for Canada, the USA, and all of Europe. The projectile they fire is similar to a Flechette, it is called a tungsten penetrator. Its ability to kill tanks doesnt have to do with explosives, but high speeds and kinetic energy. It can be assumed that 120mm cannons can take out any tank in the American and European theater, or else they would quickly be phased out. Further information on the projectiles of modern tanks:

quote:

---

The original M829 threw a 9.41 pound (that's 65,870 grains), 1.06" diameter, 24" long, depleted uranium dart at 5480 f/s! The A1 version fired a 10.78 pound dart at 5170 f/s and the current A2 version throws a slightly longer (30") but skinnier (.8") 10.85 pound dart at 5512 f/s. (For you hand loaders, operating pressures of the M829 series are between 74K psi and 96K psi.) The M865 TPCSDS-T (Target Practice Cone Stabilized Discarding Sabot with Tracer) training round throws a 7 pound aluminum dart at 5577 f/s. (This round has a MUCH shorter maximum range than the M829 and can thus be safely fired on most tank ranges.) There is also a US M829E3 round under development that should have even more spectacular ballistics.

---

This gives some idea of what performance would be required from a homemade or reactivated cannon.

MrSamosa

October 18th, 2002, 04:10 PM

Continuing along the lines of using lots of explosives, Qassam Brigades have blown up another Merkava-3 tank. Here's a snippet from their communique on October 12.

quote:

---

The Qassam Brigades declare full responsibility for blasting a highly-explosive device weighing 70 kilograms under a Mirkava-3 that was passing in the so-called Netsarim area at 4.30 this evening Saturday 6th Shaaban 1 4 2 3 H 12.10.2002AD.

---

70 Kg o f High Explosives! There, that's how you take out a tank . Sorry for simply restating points made earlier in this thread and not offering anything new, but I felt this was relevant to the discussion.

the resourceless reaperman

October 19th, 2002, 05:05 PM

In case it's a brick street you could just put some barrels of AP or ANFO under the surface, put a mine on top and carefully put the bricks back. (use a mine with a high weight tolerance! an anti-tank mine for instance). that should blow the tank to pieces quite nicely since the bottom isn't that densely armored.

kingspaz

October 19th, 2002, 05:48 PM

some barrels of AP?! what the fuck?! if you can make a barrel of AP and not die i'd like to see how you'd get it in a hole without it going off also. the bricked street idea is decent though. try and think before you post.

the resourceless reaperman

October 20th, 2002, 06:35 AM

Well I don't really know much about explosives, so I just picked something. :rolleyes: I'm more into the theoretical stuff

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter really.

It was more about the idea with the brick street. Could blackpowder work? <small>[ October 20, 2002, 05:42 AM: Message edited by: the resourceless reaperman ]

Machiavelli

October 20th, 2002, 09:54 AM

Maybe, if the containment was good enough. However, one of our local customs on this board is that if you don't know shit about something, you don't post about it, even if it's a question, then it should be visible that you've already researched the topic. While the brick street idea is ok, the explosive suggestions are crap. Since we are usually discussing things that can cost you everything from fingers or eyes to arms, legs or even your and other person's lifes if they go wrong, we don't take bullshit lightly. Please try to be more precise in your future posts and keep to stuff you know.

Zyklon_B

October 20th, 2002, 10:32 AM

I was thinking of a system for a mine that would involve using a large steel drum welded into a bottle neck going into a steel pipe. Inside the steel pipe a steel rod fitting the diameter of the pipe is inserted and the end of the pipe is covered with a plastic sheet as to keep debris and rain out of the barrel. The mine would then be filled with an explosive such as ANFO and a trigger device of your choice could be used, be it remote controlled or some pressure plate system. It would then be placed into a hole in the street up to the depth needed to keep the steel pipe only inches from the surface. When a tank comes along the explosion would propel steel rod at terminal velocities directly under the tank. If one has access to a mill the center of the steel rod can be filled by another explosive and an impact detonation device. Does this idea seem sound?

DarkAngel

November 1st, 2002, 08:00 AM

Look where the Brit's are working on. From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2002%2F08%2F19%2Fnmod19.x ml

'Electric armour' vaporises anti-tank grenades and shells By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent (Filed: 19/08/2002) An electric "force field" for armoured vehicles that vaporises anti-tank grenades and shells on impact has been developed by scientists at the Ministry of Defence. The "electric armour" has been developed in an attempt to make tanks and other armoured vehicles lighter and less vulnerable to anti-tank grenade launchers such as those used by the Taliban and al-Qa'eda fighters in Afghanistan. It could be fitted to the light tanks and armoured personnel carriers that will replace the heavy Challenger II tanks and Warrior APCs in one of the two British armoured divisions. The ubiquitous RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launcher can be picked up for a mere $10 in most of the world's trouble spots but is capable of destroying a tank and killing its crew. When the grenade hits the tank, its "shaped-charge" warhead fires a jet of hot copper into the target at around 1,000mph. This is capable of penetrating more than a foot of conventional solid steel armour. The new electric armour is made up of a highly-charged capacitor that is connected to two separate metal plates on the tank's exterior. The outer plate, which is bullet-proof and made from an unspecified alloy, is earthed while the insulated inner plate is live. The electric armour runs off the tank's own power supply. When the tank commander feels he is in a dangerous area, he simply switches on the current to the inner plate. When the warhead fires its jet of molten copper, it penetrates both the outer plate and the insulation of the inner plate. This makes a connection and thousands of amps of electricity vaporises most of the molten copper. The rest of the copper is dispersed harmlessly against the vehicle's hull. But despite the high charge, the electrical load on the battery is no more than that caused by starting the engine on a cold morning. In a recent demonstration of the electric armour for senior Army officers, an APC protected by the new British system survived repeated attacks by rocket-propelled grenades that would normally have destroyed it several times over. Many of the grenades were fired from point-blank range but the only damage to the APC was cosmetic. The vehicle was driven away under its own power. Prof John Brown, of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, which developed the Pulsed Power System at its R&D site at Fort Halstead, Kent, said it was attracting a lot of interest from both the MoD and the Pentagon. With the easy availability of RPG-7 rocket launchers "it only takes one individual on, say, a rooftop in a village to cause major damage or destroy passing armoured vehicles", he said. But the use of electric armour, which will protect against all shaped-charge warheads including artillery and tank shells, would reduce the threat to zero. --End Which kind of actions do you have in mind that could be taken to bypass this system?

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter A double shaped charge warhead could maybe used in some sort of similar fashion like the patent(?) NBK ones posted, about a warhead that can penetrate through a wall using a shaped charge and than pushes out a grenade to cancel the targets inside the room. Only the 2nd SC is made smaller so it doesn't come in contact with the outer plate. Or somekind of way to isolate the yet? A jet from another material than copper that doesn't conduct? "The electric armour runs off the tank's own power supply." Maybe that can be used against them, like a special warhead that let the tank run out of power in some sort of way? An EMP device that can be shot into the tank and makes use of the tanks power suply?(im not into electronics so correct me if it makes no sence)

Bitter

November 1st, 2002, 10:58 AM

How about a cermet penetrator that isn't likely to be vaporized and doesn't conduct electricity ?

Jacks Complete

December 1st, 2003, 06:36 PM

The electric armour is a great idea, and it pisses me off as to how close I had been a few years ago. Ok, how it works. When you fire an RPG, it hits the target and explodes. The shaped charge uses a copper disc and explosively forms a jet of molten copper, which is very heavy and burns through the armour. Needless to say, the jet is very conductive. Any molten metal is, even more so than any metal (conductivity is a defining feature of metals). This system works using a pair of spaced plates of armour, and a high powered capacitor bank. The capacitor bank is charged, and everything is fine. The two plates are separated by either some solid insulator, or an air gap. When the RPG hits, the jet breaks through the first plate, travels across the air gap, and reaches the second plate. At this instant (don't forget that electricity travels at half the speed of light, generally) the circuit is made, and the capacitor bank discharges through the jet of copper. The electromagnetic forces and heating in the jet blow it to bits, and the liquid copper is then splattered on the inside of the air gap, having failed to break through the internal plate. Two hits in exactly the same place would get through, but the odds are very much against you. Two simultaneous strikes might do it, too, as the capacitors might be discharged enough for it to fail to disrupt one of them. Any little strands of copper that bridge the gap are rapidly melted by the repeated firing of the system. The outer armour would be made thick enough to stop a standard round from bridging the gap. A large enough dent would do the trick, followed up by an RPG, if it was an air gap. I somehow doubt that it is. As for the rest of this thread, well, some of the ideas here are interesting, to say the least. Mis-guided might be the better description... Firstly, why does everyone think the top of a tank is the thinest armour? It isn't! Quite the opposite! The soft underbelly of an M1 has a mere 3" of armour in places (like the non-vital areas, and outside the crew compartments) while the top has far more, and blocks of DU or titanium are added if they feel it is needed, as well as reactive armour blocks. For info, the top of an M1A3 has the equivalent of 850mm of RHA to a KE projectile, and 1300mm+ vs a shaped charge. The front of the tank, which used to be toughest, has 800mm equiv. The M1A2HA (Heavy Armour) had extra DU slabs and RA, and it had 800mm equiv. on the turret, and 750mm on the front. Note that RHA stands for Rolled Homogenous Armour, and refers to high quality steel armour plate. It is used as the standard measure, since modern armour is far superior, at least 3 times better than plain steel RHA, hence these silly sounding thicknesses. Modern tanks have radios, and video cameras, and claymore mines, as well as air overpressure systems, etc. Molotov cocktails won't work against British Army Landrovers, let alone a modern tank. Nor will trying to shoot the vision slits. The machineguns all work from inside the tank, they have overpressure systems to stop NBC, the tracks are pretty solid, they can climb walls, crush houses, blow away other tanks, and any fool running up to one with a can of paint is going to be decorating the wall behind him, whether from the tank or the supportig infantry. Even without local support, the air force could napalm/cluster bomb the area, without much risk to the crew of the tank. The only way you are going to kill a tank is the blow it to hell with high explosive. Use a low explosive, and flip it, and the crew will be trapped, but then two more tanks turn out with a tank rescue vehicle, and air support, troops, etc. and even if you look like Mother Teressa, you are going to get shot if you walk outside! They right the tank, free the crew, and you get shot while trying to snipe the crew. The tank gets repainted, and it is back a week later. The crew are fine, since they were wearing the safety harnesses provided, and they have specially mounted seats to stop "gunners knee" (where the shock of a hit gets transmitted through the hull and liquidises the bones on the gunners legs below the knee). Personally, I would go with a half dozen tank rounds or artillery shells turned into mines, buried well, and remote detonated. Spaced them out well, and you blow one when it is in the middle. Then use the others to get the reinforcements. An idea I had was a rolled thin sheet of plastic explosive, which would be rolled out all the way down a thinish road, spaced for the mines, with charges designed to knock down trees (det cord) or houses (dynamite) along the sides. Wait for tank #1 to reach either mine 3, 4 or 5, depending on local procedures. Blow it up. Use the other mines to immediately strike the support units and other tanks/vehicles in the area. Now stop. Wait till people start swarming the area, getting out of vehicles, etc. then detonate the sheets of explosive, and the trees/walls come down at the same time. Actually, setting off the sheets a few seconds afterwards would be even better... That would get most of them. Then use one sniper, at a distance, to take out anyone moving. He would be expendable, though.

AsylumSeaker

December 2nd, 2003, 08:50 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Apparently a weak spot on the abrams is the turret ring where the turret meets the body. Even then you need AT weaponry. RPGs won't do it. After watching some movies of some detcord being wrapped around the trunk of a tree and detonated to blow the tree down, I wondered if you could do the same thing around the barrel of the tanks main gun.. but then you would have to climb on top of the tank to do that. Maybe if it was just sitting there you could sabotage it that way. I say kamakazee a boeing 747 into it. :p

vulture

December 2nd, 2003, 01:48 PM

Hmm. Airplanes. RC helicopter or aircraft? Seems alot easier than a RC mortar round. RC cars with shaped charges to blow off the tracks seems feasible too.

TreverSlyFox

December 2nd, 2003, 03:17 PM

Having spent, shall we say, just a little bit of time around the Militia movement this has been discussed for many years along with what the hell do you do against Attack Helos. The general consences is YOU DON'T screw with Armor or Helos, at least not on the battlefield. Unless you have High Explosives and lots of it. Otherwise you deal with Armor and Helos at their bases, refueling points and repair centers. You destroy their fuel, ammo, repair facilities and crews. The LAST thing you want to do is go up against Armor or Helos on the battlefield. The crews have to sleep, eat and shit just like anyone else and they don't spend 24/7 in their tanks. That is their weekness and that's when you use your improvised goodies to the most advantage. Don't try blowing up the tank, blow up his refuling truck and ammo dump, kill it's mechanics, waste it's crew at their base. The one weekness modern Armies have is that it takes a lot of supply and support people to maintain one combat soldier in the field. Kill the supply and it's people and you kill the Army. The Germans blew it in WWII during the Battle of the Bulge when they failed to capture the Fuel Depots, the Armor stopped moving and the attack ground to a halt. The Alies reenforced, the weather cleared and the Air assets had a field day killing stationary Armor that still had full ammo loads.

AsylumSeaker

December 2nd, 2003, 06:01 PM

Hrmm. How much weight do you think an RC chopper could carry? If you got the biggest on available.. and removed all the crap it didn't need, like landing gear and the decorations and everything.. you could rig it with a reasonable sized shaped charge couldn't you? And land it on the roof somewhere and detonate it. Wouldn't be difficult. Might need a bit of flying practise. And then you could make 5 or 6 of these RC shaped charge choppers and have 5 or 6 people attack the tank with a swarm of them. A small swarm, but still..

xyz

December 3rd, 2003, 04:19 AM

I don't think you will get a big enough SC onto a model helicopter, it is an interesting idea though. Treverslyfox, infantry can be effective against helicopters so long as they have some cover/camouflage, what do you think RPGs and Stingers are for? If you are going to bury a charge like Jack's Complete said, why not just use several hundred Kg (like 500Kg) of ANFO? Who cares if it doesn't have an armour shattering VoD, let's see that tank (and it's crew) remain funtional after being tossed 25m into the air and then coming down again (60 tons of armour, engine, and weaponry is usually not very skilled at landings :) ).

dana_m_h

December 3rd, 2003, 08:11 PM

Anyone remember this?: http://www.docsmachine.com/nonPB/mortar.html This might have a chance to penetrate armor, or at least be able to scare someone in a tank. If fired straight up it could hit a soft spot on top and/or break something. Just a thought. Oh yeah you could also cut the bowling ball in half hollow out the center slightly and then fill it with something to make it heavier or a high explosive and another substance in the middle to make it go off. Again just a thought.

Jacks Complete

December 3rd, 2003, 08:36 PM

I think www.docsmachine just got DDoS'd!! (Connection refused) It's getting like Slashdot! If, however, it is the one I think it is, those bowling balls would just shatter. The tanker would just look for someone to shoot then! However, full of a fairly high powered explosive, it should go bang. Don't think it would do much to an MBT, but against an APC or light tank, you would probably win. The problem with RC helicopters is that they are as loud as a chainsaw. So are planes. They cannot carry much weight, either. The solution? Use a large powered glider. Use the motor to get it high up, then cut the power (or design it to run hard and die) and then just steer it into your target. You could get an extra 300 mph on your explosively formed projectile with a powered dive, I bet. As for bouncing a tank onto it's roof, that will just piss them off. Sure they are stopped, until another tank (or dozer) rights them. The guys inside wear seat harnesses, as they go over rough ground with crap suspension at 30+mph and hit mines! Lets put it this way - if an armoured limo can let the driver, etc. walk away with cuts and bruises after one gets flipped by a huge mine, what chance have you got of killing a tanker? You can't starve them out, or anything, either, as they will have support, and a radio. Hell, try it. I just don't see it working. I have a cool slideshow of a T-72 vs. a Javlin anti-tank missile somewhere, I will dig it up and upload it. It shows how to deal

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter with a tank!

AsylumSeaker

December 4th, 2003, 05:28 PM

I heard from someone who seemed to know what he was talking about that some modern tanks are being given lasers which shoot down missiles before they hit the tank? (!) Can anyone verify this? Jack - perhaps a tank wouldn't be to bothered by being flipped, but once its on its back you could climb onto its belly and stick some big shaped charges on it or a pile of thermite. Provided you had a whole crowd of people hiding with machetes or something (crowds of people usualy aren't to difficult to gather in the third world countries that america always invades) to watch your back. People have mainly suggested burrying huge explosive charges of ANFO, etc. How about if you buried a huge shaped charge? More difficult to make, but surley more effective.

xyz

December 5th, 2003, 05:19 AM

A huge shape charge would be very difficult to make and much harder to correctly use than a massive amount of ANFO. Jack's Complete, I think that 500Kg of ANFO will do more than flip the tank, it will toss it 25 - 50m into the air as if it were a child's toy. It will probably also remove the tracks and any other vulnerable parts while it does this. Then comes the fun part, the landing :) .

apathyboy

December 5th, 2003, 08:17 AM

I was aimlessly wandering the net when I found mention of a new anti tank missle called LOSAT that works on KE only, no warhead. The technical specs are here (http://www.atk.com/aerospace/descriptions/tactical-propulsion/losat.htm) I don't know if all of this is workable, but some of the rocketry work on this forum has been pretty impressive. If the tank was close enough, guidance might not even be a problem, especially if you launched a couple of them. There's also a movie of the LOSAT in action at White Sand's site (http://www.wsmr-history.org/LOSAT2.mpeg) Actually, after seeing that movie again, I think there'd be a substantial minimum range for that thing to get up to 5000 fps, maybe a guidance package would be a good thing Of course, half the posters here could just make up a nice EFP charge, so I'm not sure which is easier.

stickfigure

December 5th, 2003, 11:07 AM

Recent events in Iraq should be noticed as any credible source of information on defeating an M1A1. Quote: October 31, 2003: The U.S. Army is not saying much about the "mystery projectile" that went through the side skirts and side armor of an M-1A1 tank last August 28th. Whatever it was just barely missed the tanks gunner (it went through the back of his seat and grazed part of his flak jacket) and put a pencil size hole nearly 50mm deep into the four inch thick armor on the other side of the tank. The damage may have been done by a projectile, not a shaped charge (which uses a jet of super-hot plasma to burn a hole in armor and put a quantity of plasma and molten metal inside the tank.) No known RPG would do that kind of damage. But some Western anti-tank rockets generate a different kind of plasma jet that might create the kind of damage done. A U.S. 25mm armor piercing shell (fired from the gun mounted on the M-2 Bradley armored vehicle) uses a small penetrator, but that penetrator is of depleted uranium, which burns like a flare once it is inside its target. One major unknown is the large number of portable anti-tank weapons (especially Russian and Chinese models) that have not been tested against the M-1 tank. It's not unusual for new weapons to have unpredictable effects once they are first used in combat. Until the army releases more information, if they have any, the mystery lingers. In the sort of excited langua ge seldom included in official Army documents, he said, The unit is ve ry anx ious to have this SOMETHING identified. It se ems clear that a penetrator of a yellow mo lten m etal is wha t caused the damage, bu t what weapon fires such a round and precisely what sort of round is it? The bad guys are using something unknown and the guys facing it want very much to know what it is and how they can defend themselves. While it s impossible to determine what caused the dama ge without actually examining the tank, some co nclusions can be drawn from photos that accompanied the incident report. Those photos show a pencil-size penetration hole through the tank body, but very little sign of the distinctive damage called sp alling that typically occu rs on the inside surface a fter a ho llow- o r shaped-charge warhead from an anti-tank weapon burns its way through armor. In the western countries the people have been disarmed so much that it would be near impossible to find a weapon or create one that will fully destroy or disable a MBT. In Iraq civilians were issued military weapons and trained well in advance for urban warfare so it does not supprise me that something like this has popped up. But considering how advanced the M1A1 is it doesn't suprise me that it sustainded little to no damage either. In Iraq there is a legend of a mythical beast that would come to Baghdad and destroy it, this beast could not be stopped by the hands of man. In this war M1A1's were routinely hit by direct RPG and anti-tank rockets. One tank was hit by at least 8 RPG rounds with them literally bouncing off the front of the turret. Not a single M1A1 was completely destroyed with loss of life to the crew, or in Desert Storm either. Many were disabled but they are always accompanied by backup. Infact this war had a couple of hit to the ammuntion bays which caused them to cook off, again no loss of life and in the words of the crew the blast doors "Worked as advertised". This legend came to life in the minds of the Iraqi militia men who were plagued by nightmares of the M1A1 to the point that, the US capitalized on this and startred playing recordings of tank movements broadcast from loud speakers near towns and villages the were putting up resistance. They did this nightly until the towns were either invaded or gave up. Some suggestions like detonating large amounts of charges would work, but that would only take care of a couple at most a few tanks. The US has some where around 3500 M1A1's and A2's in inventory. here overview of M1 losses in Iraq: http://www.fireandfury.com/phorum/read.php?f=4&i=839&t=839

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Flake2m

December 5th, 2003, 12:33 PM

While the M1A2 abrams tank is the most advanced MBT in use today, it is still vunerable in the same areas like other tanks. The bottom, the top and the arse. I am surprised the Iraqis didn't try to take out a tank by sticking about 10-20kg of C4/semtex under a manhole cover, wait for a tank to drive over it then BOOM. The force of the manhole cover being propelled by 10-20kg of high explosives would be enough to either disable the tank by maybe blowing off its tracks or flipping it. Or why not have a very brave person attach copper linears to the underside of the tank. If the tank was stationary, they could use a diamond tipped drill and screw on the linears, Or use a strong adhesive such as expoxy and glue them on. There is an old saying "In the battle between warhead and armor, the warhead always wins". So eventually some individual(s) is going to figure out a way to take out a M1 Abrams tank whether the US likes it or not.

Jacks Complete

December 5th, 2003, 05:06 PM

Flake2m, It doesn't matter how brave/stupid anyone is, they aren't going to win that way. You crawl under a tank, and you get smeared. The tank crews also know well enough not to drive over a manhole cover like a total newbie! Read the report above your post, which credits the lack of losses as much to the support as to the tank itself. The sad fact is, unless you are a first rate, first-world army, you aren't even going to get to slow the US army down.

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

December 8th, 2003, 04:00 PM

the russians were developing an anti-anti-tank missle system that featured a large shotgun that was to shoot the incoming round down, along with this they tried mounted flares (as most of the modern ATGM's use a flare on the rear of the missle, multiple flairs just spastify the simple computer) it would need a very well crafted and heavy home-made shaped charge to harm a modern tank in any way, i can only recommend that a mobility kill is the aim, as tank tracks don't have the same 800 mils of RHA to keep it safe ;) the turret ring is the weak-point of any tank with a turret (the israeli merkava uses HEAVY chain over the back of the turret over-hang to prematurely set an RPG off) realistically we need to think up a smooth-bore cannon (simgle shot) that might offer some hope of damaging the lighter vehicles. and for my last comment, the reason that tungsten and DU are used in ballistic penetrators would be due the the unusual property of self-sharpening (fragments broken off from the penetrator only serve to increase the length-to-cross section ratio) the action is called adiabatic shear banding. http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Amorphous-Tungsten-Alloy30jul03.htm

ossassin

December 9th, 2003, 12:08 AM

Jack, I'm confident that the US could be stopped. It wouldn't be easy, and ironically, I think that the American civilians would have the best chance. After all, we've done it before, why couldn't we do it again? It would just take a little old-fashioned American ingenuity. :) Don't get me wrong, though. I support our country in all its indeavors. Hopefully a truly tyrannical US government will be something that only future generations will have to deal with.

Jacks Complete

December 9th, 2003, 09:55 PM

I agree that the only ones that could stop the US Army would be a white, english speaking, western army. This is because the US public would baulk at seeing US troops bombing the shit out of nice folks who talk just like them. All this talk about stopping the tanks, is, of course (as backed up by recent events) a waste of time. It isn't the tanks you have to stop, it is the A10 that just strafed your house or the AC-130 that howitsered your car (and you) from three miles away, because someone thirty miles away once hear a strange noise from your yard, and thought they saw a man in a turban there once... You need to knock down the jets, as the moment the US Army even thinks there is might be an ambush, they tend to call in an airstrike, and levels a few city blocks. Then the tanks roll in, and mop up. See my post in the water cooler for some enlightening stats as to how big an army you will need... http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?s=&postid=50762#post50762

ossassin

December 10th, 2003, 01:16 AM

It was not a racist remark. I was simply stating that the Americans are the ones who tend to change the style of warfare. In order to be victorious against such an army, we would have to do that again.

Dave the Rave

February 18th, 2004, 06:12 PM

I was thinkig about JC´s statement... Surely if the airstrike came, there is no hope to the figthers, but only if the tanks can make their way out. So, the best way to not receive the little air babies is not allow the tanks to go out. Even if all the tank´s crew is dead, the air strike will not occur, because their senders can think that their boys are still alive. Back to the 50ties, the hungarians made one revolution agains the red army and their frightening T34, at the time, one of the most spetacular beasties ever made. Of course it haves some drawbacks, like the combustible tank at it´s back, where it can be set on fire by the use of molotov cocktails and such. Anyway, the hungarians hold the tanks with fake landmines, which the reds don´t disturbed by fear of set of, or splashing

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

grease or heavy oil through the floor, so the tanks can´t "grab" the track, covering the spots with paint, or even droping the eletric cables over the tank, electrocuting all it´s crew. At least, the M1 is much more an beast that the T34, but it´s still made of steel, and have the same blind spots, so, the hungarian tecnics can be used again. I don´t know, but I think that 20.000 volts, at more than 30 amps can fry anyone inside an tank, whatever NBC defenses it haves.

vulture

February 18th, 2004, 07:05 PM

Do tank gunners have a live round loaded all the time? If you'd find a way to set it off inside the turret...

Jacks Complete

February 19th, 2004, 07:22 PM

Dave the rave, I doubt you would fry the crew with electric, even in an older tank. How would the electric ever reach the crew? Surely it just goes through the steel hull?

Dave the Rave

February 20th, 2004, 10:24 AM

Vulture, they do have an live round, but it´s only become armed when leaves the barrel, just to prevent it to explode when something is stuck on the barrel. Besides, I think that, due to the high velocityes the round is fired, even if something is stuck through the barrel, the round will clear it´s way... JC, My grandfather fougth the WWII and after that he fougth on Hungary, Bulgary, Macedonia and some other minnor revolutions against the Reds, and he told me about it. First I tought that was an joke, but I found some old Times magazines and some war correspondent wrote about it. I think that, if the crew touches any metal part of the tank, that is grounded by itself, the current will flow through their bodies, the same way it will flow through someone who is above an grounded metal object touched by electricity. At my Country we have portable metal stairs, and many times I electrified myself when over the stair, just because the exposed cable touched the body of the stair.

vulture

February 20th, 2004, 12:43 PM

Vulture, they do have an live round, but it´s only become armed when leaves the barrel, just to prevent it to explode when something is stuck on the barrel. Besides, I think that, due to the high velocityes the round is fired, even if something is stuck through the barrel, the round will clear it´s way...

Sure, but a high velocity round will set off a rather oversized detonator which would then set off the round...

Dave the Rave

February 20th, 2004, 02:07 PM

Nice tougth, but which mouse will put the bell on cat´s neck ? Unless someone wait till the tank moves and then climb it´s back and put the detonator, but someone who can climb the tank can also throw some grenades inside the spots...

vulture

February 20th, 2004, 02:38 PM

I'm not entirely sure, but don't have modern tanks cameras instead of spots? Kinda defeats the purpose of state-of-the-art armor. The spots should be only for emergency use.

Jacks Complete

February 23rd, 2004, 07:49 PM

Spots => Ports, I think? Spots would be spotlights, and ports would be where to look out of.

vulture

February 24th, 2004, 06:29 AM

I (and probably Dave) was referring to the ports indeed. Sorry for the confusion.

Jacks Complete

April 14th, 2004, 08:53 AM

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur, just a note on your post from some time back... You said about using some kind of heat seeker or laser tracking system for hitting moving targets, with reference to sunchaser rockets. The military took years to work out how to avoid the expensive prototype missiles taking off after the sun. I can, therefore, tell you one of the ways. If you are using a laser, you want to modulate it, in the same way as an infrared remote control. By doing this, preferably with a non-repeating code (at least over the seconds of the flight time) and have your missile look only towards that, then you will have no problems with sun chasing. However, most modern tanks now have a set of sensors on them which tell the crew when some idiot is targetting them with a laser beam, as well as the direction he is in. Also, since modern tanks have both NIR and thermal imaging equipment, they can both see the beam path (as they are nearly on the axis of the beam, and so see a lot more scattering) and probably you too, in spite of your cammo gear.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

If you are going to do it, do it remotely! If you are going to do it safely, do it (at least) 2 steps removed from your fragile ass! It might be worth starting a thread on heat and guided rocket systems. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Simple handgrenade designs Log in

View Full Version : Simple handgrenade designs Hundminen

January 13th, 2002, 05:02 AM

Here are two simple handgrenade designs that I know of that are pretty simple mechanically and can be as "safe" to handle as common military types. The first type uses a preccussion ignitor: This consists of a tube with the blastcap on bottom,then fuze/powder train then topped with a shotgun pimer with small bb epoxied in the center(bb must be covered with epoxy completely. the "holder" for this tube is threaded externally to except the screw on safety cap. To use=unscrew safety cap/cover, bang the head(epoxy blob) on something hardand dispose of. this design is handy for highly concealable small handgrenades/or large destructive ones. Second design is the "electric grenade" This is simply an electric blasting cap with fuze train in a single tube with the lead wires secured to two screws in the top of the grenade body. To use this grenade,the operator has a nine-volt battery taped to a string/para-cord round his neck to ignite the grenade he touches the lead screws on the battery posts and disposes. I did a search for grenade types and didn't find these types so I figured I'd share them,just my 2 cents.

BoB-

January 13th, 2002, 05:55 AM

"electric blasting cap with fuze train" I think you meant e-match, or electric ignitor.

Noct

January 13th, 2002, 01:13 PM

I am sure this has been mentioned before, but it seems about as simple as it gets.... co2 cartridge (empty) filled w/ powdered explosive, fuse at the end. Seven or so wrapped together parallel to one another, with the fuses tied together (braided/taped/whatever), then when one blows the rest will probably disperse, each going off soon after. This is, of course, only for anti-personnel purposes.

ENGINEERKILLER

January 13th, 2002, 01:53 PM

Most common modern handgrenades fuzes do not begin arming until they are in flight .Spoon flies off sending the stryker home to detonater .I know there are exceptions to this like simulaters and anti-tank grenades .To me there is something nerve racking about holding a functioning grenade in my hand . From experience I can say that CO2 idea is not very effeicent when the first one goes it will snuff out alot of the other fuzes before it scatters them. [ January 13, 2002: Message edited by: ENGINEERKILLER ]

Madog555

January 13th, 2002, 02:56 PM

Noct, that is called a crater maker and they are very common i think the stick greanades (WWII german ones) dont have a lever thing on them. i know that they do have greanades that go instantly when the lever goes off. these are for boby traps. i would hate to mistake one of these for a normal greanade. i have a deactivated pineaple greanade and i will upload a pic of it if any of you are interesed.

Hundminen

January 13th, 2002, 03:24 PM

my point is that these designs are quite simple for resistance fighters to mannufacture in quantity.The grenade greatly compliments the handgun and boltaction rifle which is usually the only weapons one can musterup in times of emergency.As far as holding burning/armed grenade is concerned: with these designs the fuze would be a couple seconds longer than usual to ensure ignition. These are both proven designs that have shown up in the balkans. Of course mouse trap designs are Ideal, but these are "make-doable". The german potato-masher and egg grenade are friction ignited and are "burning" while in the opertors hand.

ENGINEERKILLER

January 13th, 2002, 03:31 PM

I'm talking about grenades made within the last twenty years or so most every foreign country has made some sort of friction pull pull grenade the vietcong made about 10 diffrent versions .If i ever figure out how to upload pictures I'got 2 inert ones at my house and alot of other diffrent ones. The most complex grenade I have ever seen is the area denial anti pursuit used by SF.It has a 25 second delay then it ejects 12 hair fine trip wires that only require 7-8oz of pressure to set them off .It also utilizes a frag ball with a liquid propellant so no matter how it lands the propellant is always at the bottom .

CyclonitePyro

January 13th, 2002, 05:00 PM

You can find, or at least in America, grenade bodies almost anywhere, pinapple, baseball or lemon style. You can also purchase the screw on head, with the spoon and internals. Someone I know drilled out the place where the striker hits to fit a .30 caliber shell, just the brass and primer, so you push the shell down the hole, pull back the striker, and put on the spoon and insert the safety pin. When you pull the pin and let go of the spoon, the stiker flies up and strikes the primer and sends an explosion out the shell and out the bottom of the grenade body. All the grenade bodies I've seen for sale have holes in the bottum which could be welded on. This grenade would only be used for a booby trap, I'm sure you could modify it to ignite a fuse.

Madog555

January 13th, 2002, 07:27 PM

engineerkiller, i know i was just giveing an example. and that trip wire one sound awsome. must be realy scarry if your the guy on the other side :eek:

Anthony

January 13th, 2002, 08:07 PM

The problem with internal fuse trains is that if you don't make them right (everytime!), there is a danger of the flame front flashing through like quickmatch.

Madog555

January 13th, 2002, 09:54 PM

Here is a diagram of a small "pen greanade" like i used to make. i used to use a comercial firecracker and a cheap bic pen (the white kind) the striker is folded over the side of the side of the pen and taped in place. when you want to initiate it u just push in the match that sticks out the back. the tape protects the rest of the fuse from the fire so just the tip gets lit. if it wasn't there the whole fuse would light at once when the match is pushed. in result giveing you no delay. of course this can be used on bigger devices but u might need something like a KNO3/sugar to burn hot and long enough to light visco. here

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter <small>[ March 12, 2002, 04:43 PM: Message edited by: Madog555 ]

nbk2000

January 14th, 2002, 01:24 AM

What Engineerkiller described is called a PDM which stands for Persuit Denial Munition. It's a converted ADAM mine, normally used in artillery laid mining operations. The trip wires shoot out for several yards in each directions and any pressure causes the mine to jump up about 3-5' before exploding. Very effective. But it's being slated to be pulled from the arsenal because of the Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty. SOF is fighting to keep it, naturally. I've been raking my brain to figure out how to build a work-a-like. The Toe Popper MK I is based on a 10 year old idea I've had, and is the closest thing I've been able to come up with yet. Pressure sensitive tripwires, all-ways propellant charges, millisecon accurate fuzes, etc. Too complicated to duplicate within reason. I've thought of using PIR, Hall-effect magnetic, acoustic, seismic, and various others, but they all have the flaw of being liable to spontaneous initiation under the wrong enviromental conditions. It has to be something that wouldn't be effected, like a tripwire. Making a jumping mine is easy. Getting it to go off ONLY when it should, and EVERY time it should is the hard part. Any ideas?

BoB-

January 14th, 2002, 03:20 AM

Tripwires are a great idea for jumping mines, I was thinking of something really simple, like a party popper glued into the top of a Det cap. Only, party poppers are really sensitive, and the uncoiling of the wire might cause it to go off too soon, a few blobs of Whiteglue could keep it in place.

PYRO500

January 14th, 2002, 09:44 PM

An idea for mines I've had is making ones with built in metal detectors, anyonesteps on them, they go off, anyone looks for it with a metal detector/mine probe they go off, of cousse you want to adjust it so the wiring dosen't set it off.

ENGINEERKILLER

January 14th, 2002, 10:18 PM

NBK are you talking bounding mines like the valmara*or m2 series .Or an actual jumping mine like the one in your briefcase? I,am not trying to be a smartass pyro500,but it is not exactly like people like me go probing for mines with our carkeys in our pockets and our K-mart closehanger mine probes .All military style mine detectors are made out of plastic an use carbon fiber wires in the probe head.and we use a magnetrometers on each other before we start searching. I don't know if anyone cares about it or not but the pdm only has a 24 hour life span then it self destructs.This a big issue for the U.S. when it comes to land mines.As long a mine will self neutrilez it will stay as part of our war stock indefinatley . [ January 14, 2002: Message edited by: ENGINEERKILLER ]

Cricket

March 13th, 2002, 06:12 PM

The main problem I have with tring to make grenades is that I wouldbe scared that when the primer was hit, it would be too much for the primary at the bottom and make it explode really fast. Maybe I just don't completely understand them though.

Madog555

March 13th, 2002, 06:34 PM

hey, look here if you wana see a very simple greanade ignition. the firecrtacker can be replaced with a piece of visco that leads to a cap. DO NOT LEAVE THE MATCH IN IT WHILE HANDLEING IT, I HAD ONE SPONTAINIOUSLY IGNITE WHEN THE MATCH WAS MOVED. it is safe as long as the match is only put in when you are gonna throw it. http://www.geocities.com/madog555/pengreanade.jpg you might need to copy and past the link

Ctrl_C

March 13th, 2002, 06:45 PM

how are these tripwires anchored? by weight? I have this incredibly complicated idea of it throwing little projectile things that swing from the line in a parabolic arch to gain enough speed to plant themselves in the ground in a perfect 12-agon (whats a 12 sides figure called?) and expand little barbs underground to keep them in the ground tightly. Also, how do they jump? Is it a mechanical spring device or another explosive?

ENGINEERKILLER

March 13th, 2002, 10:03 PM

The tripwires which are actualy more like thread stay connected to the spools that they are wound off of. The amount pressure is so slight all (8oz)a person would have to do is catch it with their feet. every bounding mine that I am aware of uses a small explosive charge to propel it upwards.The one one the pdm is liquid so no matter how the grenade lands the frag ball always floats on the propellant.

nbk2000

March 14th, 2002, 01:32 AM

The simplist "bounding" mine doesn't even bound. It sits on top of a stake. It's the fact that it's above the ground when it explodes that makes bounding mines so lethal, because there's no ground to absorb the fragments. The military style use fraction of a second pyrotechnic delays, or pull cords, to set the mine off just above the ground when it's fired. But I think it'd be much easy to improvise one by using enough powder to launch the mine high into the air, so it'll fall down and explode in mid-air several seconds later. This gives you enough time to use accurately measured lengths of visco fuse. It doesn't really matter if the mine explodes 1 foot, or 10 feet, above the ground, as long as you've made it well. I'm thinking a can lined with steel shot, filled with HE, capped with a cloth streamer with the fuse sticking out into a couple of grams of BP to propell it out the slightly larger can into which it's sealed. Any number of sensors launch it. It'd be interesting to build a mine that would lean towards its target to lauch the kill mechanism (oops, starting to slip into MIL-SPEAK ) towards the target. I'm envisioning a KM (Kill Mechanism AKA the bomb) in a stubby mortar, mounted on a pivot inside of a big plastic bowl (think tupperware) buried in the ground. The mine is held upright by four "sticks" made of flashpaper or such. When the mine is activated, the "stick" most directly pointing towards the victim is ignited. This blows the lid off the mine, and causes the mine mortar to fall free towards that side. It then fires the shell.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter It would then explode a short distance away in a directional manner, similar to canister shot, rather than omnidirectional like an artillery shell. The fragments than cover a wide elliptical shaped area, probably hitting the target. EK, did you ever get those pictures of the insides of the bomblets?

RTC

March 14th, 2002, 01:51 AM

I've got a video that goes over these, (hey, I've got a video that covers everything!) and it's Andy McNabb's Ultimate Warrior. I'm uploading it to a shite host with file limits of 900kb, so I've uploading all 92 files (..sigh) to a web site and shall reply here with the link (or links) so you can download it.

RTC

March 14th, 2002, 02:30 AM

Ok, so here we go: http://theforum.has.it :) Enjoy!

DBSP

March 14th, 2002, 02:12 PM

Maby it's just my computer but I can't acces that page. There's no doubt that a mine above ground is more effective against the target than a normal mine. This is perhaps not what you're discussing but since some ideas has gotten into adding shrapnell to the charge I might aswell get my idea out here. If you emagine a cable wind, and then think of the exact thing but in metall. The explosive is placed in the center, were there normally isn't anything but the bottom wich the cable is rolled up against. Then you put a thin layer of plastic or similar oround the outside, and then fill the space where the cable is supposed to be with bbs or similar. If you don't uderstand what I mean you could think of a tincan with a metall disc over the top and under the bottom. This design would effectivly disperse the fragments in a cirkel arround the charge and steer the shrapnell in the right direction. It would be very similar to a claymore but it would have a 360 degree angle of dispersial. If it would be about the size of a tincan and filled with abut 250-300g of explosive and the shrapnell being large ballbering steel balls, it would be...well you can think of what it could do.

RTC

March 14th, 2002, 03:21 PM

Sorry about that, try it now: http://theforum.has.it

Mr Cool

March 15th, 2002, 03:53 PM

NBK: about your "leaning mine" - I read in a book (sorry, I can't be any more precise than that! It was a long time ago...) that some people used to protect their land from poachers using swivelling guns. The gun had many tripwires in different directions, and when one was pulled by someone walking into it, it swung the gun round to point in that direction, and then fired it. So if you can find something describing that device, it could probably be easily copied if you wanted to make one. Substitute a pull ignitor and detonator for the trigger, and an EFP for the gun and you'd have a nasty bit of kit...

drstrangelove

March 15th, 2002, 04:10 PM

Heres what I use for grenade bodies,you will have seen these before and they are availible anywhere.You know those bamboo sticks which hold a black container with fuel and a wick used for outdoor parties for light and or insect repelant,these containers are excellent for grenades as they come in various sizes and the lids screw on and off so inserting the cap only takes a second or 2.

VasiaPupkin

March 15th, 2002, 06:10 PM

Sorry for my English. 'My homemade fragmentation handgrenade' I made a hole in ball for table tennis. Put aluminized plastic HE into ball, then insert a fuse. Fuse was a "match for hunters" inserted (with glue) into 4 mm short plastic tube with primer. Plastic tube is a pivot from gelly pen. This matches has also 4-5 mm diameter and can burn even in water. When detonator is inserted. I covered ball with 4 layers of small nuts (2.5-3mm diamter of hole). Binder for nuts was a liquid silicone latex (after polimerisation cover is a elastic rubber with a nut filler). Be sure other liquid rubber materiails is possible. Instead of nuts you can use small metal balls or wire pieces. I used Al-plastic HE for brizance redusing and overall power increasing otherwise the nuts from first layer has a very large deformation level. Overall time waiting ~6sec. I put door from old fridge on ~5-6m distance. There was a few holes through the door. But I think its a very dangerous and needs to use this thing from shelter. Al - wire elements are also possible to increase safety. Al - elements has a large kinetic energy on short distance but it decreases very quickly I found interesting fuse construction with inertia element- http://faq.guns.ru/rg.html This fuse significantly safe when grenade explodes from shock.

ENGINEERKILLER

March 16th, 2002, 12:25 AM

NBK I have the submunition that we were talking about I still have to take it apart we will see how that goes . I won't be able to get to it till tuesday though. I did some research on the pdm and it does infact use a breakwire on the triplines .

nbk2000

March 16th, 2002, 12:46 AM

AHHH....so I was right about the breakwire. That makes more sense than a tripwire given how it has to be functional on any terrain that SOF may operate in. Since it'd be difficult to depend on the wire catching on anything that could provide enough resistance for the traditional style of tripwire. I've been looking at magnetic infulence fuzing for the IPDM using Hall effect sensors. It's more expensive, but since an IPDM would be a highly specialized piece of equipment that a person would only make a few of, cost isn't much of an issue but performance is. Especially since a breakwire system is probably beyond the manufacturing capability of the average person. For those not in the know, the IPDM ( Improvised Pursuit Denial Munition) is a device that you throw behind into the path of pursuing enemy. They get close enough to it, the magnetic sensor detects the metal that everyone has on their body (keys, weapon, whatever), it jumps up and explodes in midair, spraying the pursuers with shrapnel, thus ending the chase. You can figure out the applications from there. :D A modification that would be useful would be replaceable warheads. Instead of just a lethal frag ball, you could have a flash-bang, or smoke, or aerosol tear gas. This would allow flexibility in the mission.

RTC

March 16th, 2002, 03:17 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I've had to shift the split video files as I've just spent the last 2days resetting/reconfigging my CMOS/BIOS as it appear's someone that had seen the link to my http server on here has had a go at changing the PID file. "[Sat Mar 16 07:20:53 2002] [warn] pid file c:/program files/apache group/apache/ logs/httpd.pid overwritten -- Unclean shutdown of previous Apache run? Apache/1.3.23 (Win32) running..." Needless to say I have the offending IP, (gotta love my firewall even when it's not running it logs all inbound/outbound IP/TCP activitys. I have submitted it to the correct people, and as of now the video files are on my ftp, if I have time I will upload them to _C's ftp as well. Also NBK by SOF you mean Soldier Of Fortune?

Energy84

March 16th, 2002, 04:15 AM

I'm assuming the following: SF - Special Forces SOF - Special Operatives/Operations Forces I think that's what they mean. Please correct me if I'm wrong. (You are correct on both counts. Though SOF is "Special Operations Forces". NBK2000) <small>[ March 16, 2002, 06:55 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Machiavelli

March 16th, 2002, 01:59 PM

RTC, the files are on _C's ftp now. Since I didn't remember your name anymore there's no file describing the source with them but apart from that it's the original files from your page.

RTC

March 17th, 2002, 12:15 AM

Ok, thanks for uploading them. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> "Battle Plate" Log in

View Full Version : "Battle Plate" simply RED

S e p t e m b e r 1 5th, 2002, 06:43 PM

I saw today some comandos training throwing battle stars, or ba ttle plates. http:// www.1stopselfdefensesecuritystore.com /stars.htm How i never before thought of that! This is cheap, perfectly hided, avalable, non lawenforced and extremely harmful to people or anim als! It is easily m a d e i n h o m e, you can m ake it heavy for m ore effect. For m ore effect it will be good to add stoppers, like in fishhooks! I'm g o n n a m a k e d o z e n s t o d a y . . .

Zyklon_B

S e p t e m b e r 1 5th, 2002, 06:52 PM

Pretty cheap to buy too then make. But it seem s like quite a bit of practice learning how to throw these with any real accuracy. In the hands of a well trained person I would think these to be quite effective weapons.

Harry

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 10:35 AM

Non-lawenforced? OK, gramm ar aside, I know personally of one jurisdiction where they are banned for carry. You get caught, you going to be Sharif's hunny fo'while . Right h ere in the Land o f L a k e s , M i n n e s o t a . Y e s , c h e a p t o m a k e , c h e a p t o b u y , a f e w im p o v e m ents would be good. Hey, if they're not regulated in your neighborhood, go ahead and use. Practice on the squirrels in your back yard. Even the surplus stores don't do stars around here. Swo rd canes, nunchaka, pen knives le ad knuckles, yes. Stars no. I've tried the bought o nes (mail order com p a n i e s d o n ' t a s k m a n y q u e s t i o n s ) , c r a p . M a k e ' e m . U s e g o o d s t e el. Be a craftsman about it. Make your stars the way you make a rocket display--do it right. Harry

nbk2000

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 02:14 PM

R O K ( R e p u b l i c O f Korea) com m a n d o s u s e s t a r s m ade from 5 railroad spikes weld ed butts together. Thin gs will im p a l e a t r e e a t 2 0 f e e t a c o u p l e i n c h e s d e e p . And we ARE talking about thro wing stars here (AKA Ninja Death Doo-dads). :rolleyes: :p W aste of tim e. They're not go ing to kill a person, only piss them off.

Asger

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 05:40 PM

...Unless you coat the edges with cyanide or the indian poison curare or some other effective poison. Well clothes m ight scrape m ost of the chemical off but that could probably be taken care of by drilling sm a l l h o l e s c l o s e t o t h e e d g e s t o a c o m m o d a t e t h e poison. T h e K G B s u c c e e d e d i n a s a s s i n a t i o n s u s i n g v e r y s m all quantities of ricin.

zaibatsu

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 05:51 PM

True, but ricin isn't effective imm ediately, I think it causes death days later. Plus, I wouldn't want to be handling or even k e e p i n g a n e x t r e m ely sharp piece of metal coated in poison on my person. At be st the small stars would be a distraction, a very effective one if you hit in the face :)

probity

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 06:04 PM

Battle plates? haha. The ninja s did coat the edges of th eir shuriken with cyanide, they also used to crush apple seeds and place them in their victim 's dinner. The seeds have a cyanogenic glycoside which turns into cyanide when digested.

Jhonbus

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 07:39 PM

Just a note on the topic of ricin... There may soon be a vaccine against it. (New Scientist 1 4 s e p 2 0 0 2 p 2 2 ) The article describes it better than I co u l d , s o t a k e a l o o k f o r y o u r s e l v e s . Shield against assa ssin's poison Edit: goddam n, I bug ger up every single post in some way or another! <sm a l l > [ S e p t e m b e r 1 6 , 2 0 0 2 , 0 6 : 4 0 P M : M e s s a g e e d i t e d b y : J h o n b u s ] < / s m all>

chemwarrior

S e p t e m b e r 1 6th, 2002, 09:47 PM

T h o s e b a s t a r d w e a p o n s a r e e x t r e m ly usefull. Not only a re the legal m ost places, but are small, easily carried, and you can learn to throw them really well in less than a day. (I know because I did.) C oating them in a posion such as cyanide i s a g o o d idea , but I wouldnt advise it. You do tend to get little cuts on your fingers from prolonged use of them .

Asger

S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2002, 04:14 AM

W e l l C h e m warrior. Sounds gre at that it does not take m ore train ing. Now if you have becom e e x p e rienced throwing them m aybe the next step for you is to practice throwing them wearing gloves. Both to elim inate fingerprints and to protect you from eventual poisons. Then you have that skill too. Just a thought. Besides I have had an idea for a throwing tool for these battlestars. A little like som e, I think australian, in dians use to throw

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

extra power into their spears. I haven't recearched it yet (eg. google) as it is just a 'low state' idea for me (curiosity). It would be something like a stick perhaps 40 cm long on wich the star can be m o u n t e d o n a l o c k i n g a r r a n g e m e n t . T h e l o c k c a n t h e n relase the star from a trigger placed in the other end where you handle it. With a little practice you will activate the trigger and release the star when the opposite end of the stick, carring the star is at its m a x i m u m s p e e d a p p . 1 m a b o v e y o u r h e a d ( o n e armlength + one stick length.) I think that could hit really hard - doing more penetration. N B : P e r h a p s t h e s t i c k c o u l d e v e n h a v e s o m e m echanism providing the star with som e spin to stabilize it du ring flight. <sm all>[ September 17, 2002, 03:38 AM: Message edited by: Asger ]

nbk2000

S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2002, 09:13 AM

You're talking about an Atlatl thrower. http://www.atlatl.com /m echanics.htm l That'd be an interesting way to throw a star and, if it worked, would GR EATLY increase the injury po tential since I don't know too m a n y p e o p l e o u t s i d e o f m a j o r l e a g u e b a s e ball who can throw objects at over 100MPH.

A-BOMB

S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2002, 09:48 AM

Or m a y b e s o m e t y p e o f C o 2 p o w e r e d l a u n c h e r l i k e t h o s e o n e s t h a t s h o o t t h o s e f o a m rubber discs, and you could even add spin to it this way, and any shot to the neck or face wou ld probably be fatal. And NBK what you said about the railroad stake stars rem i n d e d m e a b o u t a r a ther dum b i s h m o vie called "Ghosts of Mars" where the posseced m in ers where chopping that space cops to bits with what lo oked like circular saw blades.

Arkangel

S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2002, 10:46 AM

woom ·er·a, also wom·er·a n. A hooked wooden stick used by Aboriginal peoples of Australia for hurling a spear or dart. [Dharuk wam ara.]

Jhonbus

S e p t e m b e r 1 7th, 2002, 01:02 PM

That's right, the Australian Aboriginal name for the device is a W oomera, the Aztecs called it an Atlatl. Must be a go od idea if two cultures separated by thousands of miles o f antarctica both com e up with it. T h e s o u t h a m e r i c a n s a l s o r e - a d o p t e d t h i s i d e a t o p r o t e c t t h e m s e l f f r o m spanish invaders - it gave their spears a great armour-piercing capability. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> tyvek landmines? Log in

View Full Version : tyvek landmines? Hundminen

January 13th , 2002, 05:12 AM

Has anybody fanticized about testing these? W ould they hold out in the rain/nasty weather I wunder?Very sim ple,handy.

nbk2000

January 13th , 2002, 06:15 AM

2 posts to your credit, and both of them new to pics! :rolleyes: This is a Newbie NO-NO! I'll leave the two topics open since they're innocuous en ough, but no more new topics till you've got a few dozen replies to other peoples existing topics to your credit. As to the question, I've used Tyvek for other things, and it'll keep out water easily. That IS what it's design ed for. Vapor p a s s e s t h r o u gh, but liquids don't. I'm a s s u m ing you're referring to the design in m y PDF?

Hundminen

January 13th , 2 0 0 2 , 0 4 : 0 3 P M

Yes, in your pdf. I feel this de sign to be quite promissing. I don't wish to change the subject but I have a question to ask you: I n " R a g n a r s b i g b o o k " I noticed the claymore he describes has the goods mounted in the concave of the pvc and not on the convex which is funny to say the least. Anyway, say one were to store those m ines for a while in pvc tub es, would it be safe to sim ply drown the m i n e s i n d e s e n s i t i z e r ?

nbk2000

January 14th , 2002, 12:09 AM

That's is the way they were intended to be stored, wet. I think the reason ragner used the explosive on the inside of the curve, rather than the outside, is because being inside the curve would protect the baggie with the ANNM from punctures. But since we know how to m a k e s o l i d e x p l o s i v e s h e r e , t h e r e ' s n o r e a s o n f o r d o i n g s o . I also noticed in ragners book that he didn't describe any terminal results of his "claymores", just that they m a d e a l o u d e x p l o s i o n . W ell who gives a fuck about how lou d it is! W e want to know h ow m any penetra tors m ade it within the 6' kill zone, what density, how mu ch tissue it penetrated, etc. I p o s t e d m y idea for a m ore "conventional" m ine design on the FTP (Toe Popper MK I). I've cast wax blanks for testing the self-righting and stacking. I'll have to wait till I get a drem el to carve a working wood model. T h i s o n e h a s t h e a d v a n t a g e o f being a reusable design that can b e s a f e l y s t o r e d a n d h a n dled, and im m e d iately arm s. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Automatic or semi auto Gas rifle Log in

View Full Version : Automatic or semi auto Gas rifle Boob Raider

September 16th, 2002, 12:40 AM

A recent trip to homedepot sparked an idea ..... A tank of methyl acetylene and O2, along with a sort of a CO2 pistol design with a spark plug with a barrel. Do you get the picture. What I mean is to have a CO2 pistol or rifle design and instead of CO2, an O2 balanced mix of methly acetylene and O2 is compressed by the cylinder's pressure and ignited by the spark plug or something similar. No need to buy ammo ... one could probably cast slugs at home and buy gas at any hardware store. And modifing the rifle to different configuirations shouldnt be difficult, like for a sniper rifle increase the size of the pressure chamber and barrel calliber to .22 cal. So what do you think guys ?

A-BOMB

September 16th, 2002, 12:47 AM

Look around at yard sales, because I remember someone was making .35cal carbide powered rifles. My dad had one put gave rid of it because he couldn't find any carbide.

Eliteforum

September 16th, 2002, 01:29 AM

It's possible to make one, the design would be almost simular if not identical to a spudgun. The only differance would be it has a rifle stock, and the sheer size of such I thing..

Boob Raider

September 16th, 2002, 02:19 AM

Fuel is not a problem ... methyl acetylene is available in 400 gm cylinders and the O2 in 40 gm cylinders same size though. They are about 12" long, so I am thinking they would make the rear stock (butt), but the problem I am comming accross is the clip feed as I can't quite picture the slug entering the barrel without a leak. :( . Also would the barrel of an air rifle work as I can't get my hands on anyother barrels ..... Its Canada ... I can't even possess (sp?) an air soft with a color marking on the tip of the barrel. Pathetic Canadian laws. :mad:

zaibatsu

September 16th, 2002, 03:42 AM

I think the Germans in WW2 looked at using acetylene-oxygen mixes in mortors. Didn't come to much, as they couldnt find a way to regulate it effectively, which shouldn't be too much of a problem nowadays. But, a sniper rifle? How are you going to make sure you use exactly the same proportions, amount, etc each time, to end up with a good enough consistency? Plus, if you're using an unrifled barrel, I'd say just use BP, its not that expensive in bulk and it would make it more portable.

Boob Raider

September 16th, 2002, 10:06 AM

I can get a rifled pellet gun barrel. What I meant was I can't get the one in which live rounds are fired ...... for that I need a licence and that would cost me about 400$ CD. As fas as the consistancy goes ... I an not taking off more than 10 shots for sniper applications per tank or maybe less depending on the O2 consumed ... I haven't worked it out yet. Also there would be a larger pressure chamber for the mix for extra power .... whose volume I would have to calculate to keep the slug sub-sonic. Anyone know how much energy is transfered to the slug in a revolver as semis and autos absorb a bit of the energy in reloading (I am not too sure if that makes a difference in the muzzle velocity).

Energy84

September 16th, 2002, 09:43 PM

Be careful if you're going to be compressing oxy-actylene mixes together. I've heard that if it is compressed too much (more than 15psi) that it can actually detonate on its own.

Anthony

September 16th, 2002, 10:57 PM

I remember reading and article in an airgun magazine about this guy, who amongst other things, had knocked together an oxy-acetylene powered gun. It was either .22 or .30 and would put a slug through 2" wooden boards at either 100 or 200yds. zaibatsu's point was that without very precise regulation, you will not be able to ensure a consistant power output shot to shot. Which makes the gun inaccurate as the trajectory of the projectile will alter if it's muzzle velocity is changed. It certainly wouldn't be a sniping tool, but then not many improvised guns are. I don't think a CO2 gun would work too well as you don't have a combustion chamber. What might be better would be to take a standard spring gun, remove the spring and piston, block off the end of the compression chamber and install inlets for your oxygen and acetylene, as well as installing a spark plug. Projectile loading would be straight into the breach as normal, no leaks or other problems there. The larger the calibre of the gun the better, as you'll likely impart more energy to the projectile, as it's heavier and has a larger surface area for the pressure to push against. A switch to fire the spark plug would be installed in the trigger guard so that the existing trigger blade pushes against it, or ditch the existing trigger and just push the swicth/button directly with your finger. You'd have to really clean out the gun as the grease/oil in a high oxygen environment might cause an accidental firing.

Boob Raider

September 17th, 2002, 12:50 AM

Would compressing the fuel air mix (like in an internal combustion engine) increase power worth taking the pains (I think it will get too complicated with a piston or are there any other methods) ? Also how much of the energy is transfered to the slug (in %) so I can keep the slugs sub-sonic. The reason I prefered .22 cal is that the pierce class II armour quite easily and also a compressed air rifle (the single shot spring ones) barrel would be easy to acquire.

Eliteforum

September 17th, 2002, 05:00 AM

Perpahs you could rig up something like: I don't know how you would connect it to the trigger mech though..

xoo1246

September 17th, 2002, 05:24 AM

Military has been working on gas/oxygen propellants too, it's an advanced topic, it's not as easy as calculation grain burn speed etc. When you test this, take security measures, many accidents has happen with acetylene. Especially dry gas.

A-BOMB

September 17th, 2002, 10:54 AM

If you are doing this I just saw a set of 5 electrical gas regulator/valves on e-bay yesterday for 12$. So If you unite them with a a couple 555's and a few other componets you can get the exact same amounts of gas each time you fire. I also saw a circuit diagram for a gas regulator circuit on a spudgun site I can't remember it right now but I'll find it and post the link later.

zaibatsu

September 17th, 2002, 01:23 PM

I wouldn't advise compression with oxy/acetylene mixes if you value your life, I think Acetylene doesn't like pressure too much . Check this page for a diagram of the regulator a PCP uses to ensure consistent results http://www.airguns.net/reviews/regulators.html It would have to be set up in a slightly different way, IE you charge the chamber first using the regulator and then fire.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Boob Raider

September 17th, 2002, 01:36 PM

I was going to use needle valves for that porpose and a 2 ball valves to open gas flow. If I lead the tubes a little into the middle of the combustion chamber rather than keeping them to the walls of the chamber ..... I am hoping it will reduce the back pressure on the non-return valves guarding the pressure/combustion chamber upon ignition so they will last many more shots. :p So to keep it sub-sonic I have to keep experimenting with it. Ooo I can't wait to get the damn chamber turned on a lathe and get the barrel .... I've got the valves, tubing, fuel etc :D . Oh don't have any slugs though. Does anyone know how to cast FJP's at home with lead and copper sheet or its just not worth it. Thanx for all the input though guys

Anthony

September 17th, 2002, 02:46 PM

Compression would help, but I can't say how much of a boost it would give. There may be a simpler way of converting a spring gun *and* having compression. You basically leave the gun as-is with the exception of someway to inject the oxygen and acetylene into the compression chmaber. So you cock the gun, load your projectile, inject the gas and fire the gun as would normally. The stock trigger releases the piston, the spring drives it forwards, compresses the gas mix whilst rapidly heating it to autoignition point - compression ignition, just like in a diesel engine. Recoil may be pretty fierce and the spring/piston may be damaged after prolonged use. On the upside, the recoil will likely drive the piston back far enough for the sear to engage, saving you from having to manually cock it for the next shot.

MrSamosa

September 17th, 2002, 04:01 PM

Am I the only one who sees something wrong with using Oxy/Acetylene?? Look- that stuff burns hot, that's why it is used in welding. WHY do you want to use that in a handheld spudgun type device? First of all, you risk barrel overheating if you fire more than 2 rounds per minute. This barrel overheating could lead to structural failure in different parts of the gun, most likely at the joints. Why not just use the Butane/Propane/Oxygen mix? That is quite powerful, and doesn't burn nearly as hot as Oxy-Acetylene. If I were you, I would work on maximizing the efficiency of the more common propellants rather than messing with some new, hot propellant. One interesting idea I saw came from the Nazis' MG-42 Machine Gun. Notice at the muzzle there is a nozzle, like on a rocket. Why not try to employ that on your gun? This could have been mentioned before in other threads, but I don't remember reading it. If you INSIST on using Oxy-Acetylene, try to employ some sort of cooling system on the barrel.

Anthony

September 17th, 2002, 08:26 PM

I doubt that overheating would be a real problem, the ROF isn't exactly going to be high. I don't think you'd be too succesful casting homemade projectiles, unless you could get hold of a commercial mould, or maybe a swaging kit, then you could do FMJs. Heavy air rifle pellets would make an idea seal, but don't count on them staying subsonic. .22LR bullets would work if you can get them. 5.56mm, particularly FMJs would probably be a bit too heavy/tough.

Boob Raider

September 18th, 2002, 12:46 AM

Sam like Anthony says overheating is not a problem as the gun will be firing bursts, whereas the torch uses a continious jet. Its like gunpowder firing rounds does heat the barrel but not as much as a pile of gunpower deflagerating. Actually majority of the barrel heating comes from the projectile friction with the barrel. Propane and butane don't pack somuch energy compared to acetylene. I think it due to the tripple bond. If you have ever used an oxy-C2H2 torch, you definately would have heard a sharp, loud sound when turning off the torch, whereas you will never experience that in an oxy-propane torch. Thats one of my reasons. Thanx for your input though, you too Anthony ... It been helpful. Anthony the air rifle spring compressing the gas idea is really tough on the piston rod but not that much on the spring. I used to fire AP powered slugs ... the forced air was enough to detonate the AP and the slug (made solid with solder) would have enough power to make about an inch deep creater in a brick at 10 mts. The recoil wouldn't cock the spring but would ram the piston shaft hard enough to make it bend after about a 20 shots. I used less than 300 mg if AP.

MrSamosa

September 18th, 2002, 04:26 AM

I remember reading off of some spudgun website, I don't remember which one it was, that if you are even spraying hairspray down the barrel for each shot that you risk the barrel overheating and falling apart at the joints if you try firing more than 4 or 5 rounds per minute. They suggested not trying more than 3 rounds/min. We will have to see with your acetylene gas and the reload times for it. Still, don't try being too adventurous. And sorry for my bad terminology when it comes to firearms...but could you clarify yourself when you say "bullets" ? Are you referring to the bullet itself, or the bullet along with the casing + gunpowder? Because if you are referring to the casing + gunpowder as well, then overheating the gun risks "barrel cookoff", i.e. the ammunition going off prematurely.

Boob Raider

September 18th, 2002, 03:06 PM

Sam, I almost always use the word slug or projectile. I think what Anthony meant, was slugs too as I already have the propellant(shouldn't this be called projectant for projectile ??) the O2/C2H2 (actually the fuel I'll be using is CH3-CHCH2, methyl acetylene, propyene). Hey Anthony, does the suffix LR mean light rifle ? LR = Long Rifle (by Zaibatsu) methyl acetylene is actually CH3-CCH - kingspaz <small>[ September 18, 2002, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]

parabolic

September 18th, 2002, 03:28 PM

well, i for one was also thinking of making a butane or propane oxygen mix, rifle. i work for a barrel company so i have no probs in making myself a rifled barrel, but the only thing i would have prolems with is mixing the oxygen and butane/propane together, in order to charge the weapon, i have many pizo igniters on hand so internal spark ignition would not be a problem, just mixing the gases together would be, i also have my boss on hand who is a balsitic expert, so he can help me with balistics and any dangers that i may find., do pulse jet engines work on gas and oxygen, because there must be somthing that mixes them together for that to work surly? i got planes for making a pulse jet engine, maybee i should have a look :) . ----------------------hes using propYne (CHCCH3) not propAne (C3H8)- kingspaz <small>[ September 18, 2002, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]

Anthony

September 18th, 2002, 08:45 PM

Yeah, by "bullet" I mean just the projectile.

Boob Raider

September 19th, 2002, 02:04 PM

Hey Para, I was using needle valves preset to the O2/Fuel mix with 2 ball valves controling the main gas supply from the cylinders. Or do I have to use something fancy. Are there any good valves in a furnace (for heating homes), or any other similar source.

man_o_brass

October 2nd, 2002, 03:21 PM

I'm not familiar with "methyl acetylene" (my organic terminology is a bit rusty, but welding acetylene is VERY unstable at pressures over about 15 psi. If you tried to pressurize it with an oxidizer, you'd get some unwanted fireworks. Anyhow, if the two are the same thing keep the pressure low. A buddy of mine ran a steel potato gun on oxy/ acetylene, and most of the time the spud wouldn't make it out the barrel in one peice. My point is that it has plenty of power at atmospheric pressure.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter AfroFukinPyro

October 20th, 2002, 07:23 PM

Oxy-acetylene shouldnt pose any big problems as long as you keep the acetylene WELL BELOW 15 PSI. As it has been stated, acetylene becomes unstable and unpredictable at around 15 PSI unless it is stored in a special "sponge" cored tank containing a certain type of acid (I forget what kind). This is how the acetylene is stored for welding at around 150 PSI I believe, but as soon as it is regulated out of the tank it is kept below 15 PSI. If you decide to work with acetylene, keep it under 8 PSI just to be safe. There may be a safer fuel for this application though, one which is safer to use and possibly has more explosive power, yet gives off less

Boob Raider

October 20th, 2002, 07:49 PM

Actually ... like I mentioned earlier the gas is methyl acetylene aka Propyene, CH3-C=-C-H. That =- is a tripple bond. Hydrogen was another gas that packs a lot of punch but is not available easily or generating it for this purpose will be a bitch.

MoToMaStR

October 21st, 2002, 07:28 AM

Hey, thats a really good way to have the chamber explode and send that wooden stock splintering in hundreds of pieces towards your shoulder and neck. Personally,.... from my experinces with oxy-acetylene torches from welding and near accidents Iv had,.. I definatly wouldnt fuck with it. listen to energy84 and zaibatsu dude. oxy-acetylene isnt seomthing you really wanna play with. propane is much safer. Detonation occurs on its own around 15-22 psi,... like satated before and Believe me, air rifle barrels arent ment to handle much more than about 600psi of compressed air/C°2. So your likely to lose body parts while you mess with it. Im not saying dont do it,... but the mix compressed is about as stable as shaken nitro-glycerin. =) Hope that helps make your decesion on building your contraption.

Anthony

October 21st, 2002, 07:39 AM

Good general advice, but I beg to differ on your point about about the pressure handling abilities of the barrels. For a start, many barrels have a wall thickness greater than 5mm. Secondly, they are expected to handle 3000psi for millions of shots in the case of PCPs. I just think they're a lot stronger than you give them credit for. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Exploding Batteries? Log in

View Full Version : Exploding Batteries? nbk2000

January 15th, 2002, 10:36 AM

Found this little morsel on a flashlight forum. The batteries being referred to are the lithium photo type. "The CR123's were never designed for high current applications so be carefull in your mods. We have had some Violent rapid venting in some NASA applications. Some people have asked what the little holes in the postitive nipple is for. The CR123's have relief valves built into them to maintain a safe internal pressure. If the current drain goes too high the relief valve might not keep up. If you store Duracells in a small plastic ziplock you might be able to smell the maganese off gassing through the vent. I have never looked at lithium AA. I do not know if they even have vent capability. I have seen the results of DD lith's going explosive during thermal abuse testing. The explosion lifted up a 1200 pound thermal test stand and moved it about 2 feet. " :eek: More than half a ton lifted by a $5 battery?! Might lithium batteries be the next weapon of the terrorists? :p I've got one in my hand right now and it's only the size of the tip of my thumb. It also fits perfectly inside a shotgun grenade shell! Might that be useful? Hmm..fill the battery with epoxy to prevent venting, attach an impact switch to short it out after it buries itself in the flesh of the target. A few minutes of overheating from said shorting.....SPLAT! And no pesky illegal explosives involved.

vulture

January 15th, 2002, 12:10 PM

Why do you think they always remove the batteries of the pacemakers of people who are being incinerated? The explosive property of lithium batteries is that the fluid goes into gas phase above 50C and if a to high current is applied the gas, which is SOCl2 or something, will decompose, increasing the volume even further! :eek: BTW, if the battery explodes, the lithium electrodes are exposed to humidity and oxygen, don't they react vigirously then?

MacCleod

January 15th, 2002, 01:01 PM

Several months ago I took apart an 'AA' lithium battery that was dead (out of curiosity).it contained a sheet of grey foil and a sheet of waxy moist paper wrapped together.As soon as I cut the case off the foil bundle began to feel warm to the touch,and it began to smell funky (oxidizing?).Pretty sure it had two small vent holes on one end. [ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: MacCleod ]

Mr Cool

January 15th, 2002, 04:03 PM

The warmth was probably due to the lithium reacting with moisture from your skin, although I'm not sure how much lithium a dead one would contain. Would it not be better to connect two batteries together, so the +ve of one goes to the -ve of the other and vice versa? Electrolytic caps are also quite fun when rapidly charged the wrong way... if you get a 50V, 160000 uF one that's 30cm tall by 10cm wide, a lot of people are gonna know about it when it ruptures...

Anthony

January 15th, 2002, 05:43 PM

A compact, high energy density pressure bottle "bomb" with built in initiator I guess. In case anyone (like me) is wondering which battery it is, it's these ones: http://images.aspencer1.com/images/cr123.jpg

Ctrl_C

January 15th, 2002, 05:44 PM

sure batteries explode, for we've known this a long time. but the more important questions are: Why is there a flashlight forum? Why was nbk at a flashlight forum? :D

PYRO500

January 16th, 2002, 12:09 AM

I think a bit of creativity is needed to take full advantage of batterys as explosive devices, more than likely unless there is schrapnel around them they won't do much damage (well, in small numbers they wont) but they might be useful in disguised maiming devices, after all who'd suspect batterys as dangerous, you could make some neat looking "toy" that everyone would want to play with and drop them in mail boxes/ peoples desks might ruin someones ability to type, also I wonder if they are strong enough to be used as blasting caps for moderately sensitive HE's I doubt it though.

TheBicher

March 24th, 2002, 05:33 AM

I designed a simple 'bomb' that could be used with a lithium batery to create shrapnel and possibly a loud noise. I have not tested it or even tried making it yet. It is very basic and involves a lithium photo batery encased in a metal casing with a switch on the side that can be turned on to short the two wires conected to the batery. Obviously, the main advantage to a 'bomb' like this is the ease of obtaining what is needed to make it and the ease of making it. I might try to make one in a few days, but first I want some opinions on it. I need to know if it will probably work, how loud/strong it will probably be, and how far/strong the shrapnel will fly. I'm guessing you could get a big punch with a DD batery, but I will start off with the smallest I can find. Also, about how long is the wait untill the batery usually explodes? <small>[ March 24, 2002, 04:46 AM: Message edited by: TheBicher ]

nbk2000

March 24th, 2002, 09:35 AM

There is no such thing as a "DD" battery. There are "D" batteries, but I've never seen a lithium one. Please read the original post (by me) and you'll see that it's a CR123 battery that did the exploding. You've really made yourself look rather silly with your last post. Though can't fault you for enthusiasm.

TheBicher

March 24th, 2002, 07:42 PM

Sorry about that, it was late last night when I posted that. I got an idea and drew a quick scetch in paint. I got confused from where you said

quote:

---

I have seen the results of DD lith's going explosive during thermal abuse testing. The explosion lifted up a 1200 pound thermal test stand and moved it about 2 feet. "

---

Still, would something like this be possible? Obviously it would have limited uses, but I'd like to know if it would work and if I should even bother testing it.

Anthony

March 24th, 2002, 09:08 PM

The massive extra confinement provided by the added metal casing might too much for the battery to rupture. It might just do nothing, or more likely find an easier escape route - leaking out of the epoxy seals. If you want a frag effect then it might be better to tape frag material like BBs, ball bearings or other shot to the battery. The metal pipe probably wouldn't frag into more than two or three pieces anyway. Only other possible problem I can see, is make sure you use a chunky switch, it's the weakest link in the circuit. Likewise, use decent sized wire, equipment wire won't cut it. Even if it does burn through, thin and especially, hot wire is going to seriously choke the flow of current - not conductive to making the battery burst.

Aaron-V2.0

March 24th, 2002, 11:01 PM

Does anyone have access to the old fashioned metal film canisters? Those are a little shorter than a Lithium AA and the lid screws on about a half inch. So if you were to place a AA Lith inside one and screw the cap on half way so that it didnt seal you could carry the "device" because the to terminals couldnt make contact at once. And when you would set it just tighten the cap down making a connection with the metal canister and possibly the cap will be airtight. Just a thought.

BoB-

March 25th, 2002, 02:45 AM

WTF? all the info I posted is gone... Damn, anyways, what type of target are we talking about here? an exploding Lithium battery would cause extensive chemical burns on unprotected skin, getting lithium into an open wound would probably be fatal

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter if emergency care isnt given right away.

According to a chart on one of the pages I found on Google, that have now disappeared, it took a long time for there test batterys to become hot enough to rupture, and when they did only the valves broke. Your looking at a good half hour before the battery becomes pressurized enough to rupture.

Polverone

March 25th, 2002, 06:09 AM

I sometimes play a little mental game, coming up with ways ordinary and even apparently harmless objects could potentially be used to kill people. Once you get to things like pocket lint you have to be pretty imaginative, which is why I like the game. This seems more of the same, only people are taking it rather literally. A lithium battery is never going to pack a good amount of explosive power for its size. Even low density explosives offer more energy in the same space. It's never going to pack a good amount of explosive power for its price. It may offer some potential because it is a metal shell that people already expect to contain chemicals, but as it is it's a crappy explosive device. I'd sooner waste my time with drain opener bombs than I'd attempt to coax the world's saddest explosions from the most expensive batteries on the shelf. I don't doubt that having a lithium battery rupture close at hand would be unsettling and quite likely injurious, but I doubt it would be an effective means of killing or sabotaging all but the weakest targets. BoB-, on what basis do you assert that "getting lithium into an open wound would probably be fatal if emergency care isnt given right away"? Lithium is neurotoxic but not acutely so. The victim would no doubt suffer both chemical and thermal burns, but I am doubtful that the victim would suffer systemic poisoning. I know this is the improvised weapons section, I just didn't know so many people look to Rube Goldberg for inspiration. I'm sure the original post was intended to provoke curiosity and perhaps some experimentation. But really, if you want to do damage with lithium batteries, swing them in the end of a sock.

nbk2000

March 25th, 2002, 10:53 AM

It was to provoke some "out of the box" thinking that I posted this topic. Exploding batteries aren't something most (or any) security people would be thinking to be possible, but it obviously is. Once you've settled into the "It's impossible!" way of thinking, you're washed up as a pyro or a criminal. Only be constantly thinking of new, various, and different ways and means of doing things do you keep the engine of creation, your imagination, fueled and running. I was once accussed (Yes! Accussed!) by a teacher of being "too imaginative. Lord forbid I should have been broken by the state indoctrination facilities into a docile sheeple ready to live and die for the glory and honor of the State. :mad: And if you can kill with pocket lint, you're one bad ass motherfucker! :D

PYRO500

March 25th, 2002, 04:35 PM

I think the most best weapon that can be carried anywhere is a common soda can, what did the "terroists" carry on the plane? box cutters, little razorblade like things, have you ever ripped a coke can in half? same idea, get a few volunteers to start shreding the passengers/crew and any piolit would let you in. BTW if you injected shredded pocket lint in water into someones veins they would reject it possibly causing death, if it didn't clog their cappilaries first

Polverone

March 25th, 2002, 05:03 PM

Well sure you wanted to provoke thought, and you did. But this whole thread seemed to be drifting toward some sort of 1980s BBS text phile hell. Certainly hold on to your ingenuity and imagination. If you've lost those you might as well be dead, pyro pursuits aside. To contribute more directly to the topic at hand: the battery that exploded and lifted up a test stand did so during "thermal abuse testing." Did it generate its heat just from short circuiting or was it subjected to external heating? It's possible they were testing the batteries to see what sort of hazard they posed when the immediate environment became very hot. Many sealed items will generate an impressive bang/ amount of energy when heated hot enough to rupture. PYRO500: I've torn soda cans apart before, and you do get a sharp edge, but it has no strength. I've seen at least one other person (who was alarmed) suggest that soda cans could be used as weapons on flights, but I don't think you'd be able to do much damage unless you had an immobilized victim. The edge you get is hard pressed to cut cloth with. It might provide a stronger edge if you were able to tear a strip of metal and apply tension along the long axis, like it were the blade in a bow saw. It seems you could do better with, say, a length of fine piano wire. Where to conceal it? Inside headphone leads, computer cables, any sheath where people already expect metal. Slice the insulation back and the wire can easily be retrieved.

xoo1246

March 26th, 2002, 08:06 AM

Ahhh, the piano wire, the choise of a true professional. You could use to handles too.

Demolition

March 26th, 2002, 08:26 AM

Not quite on topic but while I was reading over this thread I remembered a post a few months back about one of our members going to visit a relative in jail.IIRC he was taking something containing batteries in to give to his relative.The warden? told him (the forum member) that they werent allowed to have batteries because they make 'bombs' out of them. Maybe its a similar sort of device.

Zambosan

March 26th, 2002, 01:25 PM

...or maybe just an uneducated and paranoid warden. Just a thought.

PYRO500

March 26th, 2002, 03:36 PM

Ah, but you see when you rip the can in half you hold the two sides together with the can in your palm, with some practice you'll have a serious weapon on your hands, as for piano wire I think it's to stiff to conceal, I would get my hands on something called a gigly saw, it is two handles with a wire saw connecting them, they are used to cut bone, some of the thinner ones would really tear some skin,

Boob Raider

September 15th, 2002, 11:34 PM

Well back to blowing up batteries ..... since I can get get my hands on virtually any type of commonly used spent batteries and in any quantity too, I have tried blowing them up by shorting them, tossing them in fire etc .... nothing works except they leak quite effictively ..... mind you I haven't mistreated lithiums as I open them up to get the foils but I need to melt them down to make a chunk, any suggestions. Although as far as blowing up is concerned ... I don't see a higher chance of lithiums blowing up over any other types. Now NiMH is a different story .... even if they leak in a fire they would probably blow up because of the H2 gas. Also Ni/Cd's make good weapons if tossed in a fire as they would give off Cd vapors. Oh also I can't melt the damn Cd from the battery. It just fumes. Any suggestions ? One thing .... the AAA's and the thin cells in a 9V, casings make good detonator casings. Oh ... just thought of it ... do cell phone batteries have valves in them too as they don't exceed a certain current demand, unless we get ahold of them, and they are supposed to be NiMH or Li ion. <small>[ September 15, 2002, 10:37 PM: Message edited by: Boob Raider ]

kanbayat

September 21st, 2002, 11:28 PM

while waiting for a bob segar concert in 1974..my battery went dead in my ford ltd..we attempted to jump it with my friends van..it was dark out..and BOOM..the batery exploded while I had my face within one foot of the battery..trying to see if the terminals were connected ..I got some shit in my eye..it made a rather loud thump..and I washed my eye out with water..we went to the concert and suffered no ill effects to this day..and that was acid..so in closing..I think a little more research is needed on small batterys to see how lethal they may be..peace ppl..lol

the resourceless reaperman

October 11th, 2002, 10:32 AM

Coming back to the warden thing, I think they won't alow batteries because as mentioned before they can be stuffed into socks or stuck don't someone's throught. (not a bad idea really :D ) Also I think the warden also heard stories about exploding batteries and just got jumpy at the though of an inmate with a bomb.

Magas

November 8th, 2002, 08:16 AM

I wonder what would hapen if you used a magnesium battery?

Anthony

November 8th, 2002, 09:40 AM

A battery in a sock is battery in a sock... If you meant will it explode if shorted? I doubt it as it isn't powerful enough.

Jacks Complete

July 24th, 2005, 09:15 AM

Re-opening this, three years on. There are now many advisories by manufacturers regarding Lithium battery failure. These things are high energy density sources, and so, if made to dump all the energy at once, bad/good/loud things easily happen. First off, you get them wet, and the lithium reacts, creating heat and Hydrogen, which will burn and explode very easily. Secondly, you short them. They don't like being shorted, and they get hot, vent hydrogen gas, and sometimes explode. Most Lithium batteries are actually marked to say as much! On rapid (normal) discharge, they can get hot enough to melt plastic and start fires - just take a look at an instruction manual for anything with a lithium battery, and you will see three pages of warnings about the battery.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Hazards of Lithium Batteries There are some worries concerning the safety of certain lithium batteries, particularly the SO2 and thionyl chloride batteries containing less than about 0.5 g of lithium that are used in watches, cameras, etc. Tight restrictions are placed on how these batteries may be carried on cargo flights. The safe disposal of partially discharged batteries is also a major concern: bulk users are urged to negotiate with a suitable waste-disposal contractor to take back used batteries for safe disposal. The US Environmental Protection Agency has ruled that lithium-sulfur di batteries are non-hazardous if fully discharged to deplete the reactive components to low levels. All US military multi-cell lithium batteries now incorporate a discharge resistor which can be switched on when the battery is about to be discarded (called the complete discharge device, CDD). This will complete the discharging of the battery in about five days and batteries should be kept for this time before being dumped. Unfortunately, there have been a few incidents in the US Army in which batteries have exploded during, or at the end of complete discharging. These incidents are presently being investigated in order to see why they occurred. It is thought that some of the cells may have been faulty, rather than that there is a general problem. The usage of such batteries in the USA is up to 1000 times that in CF, so the probability of an incident in the CF is low and none has occurred. High-power lithium cells need to be carefully ed to ensure safe operation. For example, if a cell is short-circuited, the large current will cause internal overheating, a rise in pressure and the cell could explosively rupture. In general, battery manufacturers do not like to use the word "explode" and have invented other terms. One interesting euphemism is "spontaneous disassembly" or "decrimpling". All except low-rate cells should incorporate safety vents to avoid a dangerous build up of internal pressure. These vents are especially ed weak points in the steel can, which rupture at a particular internal pressure. Such vents are not resealable, so the battery is then unserviceable (a safety report may require to be filled out and the battery sent away for analysis). Electrical fuses and, frequently, thermal switches are fitted to avoid high cell internal temperatures. Blocking diodes are usually included to prevent charging. In a series-connected string of cells, one weak cell may have current forced through it by the other cells until its voltage reverses. Shunt diodes may be connected across cells (i.e. in parallel) to prevent the reverse voltage from reaching dangerous levels. Shunt diodes are recommended for 5 or more lithium-sulfur dioxide cells in series. The load voltage of a lithium cell usually varies very little during discharging. Although this appears to be ideal, it does make it difficult to tell how much capacity remains in a partially discharged cell. It may be necessary to record the service history of each battery to give some indication of the capacity used. There is nevertheless a tendency to throw away perfectly good, partially used batteries simply because their state of charge cannot easily be ascertained. Researchers are investigating ways of cheaply estimating the residual charge. I also found this link http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/PrimBatt/li-explosion.htm to a report on the same site, of a battery explosion. Quite a mess. Apparently, most modern Li batts now have a weakened steel cell so that it will vent through that in case of rupture. Obviously, this area could be reinforced with multiple wraps of glassfibre tape, to massively increase the failure pressure.

Jacks Complete

July 24th, 2005, 09:15 AM

Re-opening this, three years on. There are now many advisories by manufacturers regarding Lithium battery failure. These things are high energy density sources, and so, if made to dump all the energy at once, bad/good/loud things easily happen. First off, you get them wet, and the lithium reacts, creating heat and Hydrogen, which will burn and explode very easily. Secondly, you short them. They don't like being shorted, and they get hot, vent hydrogen gas, and sometimes explode. Most Lithium batteries are actually marked to say as much! On rapid (normal) discharge, they can get hot enough to melt plastic and start fires - just take a look at an instruction manual for anything with a lithium battery, and you will see three pages of warnings about the battery.

Hazards of Lithium Batteries There are some worries concerning the safety of certain lithium batteries, particularly the SO2 and thionyl chloride batteries containing less than about 0.5 g of lithium that are used in watches, cameras, etc. Tight restrictions are placed on how these batteries may be carried on cargo flights. The safe disposal of partially discharged batteries is also a major concern: bulk users are urged to negotiate with a suitable waste-disposal contractor to take back used batteries for safe disposal. The US Environmental Protection Agency has ruled that lithium-sulfur di batteries are non-hazardous if fully discharged to deplete the reactive components to low levels. All US military multi-cell lithium batteries now incorporate a discharge resistor which can be switched on when the battery is about to be discarded (called the complete discharge device, CDD). This will complete the discharging of the battery in about five days and batteries should be kept for this time before being dumped. Unfortunately, there have been a few incidents in the US Army in which batteries have exploded during, or at the end of complete discharging. These incidents are presently being investigated in order to see why they occurred. It is thought that some of the cells may have been faulty, rather than that there is a general problem. The usage of such batteries in the USA is up to 1000 times that in CF, so the probability of an incident in the CF is low and none has occurred. High-power lithium cells need to be carefully ed to ensure safe operation. For example, if a cell is short-circuited, the large current will cause internal overheating, a rise in pressure and the cell could explosively rupture. In general, battery manufacturers do not like to use the word "explode" and have invented other terms. One interesting euphemism is "spontaneous disassembly" or "decrimpling". All except low-rate cells should incorporate safety vents to avoid a dangerous build up of internal pressure. These vents are especially ed weak points in the steel can, which rupture at a particular internal pressure. Such vents are not resealable, so the battery is then unserviceable (a safety report may require to be filled out and the battery sent away for analysis). Electrical fuses and, frequently, thermal switches are fitted to avoid high cell internal temperatures. Blocking diodes are usually included to prevent charging. In a series-connected string of cells, one weak cell may have current forced through it by the other cells until its voltage reverses. Shunt diodes may be connected across cells (i.e. in parallel) to prevent the reverse voltage from reaching dangerous levels. Shunt diodes are recommended for 5 or more lithium-sulfur dioxide cells in series. The load voltage of a lithium cell usually varies very little during discharging. Although this appears to be ideal, it does make it difficult to tell how much capacity remains in a partially discharged cell. It may be necessary to record the service history of each battery to give some indication of the capacity used. There is nevertheless a tendency to throw away perfectly good, partially used batteries simply because their state of charge cannot easily be ascertained. Researchers are investigating ways of cheaply estimating the residual charge. I also found this link http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/PrimBatt/li-explosion.htm to a report on the same site, of a battery explosion. Quite a mess. Apparently, most modern Li batts now have a weakened steel cell so that it will vent through that in case of rupture. Obviously, this area could be reinforced with multiple wraps of glassfibre tape, to massively increase the failure pressure.

THErAPIST

July 25th, 2005, 02:41 AM

At work a couple months ago (a fireworks store) we got a fax from the corporate office. The body of this fax stated that if we had cell phones wth non stock batteries, or that if we had batteries made for japanese or european cell phones on our american cell phones that we weren't allowed to bring them inside the building anymore. The reason for this is that foreign style cell phone batteries would sometimes spontaneously discharge if on american style phones because they were different voltages or something such as that and the batteries would either rupture and spew their contents, or they would explode. Supposedly the above senario happened at a ware house, the battery blew up, and it caught a few cases of fireworks on fire. Now I don't know the validity of that, but it still stands as truth that we got a fax telling us about all of that. Damned paranoid fireworks people..

THErAPIST

July 25th, 2005, 02:41 AM

At work a couple months ago (a fireworks store) we got a fax from the corporate office. The body of this fax stated that if we had cell phones wth non stock batteries, or that if we had batteries made for japanese or european cell phones on our american cell phones that we weren't allowed to bring them inside the building anymore. The reason for this is that foreign style cell phone batteries would sometimes spontaneously discharge if on american style phones because they were different voltages or something such as that and the batteries would either rupture and spew their contents, or they would explode. Supposedly the above senario happened at a ware house, the battery blew up, and it caught a few cases of fireworks on fire. Now I don't know the validity of that, but it still stands as truth that we got a fax telling us about all of that. Damned paranoid fireworks people.. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Pneumatic cannon. Log in

View Full Version : Pneumatic cannon. BaDSeeD

March 13th, 2002, 02:29 AM

How ya doin guys. I've been away for quite a long time, but I have some free time tonight, and thought I'd look around. Anyhow guys I am interested in making a pneumatic cannon specifically for playing splatball, but it has other options, simply whatever ammo you decide to put in it. I was looking around a few different sites and came across this one from tippman. http://www.tippmannexplosives.com/ It has a hell of a lot of cool shit for anyone interested in paintball, unfortunatly, unless your military, or law enforcement, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT! Really pisses me off. Anyway I want to build the grenade launcher they have listed there. http://www.tippmannexplosives.com/newpages/ grenade_launchers.htm Most of it seems pretty simple except for the valve assembly. Does anyone know of a valve that would be suitable for something like this? Even an electrically operated valve would be suitable, but it has to be able to release a large volume of gas (co2) quickly enough to get a decent speed out of the projectile. Any help would be appreciated. By the way, I havn't been around for a while so I'm not sure if this still falls under improvised weapons or if it should be in another section. So be gentle NBK if I made a mistake.

Bignutsami

March 13th, 2002, 06:39 AM

Hi.. Sorry, your links you gave keep timing out for me so i cant comment on them. http://www.valuelinx.net/~dthames/spudguns.htm Gives a design for a piston type valve that is suposedly one of the fastest. It also has some great mpegs to download. You could always just use a solinoid valve for electrical firing which is far easier then the piston. http://www26.brinkster.com/fullauto/index.html has a design for an auto using solinoid valves. If you fitted this to a regulater feeding CO2 you would end up with a serious rapid fire grenade launcher, though a regulator aint fast enough for full auto it will allow far more shots at consistant pressure. Im not sure if solinoid valves make for a more powerful gun then a ball-valve, but electrical firing wont screw up your aim when you fire it.

RTC

March 13th, 2002, 08:22 AM

They time out for me as well..

xoo1246

March 13th, 2002, 01:49 PM

http://www.tippmannordnance.com/index.htm

BaDSeeD

March 13th, 2002, 02:26 PM

I'll have to look into those types of valves. The links seem to work fone for me, but i am also on a cable... maybe thats the difference. Anyhow look at the crap on that site if you have a chance, who would have thought someone would mke a full size howeitzer for paintball!!!

BaDSeeD

March 13th, 2002, 02:34 PM

Ok I looked at those web pages, and I was hoping for some kind of valve that I could just buy. I'm going to be making everything else for it, I was hoping to not have to make the valve as well. As a last resort I WILL make one, but I'd prefer not to. Money isn't a probelm with all the overtime I have been putting in lately. And it would sure save time to be able to buy the valve.

Anthony

March 13th, 2002, 06:33 PM

Don't know if it's what you are looking for, but if you want a bought solution a SGTC Supah Valve might be suitable: http://www.spudtech.com/supahvalveprod.html

Energy84

March 14th, 2002, 11:29 PM

Has anyone got the SupahValve? I'd really like to know how it works because I don't exactly have that much cash to spend on a starch abuser but I do have access to lathes and milling machines :) Photos of the inner workings are much appreciated.

BaDSeeD

March 14th, 2002, 11:35 PM

Wow, that valve looks good for other applications, but its friggin huge. I'm looking for something a lot smaller that i could use in a launcher that would be mounted under the barrel. I'm looking specifically for a valve that would be mounted to a piece of 2.5 inch pvc pipe, with a barrel length of about 10 or 12 inches. I want that to be able to launch a paint filled ballon from a cardboard sabot at a velocity between 150 to 300 fps. Somewhere around 200 fps would be ideal. Looks like I'm going to have to make the damned thing after all. Problem is that I don't know much about diaphram and piston valves really to make one of my own. I have seen some information on how they work, but it looks like pistons require a fair amount of travel before the pressure is released, so that wouldnt work too well with a trigger for example, and diaphram valves i simply dont understand well enough (yet) to make one. Thats why i wanted to skip this process and just buy one. Anyway thanks for the info so far guys. I'll keep checking here to see if anyone has more info to offer.

Anthony

March 15th, 2002, 08:27 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The commonly used 1" sprinkler valves work use a diaphram valve. The solenoid is simply used to break a vacuum allowing the diaphram to move and let the air or water flow. You don't have to use the solenoid if you don't want an electrical system, there's a manual lever built into the valves. Or, better for a trigger setup, screw a pipe nipple into where the solenoid fits (it's threaded) and run a piece of thin bore flexible hose to a push-button type valve which is either your trigger or is activated by the trigger. It just needs to vent the space above the diaphram to the atmosphere to activate the valve.

BaDSeeD

March 16th, 2002, 07:06 PM

Thanks Anthony. I had read somewhere that someone had used a valve like that for potato guns or some shit before. I just wasn't sure how much pressure one of them could take and what kind of velocity I could expect out of a valve like that.

Prodigy45

March 17th, 2002, 12:09 PM

The best plans i've seen for a potato launcher is this one: http://members.aol.com/sph911/spud/pneumatic.html The sniper rifle one, but be ready to invest some money in it because when all is said and done it' woukd cost over $100.

BaDSeeD

March 17th, 2002, 05:01 PM

Hey Anthony I found a site that had some information and pricing on sprinkler valves. It also poses a new question. Anyhow the site is here.. http:// store.professionalsupply.com/cgi-bin/wfp55389.storefront/3c9502b8013b53c82755d8f5a506064e/Catalog/1042 It says that some of the valves are specifically designed to close slowly to avoid what they call "water hammer" which I am fairly certain is just the pressure spiking on the pipes if it is shut off real fast. Anyhow if I were to use a "slow closing" valve in this kind of application, odds are I'd empty my air supply in one shot. Does anyone know anything about these valves? It dosn't specify that the smaller valves have this feature, but I don't know that for sure. We got a farmer Brown around here that might know something about these valves?

BaDSeeD

March 17th, 2002, 08:56 PM

Well before even starting I've come to the conclusion that this thing is going to be too big and heavy to mount under the barrel. I think I'll make it as a seperate gun like an M79. No point in throwing off my aim and handling of my gun by putting this big heavy thing on it.

Ctrl_C

March 17th, 2002, 09:00 PM

that supah valve is awesome...too bad it costs $100. that site also has rifled barrels that claim 50% greater accuracy. i think i may soon order the supah valve with pnuematic trigger actuation, a 4 foot rifled barrel, and a bbq ignitor for a regular spud gun.

Anthony

March 17th, 2002, 09:22 PM

I have to admit that I have no idea how fast the valves close, I've only ever used them to dump air. To be honest, I'm not sure that any/many solenoid valves available would be capable of opening fully and closing again quickly enough to give multiple, decent pressure shots from a reservior. If you don't have a seperate reservior and shot chamber you might need a spring loaded manual valve activated by a falling hammer or other kind of spring propelled mass to momentarily knock the valve open and release a blaat of air. Not sure if it will be of help but I've got some info on my delapidated website about a potato gun I made with one of these sprinkler valves: http://www.geocities.com/spudguns_uk/plastic_rifle.htm

BoB-

March 23rd, 2002, 04:14 AM

Here are a couple of cannons designed for paintball; http://www.pukindogspaintball.com/cannons/BECC.htm http://www.pukindogspaintball.com/cannons/cannon1.jpg http://www.pukindogspaintball.com/cannons/BECC2.htm The breaches are shit, but they both use Co2 for constant pressure, just dont forget the safety release valve and you could fire dozens and dozens of grenades.

PYRO500

March 24th, 2002, 01:52 AM

I think that valve is just a piston valve, there's an air space at the top and there's a piston that allows air to flow through when the piston has traveled all the way, opening a valve to the top relieves pressure in the chamber thus making the piston move letting gas escape.

PYRO500

March 26th, 2002, 03:35 PM

After some carefull searching I found a place with plans for the "supah" valve check this page out: http://www.geocities.com/jr_cross00/cannon.html it is fairly simple design, when I get some cash expect pics.

Ctrl_C

March 26th, 2002, 05:08 PM

bastard...i just ordered a supah valve. oh well...not my money. my gun is 6 feet long and weighs 15 pounds. it is very similar to the one shown here. I am waiting for the valve as we speak. I still need another 2" union (I modified the design to be able to take the valve off easily) and it will be done. I will post pics when it is fully put together.

Energy84

March 26th, 2002, 11:31 PM

Sweet! Thanks pyro! looks like I know what I'm doing in shop class now :D

Ctrl_C

March 30th, 2002, 01:15 PM

I just made my cannon with my SGTC Supah valve, but it leaks. It will still shoot a potato really high and far...i mean, i'm tempted to take out the annoying low flying medical helicopters that fly over my house with this thing...it could. the problem is that there is a 4" dia 26" long air chamber that the barrel goes through. The barrel is completely independent of the chamber except the fact that it goes through the chamber. The chamber needs to seal on both ends with the barrel going through the middle. Right now I have a 4" x 2" bushing that I sanded the pipe stop out of with a dremel. Apparently it didn't seal. I need a way to get it to seal on a new one without using the dremel to jerry rig something together. I don't know much about what kinds of pvc parts are available but if anyone has any ideas, please let me know. <small>[ March 30, 2002, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: Ctrl_C ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Spudgunner

March 30th, 2002, 04:13 PM

Wow, I haven't posted on here in forever. Anyway, my suggestion (I just made it up, it may or may not work) is to find the parts that are leaking first. Then, take some slivers of PVC and dissolve them in the PVC glue (since that is how it works, by dissolving the PVC). Then, if you can, paint on the glue/PVC mix onto the parts that are leaking, and it might leave PVC in the cracks that aren't sealed. I don't know whether this works or not (in fact, I don't know if you can even tell what I am saying), but it is worth a try. Spudgunner

Ctrl_C

March 30th, 2002, 05:53 PM

I understand and that is an excellent idea. I will try it tonight. btw, I can shoot potatoes an estimated 700ft high.

AcridSmoke

March 30th, 2002, 08:02 PM

I've made a couple of cannon myself, and have never used a supah-valve. At 80 PSI, we usually achieve a 400 yard shot with a potato with both solenoid and ball valve cannon. We're probably going to build an exhaust valve-based launcher. Specifically what PSI are you using with your supah-valve for the 700 ft shots?

Ctrl_C

March 31st, 2002, 02:06 PM

hard to say. it leaks and I don't have a guage but the air compressor is pumping 120psi in there. This shot was straight up, not angled. EDIT: Spudgun <small>[ March 31, 2002, 03:15 PM: Message edited by: Ctrl_C ]

RTC

March 31st, 2002, 05:54 PM

Nice car..

Ctrl_C

March 31st, 2002, 07:56 PM

not mine but thanks. i took it like that to get the truck in the picture for the bunker thread.

AcridSmoke

April 1st, 2002, 12:05 AM

Well, I finished a fully automatic marble gun of my own design with a 50 round clip... Lovely... That figure of my distance was at a 45 degree angle. What's yours? My current project is a breech-action paintball shooter. The automatic uses a system where the marble is struck with extreme force from a piston in the rear. It shoots a good 150 feet at a slightly above flat angle, having a rate of fire around 1000 RPM. Fun stuff. <small>[ March 31, 2002, 11:08 PM: Message edited by: AcridSmoke ]

PYRO500

April 1st, 2002, 12:29 AM

Well then post pictures plans or something similar so we can see your disign/device in action. I really doubt you got a 1000 RPM fire rate, that is faster than marbles will fall from a hopper and it is faster than most machine gun manufactuers can get their guns to fire.

BoB-

April 1st, 2002, 05:49 AM

Sorry to go OT, I got here late. Ctrl-C if it still leaks, I'd try ordinary hotglue (high-temp), Its amazing how much pressure hotglue will take. Provided you make a nice uniform seal it should hold. Anthony did this on his page here; http://www.geocities.com/spudguns_uk/1_5_abs_combustion.htm

Ctrl_C

April 1st, 2002, 03:10 PM

Well, I don't need to worry about leaks now because it just exploded. I lost a 2" male threaded coupling, a 2" union, and 2 elbows. It deafened me for 2 mins and the plastic cut my neck and arm and something hit my thigh and scraped it up. I'll go get new parts maybe tonight. It looks like the glue joint between the pipe coming off the T and the street elbow failed. The pressure escaping caused it to leverage off the male coupling, breaking it.

RTC

April 1st, 2002, 03:33 PM

Nasty, hope ya heal well.

Anthony

April 1st, 2002, 04:04 PM

Scary considering your plastic plumbing in the US is at least twice as thick as the stuff here, yours is pressure rated too. /me wonders why he is still alive... Leaks are a bastard, hotglue can help, but it doesn't seem to work too good for sealing a seam, the pressure just seems to lift it slightly and squeeze around the join. Sometimes it's better just to say "fuck it", hack off the joint and slap a new one on, even if it does make your gun shorter than it should have been.

Mr Cool

April 1st, 2002, 05:51 PM

Haha, I love that attitude Ctrl_C "It just exploded and nearly killed me. I'll go get parts for a new one tonight." :) :)

AcridSmoke

April 1st, 2002, 10:56 PM

Ow. Heal up. I've only had one of my creations explode ("The Big Cow"). It was an over-under style launcher. The 180-degree turnaround at the back blew up into three parts and most of the gun flew backwards... My friend was next to me at the time. It was really loud, but no one got hurt at all. I just got kind of mad at myself for forgetting to put the brace between top and bottom for stability so I could specifically prohibit what had just happened.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

My automatic fires 960 rpm, I am dead serious. We use a spring-fed magazine, so the speed of gravity is no problem. The piece that hits the marble to propel it is made of hard and thick plastic, yet it remains at a small weight, so the rate of fire is insane. It's only ever jammed once, I believe, and it cleared up very quickly. I'll try and get a link out to an animation I just finished of it as soon as possible. <small>[ April 01, 2002, 10:01 PM: Message edited by: AcridSmoke ]

Bignutsami

April 2nd, 2002, 02:12 AM

_C: What class pipe are you using? Did you make sure your using the pressure glue, not the standard stuff. Pictures of pieces maybe ??? :) Anthony: England would probably use the same system as Australia wouldnt it, the PN rated system. Im sure there would be pressure rated pipe there somewhere. The American system isnt rated on pressure rather on wall thickness, whereeas the PN systen is rated on pressure in Bars (PN12 = 12 Bar = approx 150psi). Its kinda easier to rig the system up to be capable of the same pressure with the PN rated stuff, but the Americans have sch80 and sch120 which hold more pressure then ours, Our system goes into polyethylene pipe after the pressure goes above 18bar (250psi).

Ctrl_C

April 2nd, 2002, 02:28 AM

i was using schedule 40 rated to 220 psi i think. the glue joint failed however. i picked up some "heavy duty" pvc glue and the necessary parts and put it together approx 3 hours ago. I will wait until at least morning and possibly tomorrow night until I repressurize it.

BoB-

April 2nd, 2002, 05:19 AM

I had several PVC spudguns blow up on me, so now I only use empty high pressure gas cylinders. You can pick up old fire extinquishers at the dump, grab a few of them incase one leaks, they may not be safe enough to hold 250psi for several years anymore, but I've shot sparkplugs at over 210psi using a fire extinguisher as a chamber. And because everything screws together, if you use a mile or so of PTFE tape, it will never leak on you. But I hear those 'Supah valves have a low maximum psi...

Anthony

April 2nd, 2002, 07:56 AM

You can get pressure rated PVC/ABS pipe/fittings in the UK but it's for specialist applications and not used for regular plumbing, anything holding pressure is either copper or steel/iron. The stuff I use is not intened to hold any pressure, well maybe that of a few feet of water, but that's about it, holds up well at 250psi though...

Ctrl_C

April 2nd, 2002, 02:28 PM

I rebuilt it last night, let the glue set up about 14 hours, and fired it about a half hour ago. Everything seems good. I had it up to 110 psi, 10 more than the valve is rated for. I hit a wheelburrow at 40 yards. It deted it badly and the power hitting it was incredible. My new favorite projectile is caulking tubes. They fit very well and are front heavy so they hit the ground tip first and bury themselves halfway into the soft dirt. It's all set up right now to be able to fire in a couple seconds notice of a heli flying over. I hate the heli's...they fly at about 400 feet (well within the reach of my newly acquired "anti-aircraft gun") and are loud as hell, shaking my house. Oh great fun today, beautiful day here too...great for heli shooting. :) EDIT: After a week or so of testing: excellent results. Potato has an estimated range of .25mi laterally, 700 feet vertically at 45*. Potatoes dent 1mm aluminum 6" off center at 40 yards. New favorite projectile: empty plastic caulking tubes. Shoot very fast and straight, good fit. Put one through 3/4" Oriental Strand Board (similar to plywood) at 70 yards. VERY impressive. Also received full 5# CO<sub>2 bottle for portable air source. Will hook up some time this week. <small>[ April 09, 2002, 12:19 AM: Message edited by: Ctrl_C ] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> C ELL PHONE GUN! Log in

View Full Version : CELL PHONE GUN! BaD SeeD

August 8th, 2001, 02:26 AM

I h a v e n e v e r s e e n a n ything like this before. It's awesome! Sorry I have no other inform ation on th is... just the video. If anyone knows ANYTHING about this... post it! Here's the link. http://64.62.53.76/adult_cdn/01048ABAAMgAAAAcDla.yF3PwuqoQ2RhzUi01rGFMVoSXZT_FK GWnSUGB_l2fpBiBI2iEJRzyCCMg/ cj_5723.wmv

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your dem i s e .

SawedOff8gaugeman

August 8th, 2001, 06:07 AM

I once was about to build a .22lr cell phone gun. I howe wer was too busy for the project and it still rem a i n s t o b e d o n e . A phonegun you could still m ake a call with would be cool(in avery non ke\/\/l way) http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ cool.gif I h e a r d s o m e t i m e a g o t h a t s o m e nigger had been arrested for having such a thing here in Finland! Had stolen the idea from m e I guess... http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/smilie s/tongue.gif

Anthony

A ugus t 8t h, 2001, 06: 42 PM

There was apparantly a large consignm e n t o f t h o s e c a u g h t b e i n g s m uggled into the UK a little while ago. I'm s u r e a s i n g l e s h o t o n e c o u l d e a s i l y b e m a d e. I wonder how the firin g m echa nism in the one in that video worked?

Predator

A ugus t 8t h, 2001, 10: 41 PM

T h e c o c k i n g h a n d l e a t t h e b a c k a r m s 4 s e p e r a t e h a m m e r s i n s i d e t h e p h o n e t o g e t h e r , a n d t h e 4 b u t t o n s o n t h e p h o n e r e l e a se e a c h h a m m er individually

Predator

A ugus t 9t h, 2001, 04: 19 PM

Had a quick drawup o f how I think it works: Because I can't link to images directly on their server, page will refresh itself after 2 seconds with the schem atic You'll also notice I deliberately mis-designed the tip of the firing pin so it couldn't set off a .22 rim fire round.. this is so the kewls can't m ake it, but anyone here with proper knowledge about firearm s such as the old/regular m e m bers will know how to shape the top so it wo rks

[This message has been edited by Predator (edited August 09, 2001).]

BaD SeeD

August 10th, 2001, 11:32 AM

I realize how it works, or a good theory on how it does. At least how it could be im provised. What i wanted to know, was if this was on the m a r k e t . D o e s a n y o n e k n o w i f t h i s c a n b e b o u g h t ?

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your dem i s e .

twinkle

August 16th, 2001, 06:37 AM

the forerunner of this cell-phone gun is a double barreled .32 key-chain gun they were m a d e s o m e w h e r e i n C h e c h o s l o v a k i a ,Romania or Bulgaria here is a link to som e info of it http://seattletim es.nwsource.com/news/nation-world/htm l98/alttiny_050798.html the principle was the sam e b u t t h e s e p h o n e g u n s a r e b e t t e r d i s g u i s e d

twinkle

August 16th, 2001, 09:58 AM

the idea of these concealed guns is not new, the Germ a n h a d a l s o o n e i n W W 2 it was a "con cealed Buckle gun" , something what looks like it is Patent num ber 5,782,025

darkdontay

February 10th, 2003, 06:38 PM

I'm on the Mailing list for Inte lligentx News mailing, some intresting computer related news articles, but today their was a interesting one in the H e a d e r " F r e n c h P o l i c e S e i z e M o b i l e P h o n e G u n s "

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Fren ch Police S e i z e M o b i l e P h o n e G u n s Reuters Fren ch police said on Friday they had seized two lethal m obile phones capable of shooting four bullets, with the digital touchpads used as triggers. T h e b l a c k t e l e p h o n e s , i d e n t i c a l t o n o r m a l m obile phones on the outside, were discovered in a raid on a suspected gangster's h o m e on Tuesday in the northern town of R o u e n . T h e f a k e p h o n e s c o m e apart in the m iddle to reveal a four-chamber secret compartm ent for .22 caliber bullets, which can be shot out of a protruding fake aerial. "These would be lethal at 10 m eters," said Michel Lavaud, head of a local police brigade. P o l i c e s e i z e d the telephones along with 1,000 ecstasy p ills, hero i n , c a n n a b i s a n d a b o u t $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 a t t h e h o m e o f a m a n suspected of armed robberies and drug trafficking. Lavaud said police thought the weapons were o f a k i n d b e l i e v e d t o b e m a d e i n e a s t e r n E u rope and to have a p p e a r e d i n Belg ium and the Netherlands in 2001. http :// www.intelligentx.com /newsletters/techn ology/articles/sto ry_tech3_021003.cfm I had just seen that just a couple minutes ago and remebered their was a thread about these guns, and yes to all thoughs new a simple search will yield you man y results if you ju st try. <sm all>[ February 10, 2003, 05:47 PM: Message edited by: darkdontay ] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> anyhting i can do with a cap gun? Log in

View Full Version : anyhting i can do with a cap gun? d_sturbed_1

A ugus t 8t h, 2001, 11: 14 PM

is th ere some way i can modify a cap gun?

CragHack

A ugus t 8t h, 2001, 11: 17 PM

you could use the cap gun as a way to cause terror. You could m odify the thing to throw a spark into the barrel when a cap is fired. In the Barrel will be som e AP, or AP putty. Leave the thing, with caps loaded, in residential areas known to have sm all children. O ther than this i don't know. -----------------"If you m ust, do it with intelligent people, at least they know how to talk to the cops."

HMTD Factory

A ugus t 8t h, 2001, 11: 42 PM

I u s e d t o m odify those with brass pipes. I bought a metal toy re volver, throw away the cylinder, attach a ba rrel to it and play it with caps and blackpowder. The "barrel" is a tube form ed with several layers of brass tube, one size bigger than another, glued together with epoxy to privide thickness. The breech is similiar to a cap nozzle like that of a muzzleloader. So a cap is p l a c e d o n t h e n o z z l e a n d p o w d e r i s l o a d e d f r o m t h e m u z z l e , a s p e n t c a p i s u s e d a s t h e p r o j e c t i l e ( t h e c a p h a p p e n s to fit the bore snugly). Pull the trigger and it will fire. The keywords are "metal revolver", "blackpowder", "sm all charge", "light projectile", "test fire", "eye protection" and "thick m itten" Have fun!

zaibatsu

A ugus t 9t h, 2001, 02: 31 PM

T h i s i s m m anwitgun's post on my forum but it crashed and I lost the post, so I'll repost as much a s I can rem e m b e r. Basically it in volved drilling the cylinder out so that you can fit in metal tubing with an id which fits a .22 bullet, and doing the s a m e for the barrel, drilling out and fitting in a tube. Ap arently this would work, and would not explode, in dream s a nyway.

Anthony

A ugus t 9t h, 2001, 03: 21 PM

Y o u ' d h a v e t o b e e f t h e h a m m er up to fire a .22 cartridg e. I can't believe som e decent informatio n actually came from such a completely bollocks thread...

Brushburner

A ugus t 9t h, 2001, 11: 17 PM

this might be able to work if you could make the ham m er better, but wouldnt the shell com e backwars breaking the plastic? what i would reccom end is buying a real cheap bb pistol, spring is good. and fixing it so a tube that a 22cal just fits in can be attached firm ly to the end of the barrel. this wo uld have to be fiddled with for the rimfires to work. a red rider i know can do this, but a pistol might be better.

Chaos A .D

A ugus t 9t h, 2001, 11: 20 PM

Maybe if you put in a heavier firing pin . the ham mer would hit it and it would hit the round .

CyclonitePyro

August 10th, 2001, 01:46 AM

H e y C h a o s , g l a d t o s e e y o u h e r e , b e l e ive m e a b o u t t h e acid?

Anthony

August 10th, 2001, 04:16 PM

This isn't Queerpier so if you two want a private discussion on an unrelated subject then you can go back there and do it. "Maybe if you put in a heavier firing pin. the hamm er would hit it and it would hit the round." I've yet to see a cap gun with a firing pin. What you've just said is the co ncept of a firing pin, but other than that yo ur post m akes no sense.

HMTD Factory

August 10th, 2001, 09:12 PM

The case won't com e back if the config uration is kept like a m uzzleloader, but the loose cap used to set off the charge will s h o o t b a c k a nd W ILL ruin a PLASTIC revolver, like the cap ruined my earlier experimentals. I already said "metal" revolver...I was like the second im mediate post and it is real personal experience...didn't som e b o d y actually read it? http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/frown.gif A regular cap weight around only 0.5 grain... a s a projectile it's not gonna be a big risk if the charge is toned down. You might even se e a straight m uzzle flash if the barrel is short http://theforum .virtualave.net/ u b b / s m i l i e s / s m ile.gif

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter CyclonitePyro

August 11th, 2001, 01:40 AM

Sorry, It's no t like I cam e here from queerpier, I recently joined there as a missionary to convert p eople from kewln e s s .

The_Coyote

August 12th, 2001, 03:55 PM

I h a v e f o u n d that with a 12 shot cap gun...whether plastic or metal....if you bore out the cham bers (has to be a revolver) you can a put .177 BB's in the caps (also h as to be a ring cap) and when you shoot it it will shoot out the BB fairly well. It isn't very powerful but it is good when you are bored. It must be a 12 shot ring though because they have a strong rim to keep the h a m mer from just pushing the cap in the cham ber.

SATA NIC

August 17th, 2001, 01:17 AM

i know of a g uy who tried to convert a m etal cap gun with extra barrel etc. he used a full .22 round, and ble w his hand off, and loss part of his eye, because it shattered. It tu rned out (though i'm not quite sure) that h e didn't com pletely clear the barrel (originaly blocked up) really, i don't think it would be worth the danger of trying to convert a cap gun to fire real projectiles.

madog

August 29th, 2001, 12:48 PM

I h a d a d r e a m that i converted an old plastic cap gun to fire bb's. In m y dream i took a sm all pice of Al tube(about 1") then i epoxied it into one of the cylinders in the cap gun to reinforce it. let the epoxy dry then sawed off the barrell of the cap gun. I l o a d ed a single cap into the reinforced cylinder, then i p ut a very sm all am ount of flash, a patch, BB, another patch. In m y dream i shot it at point blank range into a cardboard box and it alm ost whent through. works ok. -----------------" T r u e f r e e d o m is not without anarchy"

HMTD Factory

August 30th, 2001, 12:08 AM

See, the concept works as long as sm o k e l e s s powder is NO T used and powder charge is toned down. I don't believe "slightly m idified" toy gun will be safe firing .22LR : If anyone has manually cycled a Ruger 10/22 with ham m er down...im agine the case provided the work in just 0.004 seconds.

madog

August 30th, 2001, 08:36 AM

I don't think that a m odified toy gun can shoot 22LR or 22 short either, m aybe it could shoot a 22CB. I was thinking, what if you modified a metal capgun like you did to fire black powder but with a bigger bore. And you used im provised am mo with a cap as a prim er. You couldn't crim p a r o u n d l i k e t h i s t h o u g h . Y o u w o u l d n e e d t o l o a d t h e a m m o l i k e I l o a d e d t h e c a p g u n . I f o u n d i n m y d r e a m that BP doesn't b urn fast enough for such a small application. the gasses were com ing out of the breech. but then I started using a generic flash I make that burns m uch faster than BP and it works great. -----------------" T r u e f r e e d o m is not without anarchy" vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> EMP device on johnbus' site Log in

View Full Version : EMP device on johnbus' site green beret

March 15th, 2002, 12:05 AM

Does anyone know if the EMP device on jhonbus' site works? It dosent specify the voltage. I have tried to contact him but cant. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks. Here is the URL: w ww.geocities.com/jhon_bus/

J

March 15th, 2002, 05:12 AM

The HV source is actually a big capacitor bank. The diagram on the site has appeared in New Scientist before now. No details were given in the article about exact specifications, but it did mention that around 2Kg of TNT is used as the explosive. I've read in another article (no, I don't remember w here) that it could be put together by a terrorist for around £400. This sounds about right to me. If you do decide to build one, and in case it actually w orks, don't set it off in a populated area or you WILL be in a w orld of shit. Doing it near a hospital could kill a lot of people.

xoo1246

March 15th, 2002, 07:15 AM

I upploaded a file named EMP.pdf to the forum-ftp some time ago.

green beret

March 17th, 2002, 03:06 AM

Thanks guys, I am assuming that one would take out an alarm system, but for how long? Would it be around 30 seconds? Thats just a guess....

J

March 17th, 2002, 06:06 AM

It w ould take out all the electronics w ithin a 500m radius, permanently.

Demolition

March 19th, 2002, 07:01 AM

quote:< /font>< hr /> A Poor Man's E-Bomb An FCG(Flux Compression Generator)is an astoundingly simple weapon. It consists of an explosives-packed tube placed inside a slightly larger copper coil, as shown below. The instant before the chemical explosive is detonated, the coil is energized by a bank of capacitors, creating a magnetic field. The explosive charge detonates from the rear forward. As the tube flares outward it touches the edge of the coil, thereby creating a moving short circuit. "The propagating short has the effect of compressing the magnetic field w hile reducing the inductance of the stator [coil]," says Kopp. "The result is that FCGs w ill produce a ramping current pulse, which breaks before the final disintegration of the device. Published results suggest ramp times of tens of hundreds of microseconds and peak currents of tens of millions of amps." The pulse that emerges makes a lightning bolt seem like a flashbulb by comparison.< /font>

---

To ignite an E-bomb, a starter current energizes the stator coil, creating a magnetic field. The explosion (A) expands the tube, short-circuiting the coil and compressing the magnetic field forw ard (B). The pulse is emitted (C) at high frequencies that defeat protective devices like Faraday Cages

nbk2000

March 19th, 2002, 07:29 AM

You may w ish to check out the links I provided in this topic as it relates to EMP. http://www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum/ultimatebb.cgi? ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000274

vulture

March 19th, 2002, 03:11 PM

microwave gun< /a> I think i've posted this before. Get an old microwave and you can turn it into a deadly EMP weapon.

green beret

March 21st, 2002, 11:49 PM

Take em' out permanently.......shit. Thanks heaps guys the info is very informative.

TheBicher

March 22nd, 2002, 08:15 PM

Just wondering, w hat types of damage could an EMP device cause to you (besides the explosion)? I would think that you w ould need to set it off remotly. Also, is it possible to make some kind of smaller version to take out something like an alarm system? There must be some way to down size the range of it, right? I'm assuming this would also effect flashights and other portible electronics, right?

kingspaz

March 23rd, 2002, 12:09 PM

it will destroy anything with wires, circuits and electrical components inside. would batteries themselves be affected?

Anthony

March 23rd, 2002, 02:00 PM

I should imagine that the EMP would do screwy things to your brain http://w ww.roguesci.org/ubb/icons/icon22.gif

nbk2000

March 24th, 2002, 12:11 AM

EMP only affects integrated circuits. If it has it chip, it dies. Simple electrical (flashlight for instance) or vacuum tubed circuits are immune to EMP from anything less than a multimegaton nuke exploded in space. As for people, we're unaffected by it since it's just a magnetic field. But microwave or HERF w eapons....that's another story.

green beret

March 24th, 2002, 03:34 AM

I'm going to do some research on smaller EMP devices, one that has a 50meter range w ould be good for taking out alarm systems.

green beret

March 24th, 2002, 04:13 AM

Also, that microwave gun, how far aw ay from it should I be to have total safety from the magnetron? And, when pulling apart a microw ave, can I be injured if it is not switched on? I was told that they have uranium diodes in them, can they irradiate me? Any assistance would be very helpful as I want to learn alot about microwaves before I even think about fucking around with them. Say this "Microwave gun" was to w ork what would the effective range on electrical equipment be and would it be destroyed as soon as I switched the w eapon on? I dont want to end up like the message icon above!

J

March 24th, 2002, 05:09 AM

Microwaves have at least one large capacitor, which will easily kill you if charged up. It w ill be on the high voltage (2kv+ ) side of the transformer. Short it out with a well insulated screwdriver. Other than that, there's no need to worry about radiation etc. If you're serious about microw aves, you should read an introductory book about them because it's a very large subject. I have one which I'd reccomend if I could find it! I'll try and dig it out later. I warn you though, there's a lot of theory about waves that you'll need to know about already.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter vulture

March 24th, 2002, 05:52 AM

Just look at < a href="http://w ww.powerlabs.org," target="_blank">ww w.powerlabs.org, that's the site the gun is on. They have extensive info on high voltage and EMP.

Demolition

March 24th, 2002, 05:53 AM

quote:< /font>< hr /> but it did mention that around 2Kg of TNT is used as the explosive.

---

< /blockquote>< font size="2" face= "Verdana, Arial, Helvetica"> < blockquote> quote:

---

It would take out all the electronics within a 500m radius, permanently.

---

< / blockquote> I think an explosive like RDX or PETN w ould be extremely suited for this type of use.One could use about 500 grams of PETN/RDX to almost have the same effect how ever the actual device w ould be a great deal smaller and lighter,also easier to conceal. :D Im sure if you knew what you were doing one could be produced for alot less than $800 Australian dollars,depending on the prices of your chemicals. :p

J

March 24th, 2002, 07:21 AM

It's not the chemicals that would be expensive, it's the capacitor bank. Since a very fast rise time is required to get maximum effect, high voltage pulse caps must be used. These are expensive, and generally not available through the average electronics supplier. I don't think electrolytic caps would do the job, but I may be wrong. Testing would also be required to get the timings right.

PYRO500

March 25th, 2002, 04:38 PM

Electrolytic capacitors are much too slow for a priming pulse in a FCG, you need caps with a very low ESR and short pulse length

Zambosan

March 26th, 2002, 01:22 PM

You'd also be looking at a pretty hefty amount of electrical engineering work. <small>[ July 18, 2002, 01:36 AM: Message edited by: Zambosan ]

Purple Fire

April 29th, 2002, 06:47 AM

if you wanted, say, a 5m radius one, could you use photoflash capacitors from disposable cameras? and how small do you think you could get this down to? hand held, lob-itthrough a window size? burgler alarms are going to be a pretty pathetic barrier if these ever get into general circulation. And there could be a big price for one of these on the black market. If one of us does get a reliable one, they could be a millionaire in 6 months selling it to burglers!

J

April 29th, 2002, 08:55 AM

Burglar alarm = loud alert to the police. EMP device = very loud alert to police, + additional (and far more serious) laws being broken. I don't see why it couldn't be scaled down though. But photo flash caps are electrolytic, so they w ouldn't be any use. I highly doubt a grenade sized device would be possible, at least to the amateur w ith poor funding. <small>[ April 29, 2002, 07:57 AM: Message edited by: J ]< /small>

PYRO500

April 29th, 2002, 11:24 PM

You can forget about making one without housands of dollars in test equipment let alone alot more for a small one that is not likely to work. the caps in photoflash cameraa are electrolytic but that isn't the reason w hy they won't w ork, the capacitors need to discharge very fast and while they are discharging the detonation w ave needs to travel down the conductor and the pulse of electricity needs to be millions of amps and happen during the discharge, so your capacitor bank needs to discharge fast and drain very quickly witch means very little resistance, and high precision in the timing of the detonation. nothing short of a 250 pound pulse cap and a half million dollars w orth of equipment. (double that if you want it to survive)

Flake2m

April 30th, 2002, 10:44 AM

The Irony with an FCG is; that you would need a computer for the theory, yet an FCG is designed to destroy computers. anyway how big w ould an FCG be if it was designed to take out any device within a 200m radius, would it be small enough to mount in the back of a van? I was thinking about w here you would place an FCG if you w anted to set one off. In each of the experiments, a Russian (VNIIEF) designed and built imploding MC-1 flux compression generator w as used to explosively compress the magnetic field into a smaller volume. Thus, generating an energy density of approximately 60 times that of the detonating high explosives on their ow n. this could be useful in detirmining the amount of explosive needed to create an FCG. i got some info from < a href="http://ww w.lanl.gov/projects/dirac/index.html" target="_blank"> this website < /a>

photonic

May 19th, 2002, 05:34 PM

Actually, you can create a small emp device in your garage rather easily. You just need a HV/High Current transformer, a capacitor banks, and a electromagnet. Depending on the size of your transformer you can either use a standard throw switch or, if it's a large transformer, a spark gap. You connect the caps in parralel and put the switch/spark gap anywhere that allows the caps to charge when closed. When the caps have fully charged, you flip the sw itch and all the current rushed through the elecromagent and creates an emp or if you're using a spark gap, it reaches the breakdown point, the air ionizes and the circuit is completed creating the same effect. MOT's w ill probably work as the transformer, and you want high capacitance caps. More joules = more emp in my understanding. The caps at w ww.thegeekgroup.org< /a> might work but i think their capacitance is too low . If I'm wrong about any of this, correct me. I forgot to mention that if there's too much resitance in the wire, it w ill explode. <small>[ May 19, 2002, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: photonic ]< /small>

Anthony

May 19th, 2002, 09:56 PM

It's high current which creates high level emp isn't it? If so, w hy the use of HV? Also, isn't most electromagnetic flux/radiation created when a field collapses? If so, what about a car battery in parrel w ith one or more 1Farrad audio booster caps connected to a coil w ith a fast breaking solenoid/relay, nice thick, short cables all round. Or am I just making a bad arse electromagnet here and no emi? :)

photonic

May 19th, 2002, 11:43 PM

You're right about high current making a stronger emf I think. It's just most transformers that aren't current limited(i.e. Microwave Oven Transformers) also produce a decent amount of voltage. Also, HV allow s you to use a spark gap triggered emp device. Low voltage won't ionize the air. With a sg you can control at what point the caps trigger by widening the gap. As for batteries in parrael, that will just speed up the charge time. The caps are in parralel to increase the capacitance. I think we use HV because we're using caps instead of straight from the tranny. Because j = .5(v^ 2c) where j is joules, v is voltage, and c is capacitance in farads, the higher the voltage, the more energy and the more emf. That's w hy we want HV/High Capacitance caps. Most audio caps are high capacitance but only like 25 volts i think. If anybody has the formula for the em strength(gauss i think) in relation to voltage and current that would answ er my/anthony's question. All the formula's i'm finding so far indicate voltage is of no consequence, but all the emp devices I've seen use HV. So I'm not sure. Forget the MOT, I think the power supply needs to be DC. It will be difficult to find a hv dc power supply so I'm going to assume that hv is not a requirement. It will just decrease the time it takes for the caps to charge. <small>[ May 19, 2002, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: photonic ]< /small>

PYRO500

May 20th, 2002, 07:52 PM

You w ant high voltages beacuse a capacitor's energy is lineraly increased by it's capacitance, but if you plot the voltage you get an exponential curve w itch means that the more energy from the voltage the faster the discharge and the high voltage travels better through conductors. As for microwave oven transformers, They are current limited, their current is just very high, ex> PRI: 120V 8.3A SEC: 2000V .5A this is a typical 1Kw microwave oven transformer. Their are several types of electronic w eapons some mentioned before are TED herfs, these are usually of the spark gap type that use a w aveguide to guide the RF from the spark (usually from a cap bank discharge) there also is the HERF or HPM that is usually from a magnetron with wave guide or MASER attached to colimate the microw aves and I w ill mention this now : DO NOT USE SWITCHES WITH HIGH ENERGY CAPACITOR DISCHARGES! A capacitor of a suitabe size w ill probably cause your switch to explode on closing, I recomend using a very high power scr.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter photonic

May 20th, 2002, 08:32 PM

Hey, thanks for the explanation. Although it would not be portable I suppose you could w ire a line transformer backwards to a cap bank and ballast it at whatever current you wanted. If you could afford to create the capacitor bank for it, I imagine you could have a pretty sizable emp. Most SCR's for high voltage are expensive and hard to come by aren't they? Since this thing not firing very quickly I think a standard adjustable spark gap would probably w ork w ell. You mentioned energy "weapons" that use a waveguide on the spark gap. I read something about magnetically quenched spark gaps that use neodymium magnets to guide the spark. Is this what you're talking about?

PYRO500

May 20th, 2002, 09:32 PM

I am talking about waveguides that direct and focus the EM radiation, they usually have a fed horn to further increase gain in one direction, as for a triggered spark gap they are very loud and can cause metals to explode and shoot out hot liquid metal. I have seen big scr's on ebay for a fair price but I recently got 2 18KA hockey puck scr's for 5$ each at a surplus store.

pyromaniac_guy

June 20th, 2002, 07:01 PM

for those thinking of trying to make an emp w ith pulse capacitors alone... it isnt worth the effort. Some time ago I collected 70kj worth of capacitors from old pulsed ruby lasers. me and a few friends tried discharging the cap bank through all manner of coils and w ere not able to produce any signifigant emp (a cheap 5$ walmart timex was used as an emp 'detector') w e were sucesfull in making straight w ire out of alot of coils, or more to the point, bits of straight wire as the coils exploded (the magnetic flux from a high curent discharge tends to turn a coil into a line), but not much emp.... and that w as w ith a pile of capacitors that weighed about a ton!!!!!

AfterRain

July 12th, 2002, 04:08 AM

alright, sorry to bring this topic alive again, But i was thinking, Could you use a battery,magnet,copper wire and the bomb. Could you set it up like this battery (+) to the mag's negative, then from there to the copper wire loop around the explosives then back the the (-) on the battery, when it would go off, w ould that produce and EMP/EMF, I w as thinking this because the magnet ,w ould magnatise the copper wire, so when it explodes the pipe touches the copper wire, but w ould this create the short as if not using the magnet? it might seem stupid, dumb ass, what not.. i had this idea, and was not sure if it was a good idea, or a wrong one since. thanks

PYRO500

July 13th, 2002, 01:23 AM

That makes no logical sense w hatsoever, wrapping a magnet in w ire and running current through it and blowing it up will result in shreded w ire for a flux compression generator to work you need a huge capacitor bank and a precision density HE that w ill travel at the instant the coil is energised. Not really something that the ametuer can hope to build. As for a 70KJ capacitor bank, that is absolutely huge in fact unless the capacitors were slow electrolytic or very huge HV caps I don't see how you could have gotten them, let alone switched them safely to fire this device. I could use a couple of big capacitors myself they are very hard to come by. w ith 70KJ of energy I'd build a rail gun. With 70 KJ though you should have been able to destroy more than a watch.

AfterRain

July 13th, 2002, 06:52 PM

Not wrapping the magnet in wire, but adding power (+) to the magents (-) side, then from the magnets (+) side, run a wire around the explosives , then that wire runs back to the (-) on the battery, which would complete the circut, i was thinking this because magnets have magnetic field , so i just thought that making the copper wire hooked up to the magnet could produce the same effect but maybe of a smaller size

xoo1246

July 13th, 2002, 07:06 PM

Well possibly you could destroy the electronics controlling your 9 v EMP, by blast effect. :p I belive they use an explosive lense in a linear EMP device to to get a planar(is that the word?) shockwave.

PYRO500

July 13th, 2002, 10:04 PM

That idea makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, just beacuse you blow up a coil of wire wrapped around a battery doesn't mean it'll make an emp.

Anthony

July 14th, 2002, 09:08 PM

I *think* he means run a current through a permanent magnet...

pyromaniac_guy

July 14th, 2002, 11:49 PM

pyro500, the caps w ere 10kv, and a mix of 100 and 60 uf... the whole array weighed in at over a ton.... as far as how i safely switched this??? w ell a high power ignitron would probably have handled the curent if there was some inductance in the circuit to keep the pulse length long... how ever we did it the old fashoned way... hardshorting the caps... each short would vaporize maybe half a foot of the ground electrode (doubled up 0000 guage copper wire) since tnt puts out about a kcal per gram, 70kj was the explosive equivalance of about half an ouce of tnt... to say the least the hardshorts were pretty damn loud!!!! i have video somew here of setting this bitch up, if i find it I'll post to the media section later.... we destroyed plenty of stuff, but couldnt generate any signifigant amount of emp... we tried quarter crushing, and at low powers had some luck, but once we got into the tens of kj range, we didnt crush the quarters much, just propelled them at high speed... guess our coild had too many nonuniformities... my ftp client keeps crashing my damn puter.... is there any w ay to post pics directly to the forum??? <small>[ July 14, 2002, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: pyromaniac_guy ]< /small> vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Railgun Log in

View Full Version : Railgun Energy84

March 6th, 2002, 05:02 PM

Has anyone tried making one of these? I'd like to build my own, but I need to learn a few fundamentals about magnetic fields, formulas etc... I'd like to build a gun with about a .50 inch barrel and loots of power (of course). I need to know stuff like what material to make the barrel from? how many winds of wire and what gauge? how much current/voltage is required? A buddy of mine brought up the idea of building a railgun and now I'm obcessed. He told me that the amount of winds is directly related to the barrel length. He also had an idea about converting a paintball gun into a railgun and letting the air pressure get the projectile moving. Would this really be necessary? Oh, and is there a specific metal that the projectile would need to be made of for optimum performance? Thanks for the help everybody!

PYRO500

March 7th, 2002, 01:02 PM

reailgins don't use coils of wire, if you needhelp with one visit www.powerlabs.org (http://www.powerlabs.org) and ask at hteir forums.

Ctrl_C

March 7th, 2002, 05:04 PM

you are correct, railguns do not use coil. they use charged rails to create a magnetic field. the hardest part about a railgun is finding a pulse capacitor with high voltage and amperage. search for 'gauss' on http://www.slashdot.org there was an article there recently on a similar concept but some of the discussion talks about railguns.

Mr Cool

March 8th, 2002, 07:08 AM

Railguns can use coils - two rows of coils, one above and one below the rails, so that the field lines go straight down through the rails and armature (bullet). You have to have the field in the right direction though, or it will have a negative effect on performance. Every time this has been discussed on the Forum while I've been here, it has been decided that if you want something that works for under a few £100, make a conventional coil gun, not a rail gun.

PYRO500

March 8th, 2002, 12:44 PM

yes you can have electromagnets in a railgun to increase efficiency a bit but the militayry can only get around 5% so don't expect to get any higher, coil guns on the other hand are MUCH simpler and require MUCH less energy and can be relitively powerful, coilguns are alsocalled gauss guns fyi, the single coil ones are simple but when you get mucltiple coils things get harry, the advantage to gauss guns is thet you can use electrolytics on them.

xoo1246

March 8th, 2002, 01:01 PM

Don't expect too much...

Tyler_Durden

March 8th, 2002, 01:46 PM

http://scitoys.com Some cool stuff there. I think there is somethin on a simple toy railgun.

Ctrl_C

March 8th, 2002, 02:57 PM

interesting enough i borrowed (read: stole) some neodynium magnets and some steel ball bearings from physics today and made a simple gauss gun. it involves taping the magnets 2.5in away from each other on a ruler with a groove in it, putting 2 ball bearings in front of each and letting one go at the end with no ball bearings on the magnet. the 1st magnet attracts it, makes it hit, transfers the kinetic energy through the magnet and one of the 2 balls places there and to the other of the 2 balls. this said ball then gains acceleration due to the attraction by the 2nd magnet and so on. you can get a respectable speed out of 10 magnets or so. heres a diagram where 0=ball x=magnet -= nothing/ruler

--0----x00----x00----x00----x00---

Energy84

March 8th, 2002, 03:10 PM

Seems I got the terminology mixed up. I meant coil gun (hence the windings). But now that I've looked into it a little harder, it's hardly worth all the work involved. :( Ctrl_C, I found this link last night http://scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/magnets/gauss.html that shows pictures of the simple gauss gun you just described.

TariqMujahid

March 16th, 2002, 04:48 PM

Railguns...i've thought about making one of these. However, don't expect to match the Department of Defense's railgun, that shoots 6 km/sec.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Just think: a stungun can seriously injure someone, and it uses only a 9V battery. Why is this? Because of the capacitors. So, if you have a large capacitor bank (maybe a few hundred capacitors), you can perhaps get decent results. For the materials of the rails, try using Copper or Silver...Iron won't do it. Same thing applies for the Armature, it must be nonferrous. An idea for shooting the armature is this: Do not simply insert it, and then turn on the power. Try using a pneumatic device to shoot the armature in, and then the railgun does its work. The advantage of this is: it helps to prevent overheating, which can weld the armature to the rails and short out the gun. The magnetic fields on a railgun tend to push the 2 rails apart. So you will need a strong support frame that will hold the two rails together. The 2 rails MUST be parallel to each other. I had an idea for a railgun that would have 2 sets of rails, one going horizontally and the other vertically. When the armature passed through, it would complete 2 circuits at the same time. The advantage of this, is i'd have 2 capacitor banks; therefore it would charge up in half the time, while still using the same amount of electricity. Railguns give off a lot of electromagnetic interference when they are fired, keep that in mind. www.railgun.org These guys are 2 students at MIT who are building their own railgun. I've asked one of them, Mouser, a few questions. They know a lot about the subject, send em an e-mail maybe.

Ctrl_C

March 16th, 2002, 05:03 PM

hmm your pneumatic idea is a good one, but it would be difficult. first of all, the projectile would be pretty heavy. if you know anything about paintball guns, you know paintballs have a very short curving trajectory. this would be more evident with a heavy projectile being launched from something similar to (if not) a paintball gun. also, you would probably have to use a projectile slightly smaller than the barrel and use a pece of cloth or something as wadding to keep the pressure from escaping around the ball.

Mr Cool

March 16th, 2002, 05:07 PM

The (pneumatic) pre-injector is not only a good idea, it's practically essential! Without one it's very hard to stop the armateur from welding.

RTC

March 16th, 2002, 05:42 PM

What are military/industrial rail gun's made/used for?

kingspaz

March 16th, 2002, 07:44 PM

i beleive they are used for testing pretty much. i also beleive they are (where?) part of the the star wars projects which involve various 'space age' technology such as chemical lasers mounted on aircraft. the project was originally made to find a way to defeat ICBM's.

TariqMujahid

March 16th, 2002, 08:20 PM

The armature of a railgun must conduct electricity, but cannot be Iron. Therefore, a paintball would not work. It would just sit there. The purpose of the armature is to close the circuit between the 2 rails. The magnetic field that is created tries to expand itself, and therefore moves the armature up the rail. That's also why it pushes the two rails apart... So, having a wadded projectile simply will not work. The Armature will have to fit snuggly in the pneumatic insertion device. I got most of this information from www.railgun.org and searching online, so just look what they have. They have pretty good formulas for this stuff. <small>[ March 16, 2002, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: TariqMujahid ]

Anthony

March 17th, 2002, 11:18 AM

I remain adamant that a personal raigun will never be more practical than a conventional firearm or even compressed gas power weapon. Until small, portable fusion generators are created. Stunguns don't cause injury/pain because of the energy contained in the discharge, it uses the power of your own muscles to do that, it simply controls them. The amount of energy required to stop your heart is very small, considerably less than that contained within a 9v PP3 battery. The reason it works is because of the extremely efficient delivery method (if applied to the correct area of the body). Although again, its your own heart muscles which actually stop your heart, or make it fiblerate. There are many very high energy density batteries available at the moment that would probably have enough stored energy to give you several rail gun shots that possesed energy equal to that of a firearm round. But the problem with these high energy density batteries is that they just can't handle high discharge rates so would take a long time to recharge your cap bank for a follow up shot. Forget double-tap... It's much the same thing that prevents electric cars from catching on, basically that you get a lot more energy stored in small amount of chemical compound that can be released instantly. It might be less efficient but you're prepared to eat the loss because of its great advantage.

TariqMujahid

March 17th, 2002, 04:32 PM

No, of course a railgun is not practical; that's a good point Anthony brought up. If you're trying to make a railgun as a substitute for a paintball gun, that will be very difficult. It takes a long long time for them to recharge their capacitor bank, and that's the reason you don't see them on fighter planes or soldiers armed with them. They need weapons with a high rate of fire, and shooting a shot; waiting a minute; and firing another just won't cut it. Railguns, atleast homemade ones, are only good for hobbyists. Similarly, you wouldn't take your homemade coil gun on a guerilla attack. But my idea, with the 4 rails would effectively cut the recharge rate in half. It's essentially 2 railguns firing the same armature. Therefore, it would have 2 separate energy sources...

PYRO500

October 13th, 2002, 01:38 AM

Actually you'll get better efficency if you stick to 2 rails, if you want more contact surface area then a co-axial rail gun might be

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter what you are looking for.

Today I finally got some parts for my rail gun. They are two silver plated copper bus bars, and 3 4,200V capacitors. The bus bars are 3 feet 3 inches long and 2 inches wide, they are 3/16 of an inch thick. The capacitors I have are all rated for 4,200V and their capacitance that was measured at the factory is stamped on them, there are 2 298UF caps and a 297UF cap. The total energy these capacitors can store is about 7,876 Joules, witch 30 is considered lethal and 360 or so are avalable at a hospital through their defibulation machine. I plan on using lexan for the rail gun body beacuse it's much more simple to cut than garrolite composite such as used on Sam Barros' page. What I have to do now is cut the bus bars to the right lenghts and hook up all the cap's in paralell. then once there paralelled I can discharge them through a resistor and watch them on an osciliscope and try to find out how fast they'll discharge in my rail gun app so I can calculate the lenght of the rails correcly. If you want to see pictures of the capacitor bank I'm building go to this link: http://pub13.bravenet.com/photocenter/ album.php?album=3422&usernum=1081592780 I have some pictures of the bank and bus bars there. <small>[ October 13, 2002, 12:42 AM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

the resourceless reaperman

October 15th, 2002, 10:07 AM

Remember you don't need to use conductive material for guiding the projectile wihile it's still being fired. You could just use a wooden rail or a plastic one. Allthough the plastic might not withstand the heat caused by friction it will be more moisture resistant. Also why have more that two rails for conduction? since you only need + and - it seems pointless to add more potentially damageable (is that english?) parts. And what precautions are you going to take to make sure your expensive capacitors won't blow up? The projectile you want ot use doesn't have to be solid copper (or whatever conductive stuff is used here)it can be something heavier with a conductive layer. PS. does someone know/have any links about how to make a homopole generator? <small>[ October 15, 2002, 09:59 AM: Message edited by: the resourceless reaperman ]

Boob Raider

October 15th, 2002, 01:33 PM

Pyro .... here's something I wanted to try .... but I don't have good charge dump caps. Anyways see if you can try this ... take really thick insulated (PVC insulated 14 gauge) Cu wire and wind say 5 turns on a Non-Ferro Magnetic rod (a brass screw). Then have only the 2 ends of the coil make contact with the rails (keep in mind the polarity of the coiled armature). I am suspecting a slug with a winding to be more efficient and faster compared to a standard slug. I have other coil windings to try but I'll wait till I get mine tunning.

PYRO500

October 15th, 2002, 05:23 PM

I am only planning of using two rails like a normal railgun. I was only pointing out flaws with the 4 rail design. For the railgun to have any kind of efficency the armature must make contact with the rails for the duration of the pulse. I have yet to determine the pulse so I can't calculate how long my rails need to be yet. I will do that when I get all my capacitors hooked up and working and calculate the ESR and ESL. I'm not sure what exactly you ment about that conductive coating but I do know that if you use a metal strip behind a non conducting slug you will get a plasma armature rail gun and get higher speeds since your projectile is alot lighter. As far as plasma armatures go I don't think I'll be using one due to the high pressures involved and the materials I'd need to use. It isn't that I can't afford G-9 Garrolite like Sam Barros, It's just that I lack the CNC waterjet cutter and such tools to cut the tough stuff. I plan on using Lexan or polycarbonate plastic for the gun. I think the idea with the brass slug wound with a coil would decrease efficency beacuse it would raise inductance in the circuit and cause the capacitors to discharge alot slower decreasing the maximum amperage delivered to the rails.

the resourceless reaperman

October 16th, 2002, 11:16 AM

that's why I asked about the homopole generator, it can create enormous amperages and discharge very quickly without being damaged. PS. check www.geocities.com/thatsmeagain2000 if you still want to know what I meant by a metal coating.

Positive Electron

October 16th, 2002, 06:20 PM

a close friend of mine made a small version with wooden rails that contained small amounts of mercury. he used wooden barriers to keep them from contacting and it worked pretty good. he had 6 7000v caps from his dad (a laser physics engineer) and he charged with 8 die hard batteries :) one of the military guns used 14000 car batteries and had 2 35 foot long aluminum rails, and shot 22 million fps. the whole gun assembly took up 2 large warehouses, and they tipped a tank sideways with it, but the rails would destroy themselves after every shot, so they discontinued the project.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anthony

October 16th, 2002, 07:20 PM

Have you got a reference for that 22,000,000 fps figure?

Marvin

October 16th, 2002, 10:02 PM

reaperman, homopolar generator creates very high currents at tiny voltages, the power therefore isnt useful. The only people still interested in them are the mixture of snakeoil salesmen and physics incompetents that still bilieve in free energy. Somehow I think a coilgun whose magnets were coresonent with the accelerating projectile would be extremly efficient using superconducting windings. I wonder if this has been tried. Edit, played around with some math. 22million fps is 2.2% of the speed of light. That works out at about 50 tons of TNT per gram of armature. Assuming the car batteries dumped the energy completely into the gun, with 5% conversion, would make the armature about 7.5mg. I get the feeling at this power to armature ratio it would vapourise in the gun. Anyone care to doublecheck these numbers? <small>[ October 16, 2002, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: Marvin ]

firebreether

October 16th, 2002, 11:18 PM

No way it could do anywhere near 22,000,000 fps. I thought the record for a projectile was Sandia's rail gun, launching a .1 gram projectile to 16,000 m/s. Which is huge, considering bullets are around 1,000 m/s top speed rough estimate.

the resourceless reaperman

October 17th, 2002, 09:44 AM

doesn't friction in the air melt the projectile?

firebreether

October 17th, 2002, 04:10 PM

yes, going at high speed, aerodynamic heating will be high. But I'm concerned with this, if you choose to use a plasma armature, wouldn't it melt the rails and the prohectile in short order, i mean at the currents needed to produce high energy shots, depending on the voltage used, the plasma will be hot, and dense, and melterific.

AfroFukinPyro

October 17th, 2002, 08:40 PM

Some friends of mine just made a coil gun (which as has been stated is different than a rail gun). This was just an experimental prototype, and although it was cool it was extreamy inefficient. The gun could shoot a screw about 3 meters, which is obviosly not even as powerful as the human finger, and the coil gun must be carried around. It would be very hard to build a compact, powerfull coil gun, and I'm sure if your seriose a rail gun is the way to go.

Ctrl_C

October 17th, 2002, 09:05 PM

I was just thinking, what would happen if you shot a projectile from a railgun into another railgun set to discharge when the projectile entered it. kind of a series of railguns. could you achieve higher velocities? also, when they quote these figures, are they at sea level, vacuum, or other?

PYRO500

October 17th, 2002, 10:01 PM

I think a homopolar generator will be far too low in voltage to supply the power a railgun needs. As far as I know HPG's need very good low friction brushes to work. IIRC I've seen some that use liquid mercury as the contact. If you were to make a generator & flywheel to run one of these directly you'd need a compulsator or a compensated alternator. Compulsators are kind of hard to describe but basicly they are like a generator that can supply huge currents at fairly high voltages to whatever their output is hooked up to, they can be made pretty efficient and power something like a railgun with a signifigantly heavy flywheel attached. The only problem with a compulsator is that there fairly complex to build and need precision and would overall be more of a challenge to make one of them than a rail gun. So in light of that I'm using a capacitor bank, it's my most affordable option (cost me 375$ on capacitors and 20$ on silver plated copper bus bars so far) I think my railgun may be only metal armature. With a plasma armature I need tough materials that are tougher than lexan (what I plan to use) and they may be about the same price but I'm probobly going to have to use standard tools, nothing like milling machines, etc. I am still designing my rail stack for the gun. so far I've come up a design that uses 2 T shaped spacers that the rails go on wither end of and end up flish with the sides of the T si that it the T's will be covered with a block of lexan and the lexan T's will be bolted to the rail covers. I'm thinking if I use clear polycarbonate I should be able to see all the parts of the gun all the time (untill the lexan gets charred) witch should make for some fairly intersting pictures. I know already I'll have to keep the rails far enough apart to avoid arcing between them and while minimizing projectile weight. I'm thinking around 10 mm between my rails but I'm not sure yet. As far as the multiple railgun idea goes, it is possible, beacuse the railgun is just accelerating the slug with an immense current pulse however the energy will be most efficently used if the slug that enters the rails has the entire capacitor bank discharged over one set of rails instead of several. Most of the velocity's I've seen quoted for railguns are done in the ordinary lab manner in witch they just test it at STP and record the results although I have read of railguns that break the world's speed records by firing into a vacuum. Railguns that fire into vacuum's are VERY fast.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

As far as coilguns go I've built a few out of fiberglass tubes and computer grade electrolytic capacitors but they were all single stage and solid state employing hockeypuch SCR's to switch them. I think a railgun will be much harder than any coilgun and probobly alot more fun too. besides at 4,200V and 7,876 J of energy there isn't much simplicity to design a coil gun of that magnitude

AfroFukinPyro

October 17th, 2002, 10:42 PM

Sam Barros is almost complete his rail gun and in the forum he said full testing should begin as soon as tomorow. Check out this page and go to the rail gun secion (also check out the coil guns). http://www.powerlabs.org/ Edit: That's Sam Barros <small>[ October 17, 2002, 10:36 PM: Message edited by: PYRO500 ]

the resourceless reaperman

October 18th, 2002, 12:06 PM

quote:

---

As far as the multiple railgun idea goes, it is possible, beacuse the railgun is just accelerating the slug with an immense current pulse however the energy will be most efficently used if the slug that enters the rails has the entire capacitor bank discharged over one set of rails instead of several.

---

Now what if these sperate railguns each had a seperate capacitor bank? more or less like a coil gun, only instead of coils you use the two bars. It seems like a good idea.

PYRO500

October 18th, 2002, 01:42 PM

That idea would work but it would suck when it came to efficency. the longer the gun the more friction and past a certain point the projectile is destroying any part of the gun it touches (esp rails if you made the gun the right length then you should be able to get the most power out of it when everything is in one stage. Trying to make multiple stages defeats the purpose of building a railgun when you want to get the projectile the fastest speed possible in the shortest distance possible

the resourceless reaperman

October 18th, 2002, 03:14 PM

I see. Idea: If the projectile were to be filled with a gas say... Argon. would it turn into a plasma upon firing?

PYRO500

October 18th, 2002, 05:11 PM

What do you mean by filling the projectile with argon? If you mean to make the path of least resistance through a gas instead of directly from metal to metal, yes, some of the gas will get hot and turn to a plasma although that is hardly useful and would be nothing but an arc inside a gas envelope and not do much else. You can use plasma in your railgun to propell a slug though. it involves sending something like a metal ribbon behind the slug and when it's injected and contacts the rails the metal ribbbon should get vaporized and conduct and therefore be subject to the lorenz forces behind the slug and propell the non conducting slug out of the railgun.

the resourceless reaperman

October 19th, 2002, 11:01 AM

does everything that can conductwork? in case that's so, does salt water ( :p )work?

PYRO500

October 19th, 2002, 12:35 PM

Yes, and no. I think the slug has to be non feromagnetic. Aother thing is that the energy required for that bead of water to go anywere will result in it's vaporization and then nothing will happen.

the resourceless reaperman

October 19th, 2002, 02:20 PM

I assume ferromagnetics mean Cobalt, iron, neodymium etc. why don't these work? and salt water surely can't be ferromagnetic??

PYRO500

October 19th, 2002, 02:44 PM

Salt water will vaporize! read my last post!

the resourceless reaperman

October 19th, 2002, 04:45 PM

that's not what I asked, I asked why ferromagnetics don't work.

kingspaz

October 19th, 2002, 05:43 PM

the resourceless reaperman, show some respect to moderators. he is trying to help so don't get angry and be grateful. think before you post or face being banned.

the resourceless reaperman

October 20th, 2002, 06:37 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Sorry,

I was a bit rude there. sorry sorry sorry! I still wonder why ferromagnetics don't work...

PYRO500

October 20th, 2002, 06:06 PM

Because their resistance is too high.

AfroFukinPyro

October 20th, 2002, 07:01 PM

According to Powerlabs, to work properly a railgun must have a pneumatic injector so that the projectile is already traveling around 200 m/s (i think) when it enters the rails. <small>[ October 20, 2002, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: AfroFukinPyro ]

Anthony

October 21st, 2002, 07:35 AM

It doesn't have to be a pneumatically driven injector. Any means of getting the slug moving before it contacts the rails (at an appropriate speed) will work. It's interesting to see that Sam Barros' caps are a bit *too* good and he needs to slow the discharge pulse down!

the resourceless reaperman

October 21st, 2002, 09:11 AM

could a strong spring do the job? It won't reach 200m/s but it will be have some speed without the added cost of a pneumatic injector.

Harry

October 21st, 2002, 11:30 AM

How about a double-base injector? Load double-base smokeless into shotshell, add slug, crimp. Prime shotshell, load into chamber. Charge cap bank, ready aim fire. Harry

vir sapit qui pauca loquitur

October 21st, 2002, 12:23 PM

This idea could be a load of steaming B.S. but..... from personal experience at a local university and after completing a lot of experiments on the matter i have come to an idea that could revolutionise the entire idea of rail guns and it goes a little like this... plasma is the fourth state of matter (1-3 being liquid,gas,solid) this is a gas that is highly excited, and as such exhibits strange and unusual properties such as being conductive, plasma can be created by exciting gas (certain gasses) with a UV laser (or by microwave, but a UV laser gives a nice straight line) with 2 uv lasers, one either side of the other generating 2 straight lines straight out (towards target). After the plasma "rails" are generated we then take a light-weight projectile that has fins to aid in stabilisation of said projectile. A potential difference (voltage) is then applied across the two "rails" mimicing a rail gun, the projectile is then 'shunted' in the direction of travel of the rails, the projectile shorts the two plasma "rails" and it acts exactly as a rail gun would. Due to the plasma rails, we avoid the usual problems of weight, and damage due to the extreme forces exerted on them. Also this allows for the rails to be extremely long (dependant on the lasers capabilities) as far as i can see it, this is the way forward (but only if you happen to have a continuos flow of noble gas/uv laser etc :( ) I would love to see if this idea could get off the ground, I may be able to persuade the staff at the uni to investigate this but I would like a bit of feed back on the rail-gun side (not my area) before I start talking about it to anyone else

PYRO500

October 21st, 2002, 09:52 PM

In theroy that idea would work, but there are a few things that stand in the way of success. One of the things is that you need very huge voltages to conduct electricity down your plasma trails from your multi terrawatt lasers, and another thing is that the air is likely to arc across at the voltage source if you give it enough voltage to arc down two plasma channels.

the resourceless reaperman

October 22nd, 2002, 08:53 AM

Why use a railgun if you have multi-terawatt lasers?

PYRO500

October 22nd, 2002, 04:51 PM

Exactly the point I was making.

the resourceless reaperman

October 22nd, 2002, 05:21 PM

If you have multiple terawatts, wouldn't it be more attractive to use metal bars? why bother about lasers? <small>[ October 23, 2002, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: the resourceless reaperman ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter firebreether

October 23rd, 2002, 12:02 AM

I just saw a picture of Sam Barros' railgun firing, holy cow, that was amazing. quite powerful. Yeah, its too bad that it discharged too fast, you wouldn't think of that as being bad normally :rolleyes: The pulse was so short, that the projectile was only half on the rail and the discharge was over, meaning that it really didn't accelerate the projectile much, just the plasma form the projectile vaporizing. This also made it spectacular to see, as there was a huge cloud of metal sparks, and an intense muzzle flash. <small>[ October 22, 2002, 11:13 PM: Message edited by: firebreether ]

Boob Raider

June 11th, 2003, 02:51 PM

I am not sure if this would count as a plasma armature (I think it would). Here is the set up. 2 cheap Al railsbolted on a steel plate or something with a couple of mm gap between them. Your cap bank is hook up to the rails like in a regular setup. Now for the projectile ..... a shaped charge with a leaded Cu cone (Cu cone which is allowed to soak in molten lead) or whatever material you think or know is best. From what I know about shaped charges is that they produce a thin jet of metal plasma. The shaped charge is alligned with the rails and detonated. As is the jet of plasma has a velocity of ~10km/s add to which the energy dumped by the caps into the plasma when it moves through the rails.

Mr Cool

June 12th, 2003, 10:25 AM

It may work, but if you've got a SC, then why bother with a railgun? It's not going to accelerate it to significantly more than the ~10 km/s that the tip of the jet is already travelling at without HUGE capacitor banks, and HUGE expense. Plus, the mechanics/engineering of it would be a nightmare I think, if it is intended to be re-usable. Any misalignment and your jet will just plough straight through your rails and ruin them. One thing I have been thinkng about would be to have thick copper rails, coated with a mil or so of tungsten, or other nonamalgamating metal. The slug would be teflon or other plastic, perhaps with a metal core. It would be accelerated using a mercury or indium/gallium alloy, or other quite inert liquid metal, as the armature. This would get round problems associated with sparking and welding, and would provide minimal friction. The liquid metal may well vapourise and form a plasma armature I think. If nothing else it would vapourise and propel the projectile via the conventional expanding-gas method, although if that's all that happens it'd be a bit of a waste of time!

Boob Raider

June 12th, 2003, 01:06 PM

Why not use a slug of Hg or Hg/Ag amalgam instead. I believe the teflon wouldn't allow the slug to accelerate to a large extent as it is non-conductive. I believe only the Hg/In plasma would accelerate. Personally Ag slugs should be the simplest and best. Least electrical resistance of all metals so no arcing or welding problems. I am not sure is welding a greater problem or friction with the rails. If friction is a greater problem the Graphite looks pretty good. Like I said earlier Hg/Ag amalgam would be good too. I didn't know that the caps wouldn't be able to accelerate a plasma jet over ~10km/s. The reason I thought so is that in every railgun related page that I have read, it is mentioned that the faster the slug is traveling before it enters the rails the better. And I believe the military railgun has the slug explosively projected through the rails. I wasn't worried about the rails getting damaged part. I was using cheap Al rails to begin with.

Mr Cool

June 12th, 2003, 07:03 PM

"Why not use a slug of Hg or Hg/Ag amalgam instead. I believe the teflon wouldn't allow the slug to accelerate to a large extent as it is non-conductive. I believe only the Hg/In plasma would accelerate. Personally Ag slugs should be the simplest and best. Least electrical resistance of all metals so no arcing or welding problems. I am not sure is welding a greater problem or friction with the rails. If friction is a greater problem the Graphite looks pretty good. Like I said earlier Hg/Ag amalgam would be good too. I didn't know that the caps wouldn't be able to accelerate a plasma jet over ~10km/s. The reason I thought so is that in every railgun related page that I have read, it is mentioned that the faster the slug is traveling before it enters the rails the better. And I believe the military railgun has the slug explosively projected through the rails. I wasn't worried about the rails getting damaged part. I was using cheap Al rails to begin with."

Arcing, welding and errosion are serious problems with all solid armatures. With a liquid armature, there could be no welding, and minimal sparking due to the intimate contact between the armature and the rails. To get such an intimate contact with a solid armature would add a great deal of friction in comparison. That is the reason for using a liquid armature. A liquid slug, as the projectile, would be no good since it would easily vapourise due to the currents, meaning that you no longer have a projectile, and if it did survive there's no way that a drop of liquid would be stable flying through air at several km/s. The teflon slug would not need to be conductive since it is being propelled by the armature. It would be accelerated just fine due to the huge force exerted on it by the accelerating mercury armature. There is no way that the armature could accelerate without accelerating the teflon slug. "Least electrical resistance of all metals so no arcing or welding problems." The contact between armature and rails will have a significant resistance, leading to arcing and welding. "Graphite looks pretty good" In my experience, graphite shatters way too easily. When it contacts the rails, resistance (which is quite high, even without contact problems) causes massive heating, also there is arcing, and the resultant stresses blow the graphite into little chunks. Although that was with artist's graphite sticks. "I didn't know that the caps wouldn't be able to accelerate a plasma jet over ~10km/s." They could do it, but even with a VERY VERY VERY good and expensive design you're very unlikely to get more than a few km/ s extra. Meaning that you would have spent many $1000's to get from 10 km/s to 12 km/s, when the first ten only cost you $5 for a SC. Just think what sort of damage you could do with an equal amount of money spent on SC's!!!!! "it is mentioned that the faster the slug is traveling before it enters the rails the better." That is very true, I see what you were thinking. I just don't think it'd be at all practical! "And I believe the military railgun has the slug explosively projected through the rails." Explosively, perhaps. But not SC jets. Also, they have multi-MJ cap banks, which could provide significant acceleration compared to the injection speed.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Edit: I just read through my reply, and it sounds a bit rude. It isn't meant to :).

silverleaf

March 8th, 2004, 05:49 PM

One thing though, if you use high enough energy to get high speeds, then there is the chance of the rails flexing, due to the magnetic field's effect on the metal in the rails, plus too much energy and the projectile may weld to the rails, due to arcage, like that in an arc welder, but one way to curve this, is based on the principal, that the field strengthens with distance, so that a low force over a longer rail-set, will yield super-high speed, without any arc risks

zhuge liang

August 21st, 2004, 11:39 PM

Could the spacing between the rails be far enough so that when the armature is shot between the rails the arc could accelerate the projectile? And it may eliminate the question of capacitors. Also, the pre-accelerator could be a crossbow, yes? Also, if you used a thin needle of a solid material, then would it not fly faster, as well as vaporise, when fired? (In future don't post twice, us the edit function so i don't have to glue your posts together - kingspaz)

Jacks Complete

September 2nd, 2004, 07:36 PM

There is a trick you can use to double the effective power out of your railgun, which is very handy when you are dumping your power too quickly. The answer is to bend your rails, as per the patent I read once (Darned if I can find it though). Basically, the design calls for double length rails, which are bent back round, to run along with the opposite rail. The current is injected in the usual way, but because of the "extra" turn in the rails, the inductance goes up a bit, meaning that the current is driven through slower. However, this is offset by the greater force acting on the armature. This also reduces problems such as arcover and flash vapouring your projectile! The one I tried to build ended up being a very good spot welder. Heated the projectile and spot welded it to the rail when the "injection" was done by rolling a steel ball bearing down a cardboard tube and onto the rails. Faster injection just meant all the way down the rails was covered in little spot welds!

s9ar7acu3

September 25th, 2004, 07:48 AM

Google:Ram Accelerator http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q=Ram+Accelerator&btnG=Search Ram> Rail gun Positively Scalable (efficiency goes up the bigger it is) Simple(er) to fabricate Chemical reaction as opposed to Complex electrical system, hence cheaper.

FUTI

September 25th, 2004, 01:28 PM

This Ram accelerator is very interesting and I wonder why I didn't heard about this before. Do you think that sprayed diesel can be used for RAM accelerator just for testing purpose of course? It should ignite on compresion and you could use an air cylinder to accelerate the projectile to compress the mixture to ignition point. Do you think this can work? I think that 7 to 11 km/s is the highest velocity measured with rail or coil guns. It was interesting subject around WWII and now and then someone try something in this direction but no big breaktrough so far. My advice...abandon the project. I would rather play with chemical lasers (which are also suspiciously effective) then railgun. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> M203 Log in

View Full Version : M203 Victim

August 13th, 2001, 11:11 PM

I'm transfixe d with this rig. My question isn't at the rig more the 203 am m o, just a question about the shell it fire's, does it fire the whole thing? or le ave the shell in the breach? -----------------"Death, The End Of Hope, The Friend Of The Friendless..."

Mr Cool

August 14th, 2001, 03:41 PM

Lol, when I first saw this thread I was like "M2O 3 - what kinda stupid chem ical form ula is that?! And what's it doing in this section?!" I know, I'm a bit stupid sometim es! I didn't realise it was an 0 and not a n O! Anyway, I don't really know anything about wea pons, but if I understand your question correctly then the shell stays in the breech (or is ejected after the shot), but the projectile leaves the barrel. But maybe you're talking about so m e t h i n g c o m p l e t e l y different! C o u l d y o u g i v e a n y m ore information about this M203, to help p eople lik e m e u n d e r s t a n d what you're talking about?!

Victim

August 14th, 2001, 05:20 PM

Sorry, lost myself reading it. W hen the 20 3 attachm ent is loaded with a cartridge, and then fired, does the whole cartridge fire including the cartridge case, or just the actual round? [ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y V i c t i m (edited August 14, 2001).]

kingspaz

August 14th, 2001, 05:42 PM

the round leaves and the case is left b e h i n d . h e r e s a d i a g r a m to show how the shell works. http://www.angelfire.com/mo3 / k i n g s p a z / i m a g e s / b l o o p 1 .gif [This message has been edited by kin gspaz (edited August 14, 2001).]

Victim

August 14th, 2001, 05:47 PM

Thanks, that explained everything I wanted to know. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Blowguns Log in

View Full Version : Blowguns Tyler_Durden

February 26th, 2002, 12:44 PM

The last week or so I have been piddling around with different blowgun possibilities in my room. They are so simple, easy to make, and accurate, but I can't seem to think of a great way to use them as a tactical weapon, other than poison delivery. Maybe I am hoping for too much, but how else can they be used. It's unlikely you will be able to greatly injure someone with a dart alone. Or am I mistaken? Concealment wouldn't be a problem, and of course making a decent blowgun is very easy, but what about the ammo? Needles seem to be the best as far as the bulk of it, but stabilization that is both effective and durable has been some trouble to me. So far, the best I have done is to stick the needle through a half inch of shoelace, then fluff out the back end. I haven't tried much though. Just kinda messed around half-assedly with whatever was within arms reach. Any ideas?

PYRO500

February 26th, 2002, 04:24 PM

what kinds of blowguns have you been making? ones with a piece of pvc and a needle surrounded with your or what? if you use a professionally made blow pipe you will see these plastic/metal things with the darts are extremely powerful! with the wire tipped ones you need pliers to pull them out of a 2 by 4. by themselves they are weak, but witha poison they have much potential. they could be used for temporary incapacitation of someone if you were to shoot them in the face, these things would take out an eye easily, or pentrate the cheek, or stick into bone, witch means pain galore for the victim, but as these things go for defensive weapons they just don't work, if you were gonna get someone, you wait till they walk past you and you hiding behind some bushes stick them in the face with one of these and run, guranted to put them out for a while.

NoltaiR

February 26th, 2002, 06:09 PM

Oh how this topic brings back memories :) My cousin bought a commercial blow gun that shot little wire-point darts. Well I wanted to show him up so I made a improvised blow gun out of a 4' long by ¾" ID galvenized aluminum pipe for the 'gun' and a cap to a drawing marker with a nail superglued to the top of the cap (the part that is closed in). Although my shots my darts never shot out with near the accuracy and lightning speed that his gun had because my darts weighed about 50 times as much as his and were about 5 times as large, I could still pull off putting a 1/8" hole in a ½" thick peice of plywood at 30 feet away just because my darts had so much force upon impact. While his little darts would just stick in the plywood (however you are right about needing to use pliers to get those damn miniature darts out). Anyways we even got past the stage of just randomly shooting darts and went to go find some frogs.. once we were good enough to get a frog at least 5 feet way (which was simple for his gun put took a hell of a lot of luck for my gun) we went to find grasshoppers (less than 1" long) to shoot. Now he could easily get one from about 3 to 4 feet away but I had to be about a foot away and still I only managed to get it once or twice before giving up. Anyways the main difference was that while he could get it on the first shot and would momentarily stun the frog before jumping off, when I shot mine into the frog, you could hear bones crack and it didn't move anywhere :rolleyes: Well so much for my stories, I have heard of people making darts similar to my homemade ones and instead of using a nail, they would use a BB stuck to a few grams of AP which is somehow binded to the cap. When the dart would impact, the BB would set off the AP. Now if you can get good with this, then you could pick off vehicles at about 30+ feet away.

Jack Ruby

March 1st, 2002, 08:45 AM

In the FTP there is A .Doc file titled BtoD.doc. It is written by someone calling them self, "Agent Blak of C-Spec"...? The file Talks about making darts from Syring lungers and the Hypodermic Needle. The blow Pipe is made from a length of PVC. I tried this design out and it work great.

xoo1246

March 1st, 2002, 01:35 PM

Tactical application, as what? A weapon of the assassin? Tell me more about i.

DBSP

March 1st, 2002, 11:04 PM

I just thought of a sutible job for a blowgun. If you could get a dart to carry either poison as PYRO suggested or a paralyser or something it could be used to take out guard dogs safely and quietly. A blowgun is guite sile´t if you compare it with a shotgun or even a 22.

Madog555

March 2nd, 2002, 12:38 PM

i got a comercial blowgun. once i shot it into the aluminum downspout on my house. it penitrared through and was sticking out into the inside of it like 1cm. my uncle used to make blowguns from 3/4inch copper pipe when he was in the navy. they would be big (like 5 feet) and the dart was made from a nail put in the front of a paper cone that fit the pipe.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter well, one day he and his friend were talkin about them and a skeptical guy overherd. so my uncle took his blow gun, loaded it, pointed it at a nearby building with a concrete foundation and shot it. the dart stuck right into the concrete foundation of the building. Agent Blak is a member from the old forum, i wonder where he went, i hope he turns up. that AP thing sounds awsome, but if it goes off in the tube that is in your mouth thats gonna hurt. if u put one into someones eye just right it may penetrate into the brain. [ 02 March 2002: Message edited by: Madog ]

MacCleod

March 2nd, 2002, 08:21 PM

I have a blowgun a friend made for me out of 5/8th. i.d. electrical conduit that works well.We made darts for it from 4-1/2 in. segments of stainless steel wire which we sharpened.For the end we used bell-shaped foam earplugs (MAX brand,from Howard Leight industries).We'd heat the wire,then stick it up through the center of the plug.These fit the pipe perfectly,and are quite powerful,have to be pulled out with pliers.It's pretty accurate up to about 30 ft.

Yi

March 5th, 2002, 11:54 AM

My friend & I used to use paper cones with nails through them, but found the paper cones get wet and break. Also the nail is fairly short and heavy. Then we found that blowgun darts made out of thin springsteel wire (~1mm maybe slightly less), with one end sharpened and one end flattened with a hammer, pushed through a cone made out of the stuff they wrap flowers in. They work very well and accurately.

Tyler_Durden

March 5th, 2002, 05:02 PM

I bought one. For $4 I didn't see any reason not to. Also, I got 50 practice darts for about $5. The practice ones are, like you say, that thin steel stuff. There are also stun darts, paintballs, broadhead darts of some kind, and some other kind I forget the name. I can hit a circle of about 2" radius 9/10 times from a spot about 15 feet away. Not bad.

xoo1246

March 5th, 2002, 09:46 PM

Get a scope... :)

Jack Ruby

March 6th, 2002, 11:14 AM

When I aim my Blow Pipe I use line of sight(looking down the tube; not through) with both eyes open. Distance is aproximated to a just your tragectory. How do you fellows aim yours.

Tyler_Durden

March 6th, 2002, 04:33 PM

Scopes are not very practical, but I don't doubt someone sells them. I thought about that also... aiming... and I tried many different things. I tried both eyes, and using just one never worked. I tested keeping my focus at different points, on the tip of the blowgun, the target, in between, etc. What I found was that, for me, the best system is to switch focuses between the tip of the gun and the target, but before you shoot, be focusing on the target. The aim is sort of instinctual and natural. This is exactly what you are supposed to do when playing pool/billiards. I shoot a lot of pool, so this system of aiming fits me pretty well... and it seems like the best solution so far. I am always open to suggestions though. I may be wrong.

Jack Ruby

March 6th, 2002, 05:26 PM

I shoot a lot of pool... Usually 8-Ball. It is great for keeping the mind sharp and intinctove aiming.

inferno

April 15th, 2002, 06:03 AM

There was a site i lost when my comp crashed, it was www.defence-systems.com or something (tried that it doesnt work) and anyway they sold commercial blowguns, 12-72 inches (12, 18, 36, 48, 72) and commercial target arrows, and paintballs. Twas a great site, they also sold everything from knuckledusters to pepper spray to slingshots to bb guns to stun guns! Oh and did i meantion tasers? That site is great but if u want it, id do a search. Was called defence systems or something, search for blowguns on google or something.

Cricket

April 15th, 2002, 05:48 PM

I used to have a blow gun, but my brother bent it so I made some detonators out of it. Once I was sitting and surfing the Internet(here probably) and I saw this mouse run across the kitchen floor so I loaded up my blowgun. Then I saw him again. I

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

turned right (he stoped for about .25 second) and began blowing (the blowgun) before I was even on target and somehow it all worked and I stuck him in his left eye and into the kitchen floor (not carpet). He was eeking and jumping around everywhere, but he was pinned to the floor because the dart was stuck in there. It was so funny. And then I saw another one so I did the exact same thing to him, even in the left eye. I was so amazed, still am. I never was that gooda shot even if I had time to aim. And with these detonators I made, I only used them like firecrackers (AP only, no secondary). They were fun. I bought it at the Winnermaker (spelt wrong) Gun Show (said to be the biggest in the world). It was about $14 for the gun, 50 very sharp darts, 50 stun darts, and the grip and dart holder stuff. Oh and also, you can make a neat little sight by duct taping a laser pen to your gun and sighting it in. You have be a little more careful with it though or you bump it and it goes off sight and you have to either hold the on button (unless it has a continous switch) or make something to hold it for you. It works with paintball guns too. Bye. <small>[ April 15, 2002, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: Cricket ]

Zero

April 15th, 2002, 10:14 PM

Memories, indeed. I used to make little tiny 1/4 inch blowguns out of pens and later brass tubing. I made darts from cut off coffee stirrers, straight pins, and yes, epoxy putty. Making the darts balanced took a bit of practice, but once you get it down you can crank those suckers out. I would take my toys to school (where several of my friends were improvised small arms enthusiasts - spitball launchers, straw shooters, &c.) and proceed to cause all sorts of trouble. I'll wager there are still little yellow straw darts in the cafeteria ceiling to this day... Regardless, my meek little straw darts didn't do much damage at all. Certainly noting beyond irritating the target no end. They were, however, extremely accurate if constructed properly. I had a few kicking around for a while that I shot at my dartboard. I could repeatedly stack one dart inside the other from across the room... I probably still have my full auto launcher around here someplace. I should dig it out and post pictures. ~Zero the Inestimable

mark

April 16th, 2002, 12:33 AM

What should i shoot out of this little baby? I know its not a blowgun, but it would shoot similar things.

BoB-

April 16th, 2002, 05:42 AM

For simple and cheap, just pick up some cheap Q-tips at a department store (cheaper prices), instead of rolled up paper like normal Q-tips use, the cheaper ones use a hollow plastic tube to connect the cotton. Just cut one in half, and super-glue a sharpened finishing nail about a 1/4" into the hollow tube. If your barell is bigger than the cotton tip, just "fluff" it out a bit until you get a seal. Sure, they wont take major punishment like store bought darts, but who cares? it take less than an hour to make hundreds. Oh, and if they arent flying right, try lengthening the nail, if that doesnt work try lengthening the Q-tip half. Be *very* careful with a blowgun you intend to use poisonous darts with, the entire barell, the quiver, and sometimes the mouthpeice get covered in poison. I've killed many rabbits with my 4' blowgun and the darts mentioned above, 2 in the stomach or one in the head usually does it, and how do I fire 2 shots at a moving object? with one these; the coolest blowgun accessory ever! http://www.alaskabestpawn.com/image10a.gif A blowgun repeater magazine! You should be able to find one of these wherever blowguns are sold, but they're kindve expensive, mine was $20.

mark

April 16th, 2002, 08:38 PM

I made some mini blowdarts today! They take about a minite to make each, and there pretty fun to shoot.

skeleton_keys

April 27th, 2002, 06:35 PM

The last few weeks I've been tinkering with a CO2 powered blowgun. I bought a "CO2 Power Handle" from Blowgunsnw.com, which works pretty well for distances of about 5-20 feet. The only problem is, the handle only works with 12 gram CO2 canisters. I bought a 20 oz. CO2 tank and a remote line, and tried attaching it to the head of the power handle. When I cranked on the CO2, the handle started leaking like crazy, and wouldn't fire as accurately or powerfully as it had with just the 12 gram cartridges. I've been trying to build a wrist mounted, three-shot-at-a-time dart gun, and so far the only thing stumping me is how to get a valve that wouldn't allow the CO2 to leak, and preferably could be operated by pushing a button instead of squeezing a lever or twisting the stem. Any thoughts? I've got almost the whole thing built, except for that one snag.

Anthony

April 27th, 2002, 06:38 PM

Dunno if this will help, but you can dummy 12gm cylinders which have a standard CO2 sized threaded fitting on them. Used for converted CO2 airguns and crap paintball guns to run on refillable bottles.

mark

May 1st, 2002, 12:27 AM

Does anyone know how I could make a 40 caliber dart that detonates a 22 caliber blank on impact? I just got a real blowgun today, so any help would be apreciated.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter A-BOMB

May 1st, 2002, 02:21 AM

Mark, making the darts easy but its the blowing the dart out the barrel with anothe speed and power to fire the blank. Just put some Armstrongs in a straw thats got one end filled with hot glue, and put on of those sharp steel darts in it and fire at some thing hard. Thats what I did.

mongo blongo

May 1st, 2002, 03:51 PM

I got an interesting idea about poison darts. When a bee stings you it leaves behind it's stinger. This stinger is like a hollow barbed needle with a bag of venom attached to it. If you try to pull the stinger out you will end up squeezing the bag of venom which injects even more venom into the victim. Right you all probably knew that. My idea is exactly that, but using a small hypodermic needle and some type of bag containing something like Hydrogen Cyanide as the dart. It would be even better if the needle was barbed to make it harder to pull out. As soon as the unsuspecting victim is shot, :mad: it will be instinctive for him to try to pull it out. The need for some kind of elaborate injecting system will no longer be needed as the victim will do it for himself. :p Well not really my idea, it was rather mother nature's. :)

nbk2000

May 1st, 2002, 05:55 PM

I've taken tiny blood sampling pipets from the doctors office. These things have a bulb about the size of a pea, with a tube about 1/4" long. It'd hold probably a tenth of a milliliter, but with HCN or similiar, that's more than enough. Solder a straightened out fishing hook to a sports ball inflation needle, with the pipet glued in it. When shot, the victim will attempt to pull it out, injecting themselves. This would indeed save you from having to create some complicated mechanism to do the injecting.

Wicked

May 1st, 2002, 06:46 PM

Can you send me like, a few hundred of those? I wanna go shoot a few people I hate on the bike trail with them while I'm sitting in a tree.

Wicked

May 1st, 2002, 08:26 PM

Actually, 10-20 should do.

mark

May 1st, 2002, 08:29 PM

Haha. Haha. Haha. How clever you are.

mongo blongo

May 2nd, 2002, 09:49 PM

That's good NBK! That's the kind of thing I'm thinking of! But wouldn't a sports ball inflation needle be a little too thick? The injection needle should be very short so that when shot into the victim, the only thing outside the body should be the bag of poison to ensure that he pules it out by the bag. If you could put some bristles around the bag, it would not only make the dart fly straight but disguises the bag of poison to the victim.

Zach

May 2nd, 2002, 11:56 PM

at the size of a pea the bulb would most likley just look like a plastic ball. and think about it- when a misquito bites you (and you feel it) what do you automatically do? you slap at it. ive been shot with blowdarts, the long ones that are between 2 and 3 inches long, and what i did was clutch at the area of pain and drove the dart a little deeper.(i didnt know that id been shot) i dont think disguising it is a problem, and the shorter the dart is generally the less stable it is.

Wicked

May 6th, 2002, 02:55 PM

True, the only problem I see though, is that the venom would discharge if you held it wrong, or if you shot it too fast, so nbks idea is good, but id just cut the sheeth its in into smaller pieces. The problem with the tastles or whathave you, is that they would be harder to make, asin something fuzzy or somewhat in what I see. I've got my good ol' bomber blowgun here, and when you shoot, if it doesnt fit enough, it won't launch. Sooooooo :rolleyes: it would haveto be a very good tastle :p

nbk2000

May 6th, 2002, 04:15 PM

You'd want the inflator needle because of it's sturdiness. A needle meant for injection (syringe) is too flimsy to survive an impact from a launcher without bending or breaking. An inflator needle is VERY thick and will easily penetrate clothes and skin at speed. Plus the thickness of the needle allows for soldering on of the barbs, and the large bore insures almost instantaneous injection of all the poison. Also, the heavy needle makes the injector dart tip heavy, ensuring stability in flight. If a person had a plug in the needle made of a rapidly soluble salt, and an elasticly compressed poison bulb, then the dart should automatically inject the toxin upon embedding itself in flesh, wheter or not the target grabs it. :)

Ctrl_C

May 6th, 2002, 04:31 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter what about building (or obtaining?) small syringes that use the momentum of the dart to push the syringe plunger in?

Wicked

May 6th, 2002, 05:13 PM

I think that'd be too hard.

Anthony

May 6th, 2002, 05:42 PM

Wicked: One liners like that don't really help anyone. What is helpful is if you add *why* you think it would be too hard. People are unfortunately, or fortunately not telepathic so you need to explain yourself.

mongo blongo

May 6th, 2002, 11:35 PM

NBK- I see your reasoning. Maybe the needle could be sharpened a bit more to be extra sure the penetration occurs? Maybe some lead weight could be used to get a better momentum. Do you know what these blood sampling pipets are called by any chance? Thanx!

mark

May 7th, 2002, 12:37 AM

I just dreated this little gadget the other day. Its for shooting heavy darts, but I shot a target dart right through 1/2" wood with it.

Wicked

May 7th, 2002, 02:40 PM

Shit marc, you got createive there, good idea, maybe its possible to just make a handheld with a pipe and a spring, then a small plunger, anyways, I'm going to try and play with your idea, I like it :) I betcha a pvc pipe would be good enough :)

mark

May 7th, 2002, 10:29 PM

Thank you. I had another hit of creativty today. Im ade a fairly safe exploding dart that goes off nicley on concrete when fired from my stomp gun.

PYRO500

May 7th, 2002, 10:42 PM

are those cartredge primers attached to stun (plastic) darts? why are they off center?

Tyler_Durden

May 7th, 2002, 10:44 PM

Mark! PLEASE explain yourself more thoroughly! I have no fucking clue what either of those pictures mean! Don't just give us a vague, cryptic explanation of the picture and your "invention". Explain what it's made with, how it works, how you made it, and whatever else you can provide that you think would be useful to us. I am going to guess that the first picture is a device to give you more power in the blow gun... more specifically, you stomp on that bottle to force the air through the tube and out the blowgun, which would be more powerful than just blowing it. Am I correct? What do I win? As for the second picture, it looks like commercial stun darts with small copper-looking things carefully placed on top of them to make them look explosive. Am I correct? What more do I win?

mark

May 7th, 2002, 11:24 PM

You win a reproachful glance due to your mockery of my high resolution, if indeed poorley explained pictures. You were right about the first picture, it is indeed a stomp rocket type of device. You were wrong about the second picture. Those are 22 caliber blanks that are fitted into a hole in the dart. Pyro500, there crooked because they were drilled with a hand drill and my vice kept slipping.

Wicked

May 7th, 2002, 11:27 PM

Heh heh, I tryed to use some gunpowder in a container, and used an estes modle rocket ignighter to set it off, well, I shot the dart through a sinder block,,,,,,, whoops :rolleyes: anyways, I'm going to figure out some better ideas, maybe something more household and something thats more burny than exploseive. My g'ol' plaster of paris + gasoline was nice, maybe if I................................................. :D

xoo1246

May 8th, 2002, 04:11 PM

Not really related but almost: I made myself a simple pipe gun with a thin but heave walled metal piple, maybe 30 cm long. I used a small amount of electrically fired gunpowder to propell a nail dart. It worked well(didn't sound much (pop)and penetrated maybe 2cm hard wood at 1,5 meters distance). Maybe one could substitute the nail arrow and use a lead bullet, this way createing a simple single-fire pen gun.(no need for any mechanical work) I used a 9v battery but this could be changed to a smaller 1,5 v(using a micro-bulb as igniton source). Good for assassinations and such. :p <small>[ May 08, 2002, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Wicked

May 8th, 2002, 09:41 PM

I'm not picking on you dude, but please refrain from posting unless you have a point to make. If you did have a point then it made absolutely no sense <small>[ May 09, 2002, 08:44 AM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

Lazy01001

May 13th, 2002, 11:38 PM

Ahh the blowgun, what an awesome weapon. You all had different methods of aiming. The way I aim is pretty much 100% guess work. But, I guess i shouldnt really call it guess work, since I have had the gun for about 7 months. I belive I am almost 90% accurate. I love the idea of the 22 blanks!!!!! :D But I have pretty much no clue on how to make it. A little help?

inferno

May 20th, 2002, 03:33 AM

This isnt a lethal weapon or anything, but a metal tube i found, about an inch in diamter, could shoot little balls of gladwrap with excellent accuracy, about 10 metres. The tube is about a foot long. A poster i have with an actual target on it, could be shot on the 1 inch bullseye about 4/5 times from 15 feet away. Thats just balls of glad wrap, nothing special. And i just aimed it from instinct. Blowguns are pretty accurate. Good darts can be made from those ear-wax cleaner things, cotton buds. You know, the ones with the little balls of cotton on each end of a plastic tube. Well anyway, cut off one end, get a needle, melt the plastic with a lighter for a few seconds and insert the needle. The plastic dries hard around it. They can be shot out of ballpoint pen cases with reasonable accuracy. They can just stick into wood, but not very far.

Jack Ruby

May 23rd, 2002, 07:50 PM

"what about building (or obtaining?) small syringes that use the momentum of the dart to push the syringe plunger in?" I tried this a while back. I even tried putting a fishing weight on the back of the plunger. Didn't work at all. The raneg was also very limited. Sorry if I bust and bubbles.

mongo blongo

May 23rd, 2002, 08:06 PM

Yea I had that idea too. :( What about a very thin syringe. Pull the plunger out, put a small lead ball in it (not too small, just small enough to move through the tube freely), seal the end where the plunger was. Fill it with your poison and when it comes to shooting, make sure the ball is at the back of the tube. On impact the lead ball will be thrown forward pushing the liquid out. Not all the poison would be injected but with HCN that's not a problem. Does anyone know how tranquilizer darts work?

kingspaz

May 24th, 2002, 05:55 PM

how about the ball hitting a primer or somthing. the primer could then shoot the toxin into the victim.

EP

May 24th, 2002, 07:26 PM

I'm looking for diagrams of tranquilizer darts, but all I have found so far is a couple pictures. http://www.pneudart.com/images/darts/ high_dart_lineY.jpg

BoB-

May 26th, 2002, 04:39 AM

Kingspaz sortve described it, an inertially detonated primer launches the plunger from a tiny syringe forward with the gas's generated. NBK explained it a few years back (where is that dude?). An inertial switch isnt that hard to make, the sensitive side of the primer faces a striker which is held away from it by a spring, when inetia takes over the weighted striker keeps moving, closing the spring, and detonating the primer. You should be able to do it with a few bits of telescoping antenna.

McGuyver

May 27th, 2002, 01:28 PM

Does anyone know of a poison that will kill almost instantly-one that attacks the central nervous system and paralyzes the pest. NBK mentioned sodium fluoride in an earlier thread about killing dogs, but I'm pretty sure it takes at least a few hours. The poison ingredients must be easy to obtain. I don't feel like going to Africa just to some poison. I know about the ones the Indians use and that can only be found there. I'm probably asking a bit much here, but oh well. The poison would preferably be easy to apply to darts and not be dangerous unless it enters the bloodstream.

kingspaz

May 27th, 2002, 07:05 PM

they smear the points of their darts on poison arrow frogs if thats anyhelp at all...

nbk2000

May 28th, 2002, 02:15 AM

Only poison arrow tree frogs in their native enviroment are toxic. Domestically raised poison arrow tree frogs, or those long since captured, are non-toxic. It turns out that the frogs absorb and concentrate toxins they get from the venomous insects they eat in the wild.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

For us, hydrogen cyanide, nicotin sulphate, or lab concentrated organophosphate pesticides would be the quickest killers, taking only a minute or two to kill. There's also succinylcholine chloride, which will almost instantly paralyze, before suffocating to death, a victim. But you'd have to get that from a chemical supplier, thus paper trail. I mentioned NaF because of it's cheapness and ease of availability.

nbk2000

May 28th, 2002, 10:35 PM

Seeing how you have the plastic "stun" darts, I got the idea of using them as sabots for firing steel flechette darts. The design would be similar to the tank sabot rounds. This picture of a tank sabot round seperating in flight has been altered to include a serrated flechette in it. You can buy a pound of 1.5" steel flechettes for $5 in the US. That's 800 darts for $5. The serrations are added on the flechette to allow for toxins or germs to be carried into the target. Also, the idea of a stomp pump is good. For a CO2 powered blowgun, you could possibly adapt something I noticed once. If you use a spring loaded center punch set to "hard", and use it on the seal of a powerlet, the entire powerlet will instantly discharge with a POP sound. 12 grams of CO2 gas in less than a blink of an eye. So, I'm thinking you could install an immovable centerpunch in a blowgun with the point of the punch pointing towards the mouthpiece. A powerlet in a tube (that slides over the blowgun tube) is pressed against the punch till it discharges, firing off the saboted flechette at high velocity (much faster than lung or stomp). Now, if the blowgun tube was strong enough, you could neck it down at the business end and use a sliding stopper to seal the blowgun, retaining the noise, thus having a silent flechette launcher. Similar idea to the silent projector described in the black book series.

Nico

June 1st, 2002, 04:36 PM

There's a neat little piece here about use of an improvised blowgun: The Girl And The Ninja

ShotgunsAreFun

June 5th, 2002, 08:20 AM

What about modifying a blowgun to be powered by a CO2 cartridge(can get 10 of them for AU$4) with a trigger? Could make a spring loaded stripper type magazine for it without much trouble I would think. But then again, I haven't tried so I wouldn't know.

Fukineh

December 9th, 2002, 11:26 PM

I shot a marble at my friend using one of my pneumatic cannon barrels as a blowgun with pleasing results. Since the 3/4 " barrel has female adapters on it to attach on to the 1 1/4 " male adapter on my cannon, it provides a nice "cup" to blow into just like the commercial blowguns have. Is this relevant; not really, but it's an easy way to make high caliber blow dart guns out of PVC. Or of course you could just flare the end like PVC darts are made, a more practical and probably better method.

germanic

December 22nd, 2002, 03:38 PM

eeehm, those ideas are nice but they're not blowguns. anyways, wouldn't it be easy to just make a paper cone with a needle in the front. If you file a tiny bit into the needle, so that it will break of when someone tries to pull it out. that would leave a horrible itch. and if you dip the tip of the needle into poison or heavy metal you might even leave a horrible itch. :) just a few ideas.

heaton3805

January 23rd, 2003, 10:59 PM

Why don't you guys just do what ACTUAL assassins have been doing for over 3,000 years??? Run the needles through melted wax, bounce the thing across across the blade of a knife, dip in substance of choice and allow to dry... Also, me and friends have used Novicain for years...It's funny to watch people fall and squirm and it works quite fast as well :D

Anthony

January 23rd, 2003, 11:38 PM

It'd be interesting to know where you supposedly got Novocaine, and why your targets dropped instantly when it typically takes 2-5 mins to take effect. It'd also be interesting to know why you'd be stupid enough to go shooting people up with an uncertain amount of powerful anaesthetic. Further yet, why despite being knocked down rapidly with must be a large dose, why none of your "targets" died or suffered other severe symptoms. We don't take kindly to bullshiters here, so let's hope you're telling the truth...

nbk2000

January 23rd, 2003, 11:48 PM

I was able to (back in the mid-90s) buy lido/nova/procains for less than $10/lb, over the counter in 'frisco, from chemical suppliers, no questions asked. These are considered "harmless" substances.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Also, maybe he's meaning that the darts would numb a leg so much that it'd be "dead" and they couldn't support their weight on it, thus falling? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here, so use this opprotunity to explain yourself and what you did, before you "vanish", eh? Also, it seems really rather stupid to be shooting people with a drugged blowgun dart for shits and giggles. I don't think the police would think it very funny, though your new husband, "Bubba", might find it hilarious. :D

heaton3805

January 24th, 2003, 05:01 PM

Thank you NBK. Yes, I did mean that it would numb my "targets" leg. And we use to buy this stuff in a small plastic bucket type container for around $15 at a low grade medical store. Also, we were not just shooting these things at random people, we use to have little "bouts" of sorts with these darts. I am not using any bull shit at all here, sorry if it sounds so...

Spaced Monkey 2002

February 22nd, 2003, 06:25 PM

I don't know whether this product is any good, but I found this on a home security webpage. http://protectiondevices.com/blowguns_2.html You need to cut your sig down to two lines maximum! <small>[ February 22, 2003, 05:40 PM: Message edited by: J ]

Skean Dhu

March 6th, 2003, 06:00 PM

i've noticed that almost everyone has had troubles with stabilizing the darts. ::3 simple steps for stabilizing darts:: 1)take some yarn and wrap it around your first three fingers (like you make a monkey's fist knot) and then wrap twice horizontaly around the middle to hold it together. 2) stick your dart through the area around the knot ie;the center after that tape/glue it in place and cut the loops of yarn so you can make it all fuzzy. 3) trim it flush with the end of your dart, do this by sticking it down your blowgun until you can't push the end. the fuzz should cover the last 1/3 of your dart

chemofun

May 24th, 2004, 12:46 AM

about poisons that are easy to get for darts...you could probably get some off the skin of a puffer fish. I have a puffer fish as a pet. It was cheap and is pretty easy to take care of. I dont know if you can just rub a dart on them though. I do however know that they produce a lethal nerve toxin called TTX i blelieve, Tetrodotoxin. I don't know for sure how to extract it but i know it would work well. You should look it up in more detail.

nbk2000

May 24th, 2004, 01:46 PM

Puffer fish toxin is contained in the ovaries and liver of the fish, so you can't "rub a dart on it" and get the poisonous effects. You can't even do that with captive Poison Dart frogs (actual name :)) because they get their toxicity from the poisonous insects they eat in the jungle, something domestic crickets and worms wouldn't provide. :( Now, if you had a stone fish, then you could do the dart trick by pulling out one of its spines, which contain the venom and are disposable as far as the fish is concerned, and attaching it to your dart. They're about 60% fatal, and pure agony for weeks afterwards if the victim survives. I found one available for sale for $400 at a fish store once, by asking the owner if he knew where to get one, and he knew someone who had them.

akinrog

May 24th, 2004, 07:27 PM

While reading through this thread, I remembered a fact that I noticed when I was reading an entomology book. According to this book TEPP (Tetra Ethyl Pyrophosphate (sp?) or Pyrophosphoric acid tetraethyl ester) is supertoxic for humans. TEPP is a simple organophosphate insecticide which is ceased to be used due to its supertoxicity for mammals. Anyway when I researched over the net about its toxicty, I came up with this link (http://hazard.com/msds/tox/gw.cgi? query=TEPP&whole=partial&start=0) which shows toxicity of various TEPP derivatives. In the first link which this URL gives (TEPP) the lowest lethal toxicity is 1700 ug(microgram) /kg (oral - human), 286 ug/kg and 380 ug/kg (intramuscular human), 71 ug/kg (parenteral - human), LD50 2400 ug/kg (transdermal - rat) etc. etc. However only downside with this compound AFAIK and IIRC, it is incompatible with the metals. They corrodes the metals and is being decomposed by them. In addition how fast it acts I don't know. Maybe somebody may shed a light on it HTH.

rolynd

June 3rd, 2004, 01:27 PM

There are some tranqilizer darts that use compressed air to inject the contents of the dart to the animal. They work quite easy and should not be too hard to duplicate. The tip of the dart is solid with a tiny hole 2mm behind the tip, at the side of the needle. They are loaded from the backside with the tranquilizing agent, then closed with a cap which has a small valve in it. Through this air is injected with a normal 20ml syringe to create an overpressure inside of the dart. To prevent the liquid from being pushed out to early you just stick the tip into a tiny piece of rubberlike plastic/PVC first(before loading). When the dart hits the animal the tiny rubberpiece is pushed up the needle and when the neddle enters the animal the tranquilizing agent( or poison) is delivered.

Mr. Toliver

June 5th, 2004, 05:11 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

One of the best commercial guns out there is put out by Cold Steel knives. It it has a 5/8" bore and comes with four styles of darts. The blowgun and a slug of darts is only $20. It really packs a wallop. www.coldsteel.com

tdog49

August 21st, 2004, 12:06 AM

Went squirrel hunting this week, using a .62 cal blowgun and darts made from welding wire. (specifically Railbuild 540 5/64). I was kinda skeptical at first but am now a true believer. I cant hit crap beyond 10 ft but my partner is pretty good and we took several at about 20-25 ft.

milobloom

March 3rd, 2005, 12:14 PM

I use a 1/2 piece of PVC piping with darts that are made of a paper cone (something fairly stiff, such as manilla tag) and bit of metal hanger (like you hang clothes on), sharpened on grinder, then held together with epoxy or superglue. The darts are somewhat heavy, but usually come out fairly balanced, and can penetrate through plywood over 1/4 inch thick, no problem.

meselfs

June 14th, 2005, 02:18 AM

http://www.geocities.com/blowgunhunter/ Proof that commercial blowguns suck :-> From that site: "At this range, a dart will go completely through its [squirrel] chest, and be stopped only by the dart head." Am going to bicylce to the hardware shop tommorow (20 km: one of the few disadvantages of rural life) and get the components.

meselfs

June 14th, 2005, 02:18 AM

http://www.geocities.com/blowgunhunter/ Proof that commercial blowguns suck :-> From that site: "At this range, a dart will go completely through its [squirrel] chest, and be stopped only by the dart head." Am going to bicylce to the hardware shop tommorow (20 km: one of the few disadvantages of rural life) and get the components.

_SAS_

January 23rd, 2007, 08:09 AM

Just on the topic of making blowguns and ammo... I have always enjoyed blowguns since I can remember, mainly because they can be easily produced cost efficiently as well as being tactically advantageous in certain situations because of there range and silence. I make my darts from Kebab sticks (still fairly strong and robust - but not to light) and attaching hand made paper cones to the end of each stick by means of glue. This way you can mass produce ammo in minimal time with a quality result. As for the blowpipe itself, I use the curtain rail type of pipe (easy to find, plus I have never needed to employ a blowpipe in a tactical type of situation.) Hope this is useful to someone.

Charon

January 24th, 2007, 10:20 PM

I have a fairly good working knowledge of blowguns, I've used them for hunting as well as for other tactical uses (pranks, dynamic building entry, blowing up the neighbors prized koi pond) well, alot of that was exaggerated but hell here goes, First, the best blowgun material i've found is glass (the big long tubes they use for glass blowing, making research and medical equipment blah blah blah) It provides the least amount of friction and very little weight, however since it is brittle and has a tendency to shatter, a nice metal sleeve is nice to have for it too. Secondly, ammo can be made from a ton of different materials, wood, metal, coat hangers, exacto blades, and as far as fletching, i've found that a frayed end of some parachord or mylar works really well. Now as far as tactical uses are concerned, blowguns are used for alot more than killing living organisms, they are excellent deception tools, shoot out a light bulb or a window, it definetely is something that destracts people. A blowgun can even be used for building entry, hitting elevator keys and keypad numbers. As far as poisons, since lethality from a blowgun isn't that easy of a thing to kill someone with, even if you hit someone intravenously (sp?) you would need a mighty good poison to take someone out, plus if you do kill someone, you run the risk with authorities, I've used a posion made from ants (take a bajillion red fire ants, put them in a pot and poil them down to a nice red sludge, there you go) and let me tell you whoever gets hit with that will drop and start crying.

nbk2000

January 25th, 2007, 10:10 PM

I'm crying now that I see I let the previous post slip through un-deleted, and the poster un-banned. :rolleyes: I really need to get more sleep.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Tell us, oh Ninja Master, how the fuck you perform a dynamic building entry using a blowgun?

ShadowMyGeekSpace

January 27th, 2007, 12:42 PM

That post brings one word to mind: Wow. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Portable EMP gun

View Full Version : Portable EMP gun J

Log in

August 14th, 2001, 03:47 PM

I'm thinking about making a portable EMP gun. This w as inspired by the radio at work playing incredibly shite music all day long, driving me crazy. It w ould be nice to have a permanent off sw itch ;-) I probably w on't get round to building it in time though :-( I'm thinking about simply getting a 400v, 1000uf cap charged upto 380v (to give a margin, wouldn't want to waste a £15 cap), and discharging this using an SCR into a coil of around 8 to 12 turns of fairly thick wire. By my calculations, this w ould be discharging just over 70J into the coil, and this would create an EM pulse when the field collapsed. Does anybody know if this would be pow erful enough to destroy an electronic device at about 10 to 15 feet? Also, I'd like to make it directional by perhaps using Al foil to shield the back part of the gun. Any comments? From the limitted things I've read about EMP weapons, it seems a small number of turns is required. Does 8 to 12 sound reasonable? The w eapon must be fairly quiet, so no spark gaps can be used either in place of the SCR or the antenna. J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/&.src=bc&.view= l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Mr Cool

August 14th, 2001, 03:57 PM

I think a spark gap surrounded in foam to reduce noise w ould be the way to go, with a HV cap (10-20kV, a few dozen nF), forming an LC resonant circuit like a Tesla coil primary. I still haven't tested my version of this yet http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/frown.gif. Obviously this couldn't be done w ith semiconductors. Just imagine how fun it'd be to zap S-club 7 music http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

simply RED

August 14th, 2001, 05:03 PM

I've heard of a design when a high amperage current passes through a coil that is round arround cylinder of explosive. The coil ends with antenna. When the current is passed the explosive is detonated, it destroys the coil and that produces a EMP pulse that is transmitted through the antenna. Have you got reliable sources of info about EMP? Are the antenna and the coil destroyed by the capacitor discharging?

Mr Cool

August 14th, 2001, 05:09 PM

You're talking about bomb-type designs (Explosively-pumped magnetic flux compression generators IIRC), in the thing J's talking about it'd be totally re-usable, but the one you describe is single use as they contain large amounts of HE which blast the thing to pieces. I don't have much info, just a fairly basic knowledge in electronics.

J

August 14th, 2001, 05:54 PM

Simply Red, the type you're thinking of w as discussed in New Scientist last year (I think). I had a quick look through someone else's copy, if anyone has this article I'd be really greatful for a scan :-) It w as as you described, with the wire wrapped around an Al tube, not touching. A high power capacitor is connected to the tube and wire, which closes the circuit w hen the explosive is detonated, due to the tube expanding into the w ire (the explosive is contained in the tube). As the shockwave propagates, the coil is destroyed, forcing the magnetic field to collapse. This causes an enormous EM pulse, which will apparently destroy all electronic devices within a several hundred meter radius. Only 1 or 2 pounds of high explosive (I think it w as TNT in the article) is needed, but design is critical and I think there is charge shaping. Unless the article left something major out, I think one of these would be within the capability of many people here, with some experimentation. Mr Cool, generating more than a thousand volts or so will be difficult in a portable device that can fit in a small bag. The cap would have to be huge, and an ignition coil or other large transformer w ould be needed unless very slow charging was acceptable. If it w as to be vehicle mounted though... I think 70J would be enough to do some damage, because my stun gun (homemade) causes my monitor to flicker w hen it's within a foot or tw o. It only puts out 0.2 to 0.3 joules per pulse, and the EM energy is released through the spark gap. J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/&.src=bc&.view= l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Mr Cool

August 14th, 2001, 06:22 PM

The design I've seen uses an HMX-based PBX. The device will be a metre long at least, and I'm guessing that the tube in the middle would be at least 10cm in diameter. That'd be about 12kg of explosives, but they come in all sorts of sizes I expect. The cap bank is just connected to the wire - when the tube hits it, it shorts it out thus shortening the length of the coil and the number of turns. I suppose VoD of the explosive used determines the pulse characteristics. The HE is a plain cylinder, but it's important that the detonation w ave has a uniform front, and that the coil is shorted more or less perpendicular to the axis of the coil. I was thinking that one shouldn't be too hard to make, with a suitably sized cap bank. The cap in my design would not have to be huge. I have a load of 60nF 20kV caps 20cm long, and 4cm in diameter. Charging would be slow, but you wouldn't need a rapid fire device. Commercial stun guns can produce several hundred kV in a device about 8" long from a 9V battery. So although it w ouldn't be hand-held, it'd certainly fit in a small bag! Hey, I did see a program on non-lethal weapons a while back, where they demonstrated a HPM device in a caravan or something. A big Marx bank pulsed power to a magnetron with superconducting magnets, it w as pretty cool! Apparently it could be used to cause enemy planes to fall out the sky (remember: the WEAPONS aren't lethal, but they didn't make any claims about the crash!) My design would be much more efficient I think, since the circuit is allowed to resonate. This produces a decaying burst of RF, but in your design there would be one spike and it wouldn't be allowed to resonate, so the rest of the energy would go into heat (I think). Also you'll need some sort of protection for that SCR so that the CEMF doesn't zap it. And a low er voltage, higher uF cap will produce a lower peak power due to the longer discharge time. Sorry, but I think a HV cap is the way to go! But I w ould like to be proven wrong, as I've got a lot of flash caps here doing absolutely nothing at the moment! So please try it and tell me the results!

Anthony

August 14th, 2001, 10:59 PM

I remember hearing that high current rather than high voltage was better at producing EMF? If so, Haw ker Technology make a 12v 14ah dry cell lead acid battery (around 6kg) that w ill produce 5000amps on short circuit, presuming it could sustain this for 1 second that'd be around 60Kjhttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

c0deblue

August 15th, 2001, 02:25 AM

J: Don't w ant to discourage you, but I seriously doubt you'll get what you would call a destructive EMP out of a device that size - and certainly it w ouldn't be quiet if you could. A better solution to the annoying radio might be to just zap it directly w ith the stun gun and blow the detector or tuner front end (for example, a shot right through the insulation of a computer cable w ill invisibly fry a motherboard by blowing any MOS junctions that get in the way). Waste of time though - the radio w ould probably be replaced in a day or so and you might wind up having to use the stun gun on the radio's owner or whoever saw you. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/frow n.gif Seriously though, even the most impressive capacitor discharge circuits like the so-called can-crushers use an awful lot of power to produce relatively puny mechanical results, let alone EMP. As for the monitor flicker you observed, that's probably caused by a combination of the EM field of the output transformer's open core and the electrostatic deflection effects of the HV driving the image off-screen or simulating a blanking pulse. It doesn't take much to disrupt a monitor, as can be seen by bringing a magnet near the case (you'll probably have to degauss afterward). That isn't to say you couldn't generate some pretty strong magnetic fields, but EMP is a w hole 'nother ball game. As far as the high discharge batteries are concerned, the discharge rate is way too slow. This is also true of higher-value capacitors unless they're very specially designed for rapid discharge. In this respect, a large number of very small-value capacitors in parallel are vastly superior to one large one of the same total capacitance. If you could dump 60 KJ in a nanosecond or two you might just start to approach a measurable EMP output, but even this wouldn't be enough to cause any serious area disruption. If you're going after electronics, a tuned HERF thingy would be the more efficient way to go, but even these require pretty bulky power supplies to produce worthw hile results.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Any system you use, the propagation effects will be determined to a large degree by the inverse square law (even with a "focused" device), so you'll have to have some pretty hellacious forces to begin w ith in order to achieve destructive effects at a measurable distance. [This message has been edited by c0deblue (edited August 15, 2001).]

Mr Cool

August 15th, 2001, 09:05 AM

High voltage means you can have a shorter discharge for the same amount of energy. This means you can have much higher peak pow ers, which is w hat you want unless you're trying to melt the circuit rather than damage the componenets. I suppose it depends what kind of EMP device you want, the TED variety I made needs high voltage, low uF capacitors but fairly short discharges to get high currents and high peak powers. I suppose it depends on what you mean by low voltage, I've never seen any designs using less than a few kV, mainly because the high voltage allows a higher current to flow. That battery sounds fun, but I bet it's expensive!! codeblue: of cousre it'd be quite if it's all solid-state, and your wires didn't vapourise! There'd be a bit of noise from the capacitor expanding when it discharges because the plates aren't being pulled together I guess, the coil and w ires will heat up, causing a little bit of noise, and they might repel themselves due to the magnetic field, but it definitely wouldn't be loud. Can crushers don't produce EMP because they're not designed to. If you had a cap bank that big you could make a GOOD EMP device if you designed it right. The flickering of a TV screen by a spark is caused purely by radio waves and other EM waves, and can be focussed greatly with a reflector. 60kJ in a nS would produce VERY, VERY, VEEERRRY measurable results IF YOU DESIGN THE CIRCUIT CORRECTLY and DIRECT IT. That's 60,000,000,000,000 watts - an INCREDIBLE amount of power! HF devices will produce beams that are fairly easy to focus, but with LF devices (like a simple capacitor discharging once through a coil) refraction will be too much of a problem, and it will basically follow the inverse square law.

Anthony

August 15th, 2001, 07:01 PM

I had a suspicion that the energy w as required to be over a very short amount of time. What about a magnatron? The pow er supply could fit into a back pack and the magnatron itself would be in a handheld unit. Could somekind of "reflector" be used to create a narrow beam of MW? What affect would it have on a radio? If it failed ot kill the radio then you could at least use it on people who sing along to the radiohttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

Mr Cool

August 15th, 2001, 07:36 PM

Yeah, it'd w ork. A car battery or two could supply the power, and you could use short bursts so cooling w asn't a problem. It'd induce currents in the components of the radio and fry them. The only trouble is that I think the focussing device would need to be quite big - it couldn't be a nice, sneaky attack on the pop music.

Anthony

August 15th, 2001, 10:06 PM

A car battery would be a bit OTT (and heavy!) 1200w att mains inverter, 12v dc input, 250x120x120mm 1.5kg 90% efficient - £219... Assumbing a 1000w magnatron, 1000w @ 12v = 83A + 10% (efficiency) = 91A I've got some sealed 12v 7ah lead acid batts which in parallel would easily support those kind of currents (2.5kg each) Dunno how much space/w eight the electrics required to run the magnatron w ill take up though. Do you think we're getting a tad too overly complicated? You could just take the fuse out of the plug for the radio... Or if it's high up (like on a shelf) run a tripwire from the lead to across a door so that the radio gets pulled down and smasheshttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ smile.gif Or, what about a plasma canon...?

c0deblue

August 16th, 2001, 01:36 AM

Or a .38 http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

Mr Cool

August 16th, 2001, 08:46 AM

A hammer would work quite w ell, or perhaps thermite.

J

August 16th, 2001, 01:58 PM

Well, I'm only going to be working there for another few days anyway, since I'm going away for a w eek (next week) and after that my second year at uni will begin. I think I can just about put up with it for now, but thanks for the suggestions ;-) I think I'll persue this project though, since the uses would be endless. Speed cameras, electronics in police cars, security guards radios, boy racer's stereo pumping out shite garage music, all valid targets :-) Does anyone have any more info on how to concentrate the EM into a narrow, powerful beam? If I could get a very tight beam, surely the inverse square law would be overcome at relatively short distances? I think high voltage is probably the way to go, but I might try the original idea anyway, perhaps very close to a device. c0deblue, what exactly do you mean by a HERF device? J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/&.src=bc&.view= l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Mr Cool

August 17th, 2001, 08:42 AM

High Energy Radio Frequency I believe. Not very sure how you'd get a narrow beam... but I know it'd be easier w ith a high frequency.

Machiavelli

August 18th, 2001, 03:09 AM

You might want to ask people here http://ww w.plans-kits.com and here http://ww w.svbxlabs.com/

J

August 18th, 2001, 08:53 AM

Thanks for those links, the second site in particular is very interesting. It has some notes about a coil gun operating on only 2J, which has sparked my interest. The EMP section of the plans and kits message board is pretty dead. The second site has a link to the Powerlabs board, which I couldn't access through the pow erlabs.org site the last time I tried. It is definitely not dead :-) J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/&.src=bc&.view= l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Ezikiel

August 18th, 2001, 11:25 PM

Guys I have a small coil gun and I think it does probably put out an EMP but I haven't yet been able to shut off a calculator even when its placed on the coil. But I am working on the magnetron version, it seems more promising as if u place a wire made of Al foil in side a microwave and turn it on .... one of the ends ignites.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

So I am trying the magnetron. And to narrow the beam down I w ill probably use a plastic conduit with Magnetron Donuts to guide the microwave. -----------------"Go out in a BLAZE OF GLORY"

c0deblue

August 19th, 2001, 03:52 AM

J: The Pow erlabs message board gave me trouble too - repeatedly made the Netscape brow ser stop responding. Got in just fine using Opera 5.1 though. Ezikial: The "donuts" w ill work as a simple waveguide if packed closely together, but so w ould a plain piece of pipe with diameter greater than 1/4 wavelength of the magnetron's resonant frequency. If you want any kind of gain you'll have to build a horn radiator. There are programs floating around to do these calculations - do a Google search for "microw ave horn calculator" or some such.

DoH BoY

August 22nd, 2001, 03:04 PM

LOL imagine setting some sort of high power EMP device in the middle of a math exam. The results w ould be horrifying.

SawedOff8gaugeman

August 23rd, 2001, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Machiavelli: You might want to ask people here http://ww w.plans-kits.com and here http://ww w.svbxlabs.com/ Has anyone ordered anything from plans&kits? I think some of their products sound like crap: "BIO-ELECTRONIC STIMULATOR CONTROVERSIAL DEVICE IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN USED AND TESTED IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES TO CURE INDIVIDUALS OF AIDS, HERPES, AND VARIOUS OTHER VIRAL INFECTIONS THROUGH SPECIAL ELECTRONIC SIGNALS INTRODUCED INTO THE BODY. U.S DOCTORS WILL NOT ENDORSE IT BECAUSE THERE IS NO MONEY IN IT FOR THEM. THIS IS A VERY SIMILAR DESIGN THAT IS VERY COST EFFECTIVE TO BUILD. THEY SELL ON THE INTERNET FOR HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS. UUE SELLS PARTIAL KITS, PLEASE EMAIL US TO INQUIRE. THEY REALLY WORK, CAN KILL THE FLU OR A COLD IN SECONDS. PLANS COST $4.00." "MIND STIMULATOR/BRAIN ENHANCER THIS DEVICE IS BASED AFTER THE NEUROPHONE CONCEPT. YOU WILL SEE AND HEAR WITHOUT USING YOUR SENSES. INDUCES SCALAR WAVES IN NERVES THROUGH SIGNAL VECTOR MANIPULATION IN THE SKIN. $4.00 FOR COMPLETE PLANS/SCHEMATICS." "SadM...Small Atomic Demolition Munition STEP BY STEP INFORMATION OBTAINED THROUGH SPECIAL SOURCES. TEACHES YOU HOW TO MAKE A 6 INCH DIAMETER ATOMIC MUNITION DEVICE. DESIGN USES LESS THAN A COUPLE GRAMS OF PLUTONIUM OR URANIUM 238. USES ONLY A COUPLE POUNDS OF EXPLOSIVES TO INITIATE. VERY DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS. PLANS COST $3.00."

Mr Cool

August 25th, 2001, 11:31 AM

They sound like shit. Especially the last one. If they want a fission explosion and not just to poison people, they'll need more than a few grams. And U238 isn't even fissionable. The first one might be based in truth, athlete's foot and other microbial diseases can be killed with regular treatments using negatively ionised air (connect a pin to the -ve output of a 30kV DC PSU, yo will feel a w ind of ionised air coming off the point of the pin).

J

September 2nd, 2001, 11:17 AM

Some of those projects do sound like a pay-per-view version of the crapbook. I'd never buy any of those plans, since they're probably adapted from patents and other free information. You'll never know if the plans were actually tested or not (my guess would be no) especially with the illegal devices since they can't admit it if they did. Anything that claims to cure illnesses is also very suspect, since there's no way of proving it's effectiveness one w ay or the other. J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/&.src=bc&.view= l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792) vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> math figures? Log in

View Full Version : math figures? NoltaiR

February 24th, 2002, 05:51 PM

Hey guys, tomorrow (if I have enough time after work) I plan on making a crude cannon/mortor that will made of a stainless steel pipe (3' long by 4" ID). I will be shooting both 'grape shot' (just a bunch of peices of scrap metal, nuts, and bolts) as well as well as cement spheres (made by filling spherical glass ornaments with an ID of slightly smaller than 4" with cement and allowing them to dry). I will be using my electrical ignitor for the initiation so it will be fairly well controlled. Also, rather than just shooting aimlessly, I am going to be shooting at a target made of plywood that will be set at different distances for different tests. I was just wondering if any of you knew any mathematical formulas I could use to figure out theoretically how fast my shot is going to fire out.

mrloud

February 24th, 2002, 09:41 PM

On a related note, does anyone know how ammunition and firearm manufacturers determine the velocity of a projectile? I suspect that it is not determined until after the product is tried out. They could use RADAR in modern times or they could have used high speed film in old times.

DBSP

February 25th, 2002, 02:35 AM

The VOD is determined with a chronograf. Its a box similar to a brick in shape filled with electronics. On the top there's two sensors wich measure the time it takes for the bullet to pass both sensors.

Ctrl_C

February 25th, 2002, 10:17 AM

I will bring my physics notes home tomorrow...they contain all the projectile motion equations you will ever need.

SATANIC

February 25th, 2002, 01:06 PM

If you are going to be really simple about it, you could take a measurement of the distance it flies, (fire one at a set charge) estimate the height, measure the angle of the barrel, and record the time. From that you can work out the actual distance it flew, then the average speed. from those you could at least make a rough estimation of the launch speed. just use your simple trig rules, and possibly pythagoras's theorem, (sp). It's year 10 science stuff ( i did advanced science but). i'd post diagrams, but i have none. if you really can't do it your self, post the data and i'll work it out. i can't explain how to do it, i haven't got the patience.

NoltaiR

February 25th, 2002, 06:19 PM

Well today I shot off a few and with a little work made it quite accurate (I shot a small branch off a tree that was about 100 feet away). My homemade BP doesn't burn fast enough to shoot any kind of projectile off well, so I mixed it 50/50 with industrial FFG grade BP and it worked just fine with my electrical ignitor. I went through my old physics notes and found a formula if I was to shoot the mortar off straigh up in the air. To measure using time, you can time the amount of seconds it takes for the projectile to leave the barrel to the point in which it stops (reaches 0m/s). VI = VF - GT (where g = -9.81 gravity) Therefore if it took my projectile 7 seconds before it reached 0m/s, then VI = 0 - (-9.81)(7) = 68.67m/s Also you can calulate the maximum height it achieved by using: D = (VF² - VI²)/(2G) = (0² - 68.67²) / (2)(-9.81) = 240m (of coarse this is its theoretical value, not including the factor of wind causing it to slow down)

zaibatsu

February 26th, 2002, 07:29 AM

To measure speed of a bullet in an easy way just use a ballistic pendulum. http://www.frontiernet.net/~jlkeefer/ball_pen.htm or do a search on it a find a load of different pages.

vulture

February 26th, 2002, 08:49 AM

The distance where your projectile hits the ground(so not a tree in the middle!) is equal to: Vo x Vo x sin 2y / 9,81 Vo = muzzle velocity y = angle with the ground so if you want to know the muzzle velocity you have to take the square root of: 9,81 x d / sin 2y d = distance I hope this is clear to you, if not, send me a mail.

Ctrl_C

February 26th, 2002, 11:45 AM

you also have to take into account the height of the barrel from the ground. in reality, you should find the distance to where it hit, calculate the trajectory, and calculate where the "landing poing" is at the same height as the muzzle. i forgot my notes...tomorrow perhaps

NoltaiR

February 26th, 2002, 06:30 PM

Vulture's formula seem to be a formula made for 2 dimensional (where Vox and Voy are both accounted for) analysis of distance and hieght and he just translated it to be made for a vertical measurement.. sounds like making it a lot harder than it really is but I guess if your the technical type, then that's the way to go. BTW, for you people that don't know your physics all that well, Vo and Vi are the same.. they both represent the initial velocity. Anyways the formulas I gave earlier were to measure from the time that the projectile left the barrel and was far enough away that the BP no longer had an accelerating effect on it (about 6-8 inches I should think from the end of the barrel) to the point in which its vertical hieght is at its maximum point (when V = 0m/s). You could also (theoretically because the real acceleration would not be uniform) calculate the acceleration from when the projectile is at rest inside the barrel to the point outside the barrel when it is no longer accelerating. I forget what this formula is but I am pretty sure it works.

vulture

February 27th, 2002, 06:47 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Actually, it's the simplest formula that exists for this! Of course it's a 2-dimensional movement, it has a vertical and a horizontal velocity. And i don't see where you get that Vo and Voy from, it's just the square of Vo, but i don't know how to type superscript. My x stands for multiply BTW. 2x barrel lenght / square of time in barrel = acceleration

Ctrl_C

February 27th, 2002, 09:57 AM

heres all projectile motion equations from my physics notes.

g = -9.80 m/s<sup>2 V<sub>f = V<sub>i + at d = 1/2 (V<sub>f + V<sub>i)t d = V<sub>it = 1/2 at<sup>2 V<sub>f<sup>2 = V<sub>i<sup>2 + 2ad d<sub>x = V<sub>i<sub>xt d<sub>y = V<sub>i<sub>yt + 1/2 gt<sup>2 where V<sub>i = Initial velocity (muzzle velocity) V<sub>f = Final velocity d = displacement (distance) t = time in s a = accel due to gravity (g)

Furthermore, you can seperate the projectile into an x and y component using:

V<sub>i<sub>x = V<sub>icos(angle) V<sub>i<sub>y = V<sub>isin(angle)

[ 27 February 2002: Message edited by: ctrl_c ]

xoo1246

March 2nd, 2002, 11:58 PM

When a projectile reaches higher speed than aprox 60km/h air resistance becomes important.

Bignutsami

March 5th, 2002, 11:33 PM

The older chronographs just used two sheets of paper with wires running through them set at a defined distance apart. As the bullet passed through the wires were cut, which started and stopped a timer which shows how long the projectile took to go that distance, the math is simple from there.

A-BOMB

March 7th, 2002, 05:36 AM

I'll scan you some pages for a old gun book I have that tells you pretty much every way to register velocity of your projectile. I'll put it on the FTP in the uploads It name will be "chronographs scanned pages.pdf" vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> m obile ph o n e g u n

View Full Version : mobile phone gun Mick

Log in

August 15th, 2001, 02:27 AM

have a look at this, p retty tricky if you ask m e - and probably not all that hard to do eithe r http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/20981.htm l

c0deblue

August 15th, 2001, 03:01 AM

Good article, but see BadSeed's post @ http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/Forum 4 / H T M L / 0 0 0 2 6 0 . h t m l com plete with drawings and a video clip of the device in action.

Mick

August 15th, 2001, 04:29 AM

oh..woops, didn't kno w there was alrea dy a post about it ...didn't both e r t o l o o k , d i d n ' t t h i n k a n y o n e e l s e h a d s e e n i t b e f o r e sorry http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/biggrin .gif vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> OICW can it be improvise?

View Full Version : OICW can it be improvise? Mad Dog

Log in

April 22nd, 2001, 09:16 PM

Fore those who don't know OICW stands for (Objective Individual Combat Weapon) http://members.tripod.com/~DragonC147/OICW2.html My plan was to improvise a simplified version consisting of a home made sub-machine gun and Kurt Saxon's slam-bang shotgun mounted on top. Dos anyone have any suggestions how it can be improved? Also I dont have any sub-machine gun plans so can you can suggest a book or a web site that has appropriate gunsmithing advise it would be greatly appreciated

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

DaRkDwArF

April 22nd, 2001, 09:35 PM

hmm if you wanted to use a slambang shotgun wouldn't it be better mounted underslung? I think I would prefer NBK's Gyrojet project, it sounds a hell of a lot more sexier =)

Mad Dog

April 22nd, 2001, 10:30 PM

Question: what is "Gyrojet project"? I have a number of NBK's pdf's but I've never herd of Gyrojet. And over thing if I put the slambang shotgun underslung would that mean that I should have a sub-machine gun simular to Sten Mk2 with a clip on the side of the weapon. Also from my entirely theoretical knowledge Sten is inaccurate and unreliable, but I may be wrong.

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

Agent Blak

April 22nd, 2001, 11:12 PM

Dwarf, At a distance the GyroJet is effective but up close and personal she is supposed to be shitty. it would be interesting to build though. As for being sexier...To Chix A Gun Is A Gun(sory FireFox but it is true); also most of the Chix I have met hate guns.

-----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

phyrelord

April 23rd, 2001, 05:29 PM

it's not in a pdf it's one of his posts a gyrojet is a small gun which shoots rocket propelled ammo, at short range it is very, very weak, at long ranges though it's at full power. The bullet itself is about the size of a forty five shell (the whole thing). Oh and another thing is that it stabilizes itself because the two jets are sent out in opposite directions. Do a search for gyrojet posts and you should find it.

DaRkDwArF

April 24th, 2001, 07:31 AM

Aye, theres your launcher, now underneath it you place your SMG =)

AR-15 Man

April 24th, 2001, 06:58 PM

Just curious how do you plan on the infared/nvg display? And did you know it has a tracking system that follows moving objects like say if you run into brush it will give the user some idea of where you are at? It is one hell of a weapon system is one thing but don't think it would be easy to improvise and/or be reilable. I think it would be cool to try but nothing beats getting out and actually learning your weapon. I thought about getting a 500 dollar upgrade on my AR-15 but decieded to try everything first. Sure glad I did that. You would be suprised what you will learn. But I will say some good thing to add to any CQB rifle are holographic sights. Not the cheap 5 dollar wally world versions. If you can afford that buy some of that sight paint and paint a triangle and a dot in the middle of a piece of plexiglass. You would have to find some sort of mount but it should work out fine. Shouldn't matter anyway slam fire SMG's like you are wanting are not the accurate anyway. The shotgun underneath is a great idea.

DaRkDwArF

April 25th, 2001, 09:16 AM

That idea's been tried and tested before, the US military were using them, I'm pretty sure it was a standard M203 with a 12ga adaptor. I've seen carazy jap workings though, they cut down a remington 870 and mounted it below an AR15... I'll look for the pic

AR-15 Man

April 25th, 2001, 09:54 PM

Darkdwarf you are referring to something called a "master key". It is a cut down 870. It is in limited use f or special forces. The M203 shotgun adapter was actually used in Vietnam for M79 users who only had a .45 pistol for defense. They later came up with a 40mm Buckshot round. I think the 40mm worth of buckshot is better than 12 gauge but it might of been a weight consideration. Hell the first M-16's only weighted 5 and a half pounds. I would of carried one too. But that is why the came up with the M203 in the first place. I would just love to have an M203 with buckshot and HEAP rounds. But still on the topic of the subgun it would be more of a PDW or CQB cause subguns aren't great rifles.

Mad Dog

April 25th, 2001, 10:43 PM

AR-15 MAN I am attempting to make a simular weapon, to OICW I can't recrate all of the electronics so fare a close relative of mine offered me his IR scope and laser sight maybe I'll manege to get some over gadgets. And after reeding about Gyrojet project a slightly modified version of the project would be the best "primary" weapon to witch the IR scope will be fitted. I'll probably place the laser sight on the SMG so it will be my CQB weapon. And one more thing dos any one have a good SMG or compact assault rifle plans they could land me?

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter SofaKing

April 26th, 2001, 01:00 AM

Remeber when ripley duct taped the m40A1 to the flamer, yeah I want that where can I get that ? What do you mean it's illegal, I'm going to talk to someone about this. Then again the sentrys where cool two. -----------------With Knowledge we find Truth - With Truth we find Freedom

AR-15 Man

April 26th, 2001, 10:04 PM

Mad Dog if you are using such good items like a IR scope and laser site don't use a homemade SMG. Heck go out and buy a good rifle like an AK, SKS, AR-15, one of the newer imported G-3's or FNFALs. If you want an SMG and/or are strapped for cash try the PM-11 or AB-10. Do you have access to a machine shop to make the mounts? But in reality lasers and holosites belong on SMGs not IR scopes. They take away from their true purpose. Kinda like trying to use a low rider truck for off roading it isn't going to work. The OICW is suppose to be a rifle/mini missle platform anyway. Your is more of a high tech CQB weapon. But all of what I am saying is from a practical standpoint and goes back to my analogy of the low rider truck. The low rider truck like a SMG with lots of crap on it like IR scopes that weight it down but it looks cool and if that is what you are going for then let your imagination go wild. But if this is something you would take to combat keep it simple. All I can say is good luck and if you need any ideas just mail me.

DaRkDwArF

April 27th, 2001, 08:29 AM

I wouldn't really like carting around an OICW, too bulky for me, I'd prefer a Styer AUG or one of th new HK series (the plastic Rifles) with holo sights. Thats probably because I've never fought a tank or a bunker full of men before but hey! If thats your cup of tea then build one, let me know how it goes =)

HMTD Factory

April 27th, 2001, 06:52 PM

Improvising OICW? Get a crossfire (.223 + 12Ga), mount a rangefinder night vision scope. Under mount a grenade launcher, there you got yourself a 100 pound rifle. OICW cannot withstand EMP blast if you want to know...After a soliton bomb exploded, the whole arsenal will fall prey to good old AKs.

AR-15 Man

April 27th, 2001, 09:10 PM

Yea Darkdwarf hit it on the head the OICW is for HEAVY battles. Such as you jump out of the vehicle and are in the fight. It isn't a patrol, recon, or carry around weapon. It is to give each infantry man a hell of a lot of firepower in battle. Yea I would prefer any assualt rifle like AK, AR-15, G36, galil, valmet, ect. Yea it like HMTD Factory said it won't take an EMP blast. HMTD Factory are you from Canada if you are I can see why you like AK's. I would too if I lived in a very cold region. Nope I get to live in the good ole south in the US. I do like the idea of mounting the stuff on the crossfire. To bad the rifle isn't semi. If I wanted a heavy weapon I would use a M1A, BAR, or some type of squad automatic weapon like RPK, M243, PKM, ect. Oh yea best thing for a tank battle is just to avoid them whenever you can. Wait till you liberate heavier weapons. I don't wanna be the poor bastard who tries to sneak up on a tank putting a charge around the turret. Remember tanks can only take ground not hold it anyway.

DaRkDwArF

April 28th, 2001, 10:35 AM

Yeah I would honestly prefer an AK, easy to strip down and the rounds are abundant around here, around my area I face alot of different climates all offer different ways to fuck up a nice rifle, so yes an AK or something similar would be my choice, probably mount a holo sight and a flashlight and convert it to a folding stock

Agent Blak

April 28th, 2001, 12:32 PM

The AK-47 is the most widely used assault rifle(it has seen the most battles). It is tried and True. It is russian and there for design for the russian climate(Same Canada).

-----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

AR-15 Man

April 28th, 2001, 03:56 PM

The AK is a good rifle. you can add cobra holo site, buy mags, ammo accessories very cheaply but I prefer the AR-15 series. Some may say AR are Jamomatics but they aren't if you clean them like you have to do every rifle. The AR series is flexible. In minutes you can change the rifle from a very accurate precision rifle to a handgun caliber subgun. I have abused AR every way. I live in the south so we don't usually have very cold weather but we do have rain, mud, swamps, hail, etc. Accuracy is one thing I strive for. That is another reason I chose the AR-15. But when it comes down to it just have a rifle. Heck in Vietnam and Pakistan guerilla forces mostly had pre WWII weapons. Oh yea darkdwarf most AK folding stocks have some play in them so you will some lose accuracy. If you want compact go for it.

Mad Dog

April 28th, 2001, 11:44 PM

DaRkDwArF I have used both AK-47 and Styer AUG. AK may be heaver but it is more powerful and reliable but I may its just my heritage spiking as I was born and raised in Russia.(I an NOT a communist!!!) So if OICW is designed to be used only in large scale combat, what should I use to defeat any weapons or equipment that a SWAT team can use against me. One more thing I am currently living in Australia so any assault weapon is outlawed so I'll have to construct it from scratch.

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

Mr Cool

April 29th, 2001, 11:48 AM

Just another comment on the Gyrojet: it's very quite (like an airgun, apparently) and since it fires rockets it can be totally recoilless. Also, since it fires rockets, no pressure has to build up, so it can be made from cheap, light materials (Al, plastic), and due to the spin stabilisation from the angled jets, no rifling is needed. In my opinion, it would be worth making the ammo (not very hard) for an improvised weapon because of these points. For the (very basic) ammo, just get copper tubing, seal one end with epoxy, fill it with a composite rocket fuel, and plug it with a disc of anything easily drillable and fairly strong, e.g. MDF. Then, using a jig, drill a central hole through the rear plug, and two small angled holes opposite each other on either side of the larger, main hole. Pour a little bit of BP in through the main hole, seal the other two holes with molten wax, and push a rifle primer in the main hole. Once everything is set up you could mass produce these very quickly. It wouldn't matter if the MDF burnt, because by the time it had burnt a significant amount the rocket would have hit the target.

PYRO500

April 29th, 2001, 04:07 PM

that does not sound easy or workable/safe

AR-15 Man

April 29th, 2001, 06:15 PM

Mad Dog, that is awful you live their with such horrible gun laws. You might be able to make a AK-47 copy if you want a rifle. If the Afghans could make their own copy I am

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

sure someone in a 1st world country could. You said you were from Russia? I have had training from people from former soviet satellite countries. Mainly Lithuania. But I have also had training from Korea era US soldiers, Vietnam era US soldiers and Current US soldiers. Plus a few others like from South America. Did you ever fire the real deal full auto AK version or full auto AUG Steyrs? Just curious. Well good luck with your OICW.

Mr Cool

April 29th, 2001, 06:16 PM

The idea is both workable and safe. I made a 1" diameter rocket stabilised using angled jets. I used a paper roll cap to set it off, and BP with a bit of red phosphorous as an igniter because I didn't have any primers. The fuel was AN/Al/resin/ammonium dichromate/charcoal (actually I used potassium dichromate), as described in ALENGOSVIG1's site. I launched it from a cardboard tube with a nail in the bottom. The rocket was put about 1" into the tube, where it was stopped by a nail through the side. A length of string attached to this nail could be pulled from a distance, allowing the rocket to fall and be set off. It went very high very fast, and very straight. I suppose it would be easier to make a gun though. I just mentioned this because I like experimental rocketry.

PYRO500

April 29th, 2001, 06:31 PM

I once saw a gyro jet shot before, using copper tubing with a homemade propellant could be hazardous to your health, for one the gyrojet proplellant burns very slowly and it has no solid particles in the exaust that can clog the jet holes you made one with paper witch is what I would recomend you experiment with or else you might have just built a handheld finger remover

DaRkDwArF

April 29th, 2001, 07:02 PM

Well then MadDog I guess you can understand what I mean by multi climate if you live in Australia =) Hmm the AUG is very easy to strip down but alot of others I know loose parts when stripping it down in the field. but the AK can have parts improvised easily if you happen to have the blueprints on you. IT's got alot more stopping power but the AUG is more accurate. Anyhow skipping to far off topic here. The OICW would really only be useful against LE and Military, bu if the military are there you've already spent to much time on the scene. I think it would be an excellent "SWAT stopper" just point and click at their van/bus =)

Mad Dog

April 30th, 2001, 10:55 AM

I can't argue with that, AUG is more accurate and with AUG you can actually hit something while firing full auto (AK jumps too much). The only reason I prefer AK-47 is a more powerful round and the fact that it doesnt contain any plastic which has a tendency to brake in -30C. I know someone who has AK-47 plans but all the commentary is in Russianso I can post them to anyone but you might not understand them. Back to OICW is there any over ideas for a SWAT stoper rifle?

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong? [This message has been edited by Mad Dog (edited April 30, 2001).]

Mr Cool

April 30th, 2001, 03:00 PM

I read a report on the gyrojet which stated that the muzzle velocity was 274 m/s, and that's in about 20cm of barrel. Therefore the fuel can't burn very slowly! And smoke won't clog anything. It's too fine, and it has several hundred, if not thousand, psi pushing it out of the way. Well, they're fun, even if not practical for weapons use!

PYRO500

April 30th, 2001, 05:41 PM

yes it may make a huge amount of pressure, if the pressure rises too fast it will explode wether it has a hole or not, and what clogs it is carbon debris from the black powder you will probably use

HMTD Factory

April 30th, 2001, 10:52 PM

Yes I live in Canada and yes I love AKs. But AK-47 can not be made really accurate like .223 rifles. 7.62X39 M43 caliber is not accurate enough after 200 yards. 5.45X39 is better competeing to .223 Rem. The Russian got a new shit called 9X39, ever heard of it? Some AK-47 blueprints are cooler than other AK-47 blueprints, how come? THE COOLEST ONES ARE WRITTEN IN RUSSIAN!!! So Mad Dog please post the naked picture of Ms. AK and I am gonna hang it on my walls.

AR-15 Man

May 1st, 2001, 10:59 PM

Yea HMTD factory I have heard of the 9x39 round. It is very bad ass from what reports have said. But this is also from the people who make it. If they would let some of us "westerners" in to test it I would be very pleased. The 9x39 would make a good round for the OICW. Oh yea HMTD factory I thought all AK type rifle were banned by name in Canada? I also heard you all can get standard G36's but without Hi Cap mags. Your assessment of the AK situation is right. You ever heard of Valmets and Galils. Apparently they are accurate. I wouldn't know they run about $2000.

HMTD Factory

May 2nd, 2001, 05:29 AM

Anything that looks like AK or designed base on AK is banned in Canada, but can be traded between those who have a "prohibited firearm license". (Anything that looks like AK : Dragunov, Velmet, Galil, AK-22, Type 56, RPK, Romak, the whole AK family...with only a few exceptions, such as "Velmet Hunter" and SKS.) I was checking a .22 AK copy in a gun show but I was stopped by the dealer, he said in heavily accented English "If you don't have the permit then don't bother checking out the gun." I was like #%&*@!^...

Mad Dog

May 27th, 2001, 01:38 AM

I am back. I was unable to post for about two weeks(it's a long story). And now for the bad news my scanner is out so I will not be able to post the AK blueprints for some time yet. The good news is that there is a chance that I will get my hands on SVD plans. So if I do I will be happy to scan them for anyone who is interested.

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

petermueller Originally posted by Mad Dog: Fore those who don't know OICW stands for (Objective Individual Combat Weapon) http://members.tripod.com/~DragonC147/OICW2.html My plan was to improvise a simplified version consisting of a home made sub-machine gun

June 20th, 2001, 08:53 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

and Kurt Saxon's slam-bang shotgun mounted on top. Dos anyone have any suggestions how it can be improved? Also I dont have any sub-machine gun plans so can you can suggest a book or a web site that has appropriate gunsmithing advise it would be greatly appreciated look on the wild eyed psychos page

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

ANTI-SYSTEM

June 20th, 2001, 01:22 PM

holy damn if i had one of those ,even an improvised one the world wouldnt be the same. how much would one of those cost?

AR-15 Man

June 22nd, 2001, 12:48 PM

I was reading an artical about it a while back in Nation Rifleman and they prototype costed 40,000 dollars. You may say what the hell that is expensive. They hope by the issue date 2006 it should be down to 20,000 dollars which is the price of an Urban land warrior M-4. And bring it down to 11 pounds. Maybe they will maybe they won't. And the 20mm shells compents have been classified. They are coming out with a Machinegun version that will replace the MK-19 and M-2 Browing Ma Duece. Personally I think the M-2 needs to stay. It will be a decent replacement for the MK-19.

Ragnar

July 29th, 2001, 04:31 AM

Hey, Mad Dog. I would be very interested in the russian AK blueprints, I know someone who has a Ruski AKM that is missing the trigger mechanism and bolt. It's a '73.

Mad Dog

August 16th, 2001, 03:28 AM

OK I am back Sorry Ranger but my scanner is not working. I have finally gave up on the project, the only thing that I acutely made (in my dreams of corse) was a "slam bang" with an attachment to fire NBKs hand grenades and "Molotov cocktails". AR-15 Man, personally I consider that m-2 is outdated and needs to be replaced by a newer weapon and a deferent round e.g. 14.5mm or 15.2mm. Hey what's Urban land warrior M-4, I know what M-4 is I presume that Urban land warrior is a short way of saying "M-4 with every possible gismo attached to mace it look reel scary" was I far of.

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

AR-15 Man

August 18th, 2001, 03:41 PM

Why do you feel the M-2 is outdated? I am curious. I know there are better weapons but I feel it's purpose is anti aircraft and anti material weapons. Not anti armor. They have much better weapons for that purpose. Like 30mm auto cannons. As for the Urban land warrior it is a joke. To many gismos. Well it would be good for specfic purposes but that is it. Like heavy street fighting and you have a good supply line. Shouldn't be general issue EVER. I know I wouldn't want to be lugging around a 20 pound weapon that has too many gismos. I mean for 20 pounds I could have a belt feed. And for 11 pounds I can have an M-16A2 with M203. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Sniper Log in

View Full Version : Sniper herrbauer

August 18th, 2001, 10:42 PM

I'm looking for a small sniper rifle project. I've found some projects in other forums but none matches my query. The effective range must be over 100 metres. The caliber may be 5.5mm. The barrel can't be longer than 70 cm. Of course I'm not trying to kill anyone, I'm just adding ideas to my project. Thanx

Heavy Recoil

August 18th, 2001, 11:10 PM

Something improvised probably wont be accurate at 10 meters much less 100. since you use meters. you are probably not from the USA, while you have strict laws, over the lake, in the land of the semi-free, they are not that hard to get around. .30 cal. would be better, as machine gun barrels used to be found here (http:// www.sportsmansguide.com) in .308. most parts (receivers no) can be ordered from the mail. 100meters will usually need to be rifled (read as very very hard) so complete impro. is difficult. 30 cal. is your best bet over there, too. has a bit more range and knockdown power (reliability, accuratcy, knockdown, range, rof, kick ass looks http:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif ) greatest to trivial needs of a gun) you will need a already made barrel. then add an action. Ill get back to you on that, Thru the forum not email. -----------------"I'm not an assassin. killing is more of a hobby with me."' Robert A. Heinlein [This message has been edited by Heavy Recoil (edited August 18, 2001).]

Mr Cool

August 19th, 2001, 09:33 AM

You want a 5.5mm barrel? Then go get a .22 air rifle second hand and strip off the barrel. You could probably pick one up for £20 or less. You could also use it's trigger mechanism and stock.

Predator

August 19th, 2001, 12:31 PM

Air rifle barrel rifling would be too slow for a live round though.. the gyroscopic stability out at 100m probably wouldn't be fantastic

Mr Cool

August 19th, 2001, 01:02 PM

Ah, I didn't think of that. Well it'd be better than a smooth bore I bet!

Anthony

August 19th, 2001, 03:09 PM

Depends what you deem as "accurate" at 100m? If you want to hit a man size target, torso, or maybe even head then a .22 rimfire in a half sharp air rifle should be capable of that. You couldn't be confident of a kill with a rimmy though. IIRC officially "sniping" doesn't start till past 600 or 700 yds.

twinkle

August 19th, 2001, 04:57 PM

If it has not to be made with a silencer you could use .22 WRM instead of .22 LR and when making it as a Bullpup-rifle you could made it very small though the killing range of a .22 lR is somewhere 400 m

[This message has been edited by twinkle (edited August 19, 2001).]

Victim

August 19th, 2001, 07:01 PM

If your thinking of a .313, you may want to try building it on the Vikers K machine gun design, although the calibre is .303, the muzzle velocity is 743m (2,445ft) per second, and has a range of 1,828m (2,000yards). Although for a range of say 500meters this would be a slight overkill, but, if building it on the Vikers K machine gun, the design is pretty simple. I will try and get some plans from somewhere. -----------------"Death, The End Of Hope, The Friend Of The Friendless..."

Predator

August 19th, 2001, 07:54 PM

In my books 'Accurate' is when you can hit your target to within a 1 inch diameter circle consistantly at a given distance, in this case, 100m The only thing is, a 'half decent' air rifle/barrel that can contribute to achieving that costs quite a bit, and cheaper air-guns just won't cut the mustard. I've come across airguns that were supplied with a spec sheet that read "accurate to 3cm diameter at 10 meters" ! http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/mad.gif

HMTD Factory

August 21st, 2001, 02:37 AM

A .22 air gun barrel may have enough rifling to stablize a centerfire bullet http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif If the twist is 1-in-14 then it can shoot anything below 55 grain. If the twist is 1-in-9 then it can shoot anything below 70 grain. The US army use a 1-in-6 tight twist for NATO 62 grainers, but thats to enhance terminal ballistics. An air gun barrel should have no problem as long as the groove diameter fits the rifle(AND thick enough for your chamber). Say, the barrel is .226 and the bullet is .223, then you are hopeless for accuracy. On the other hand if the barrel is .219 and the bullet is .223 then you have pressure problem. The power of your gun MUST be equal to or greater than .22 WMR to perform MOA.. If you don't handload then 223 Rem is your best friend. My personal "Poor man's sniper rifle" is a Swedish mauser I found on a gunshow. It's cheaper than my SKS...but the most accurate rifle I own(handload shoots sub-half MOA, all the time). Go to gunshows when you need gun parts, last time I spotted an unchambered .308 bull barrel 1 inch thick for 80$CDN., but my money is already gone.

AR-15 Man

August 21st, 2001, 01:13 PM

HMTD Factory are you sure the NATO twist is 1 in 6? I thought it was 1 in 7. Even stamped on my barrel and has NATO on it. Also good choice on the Swedish Mauser. They never used corrisve ammo so shot out barrels are hard to find. All I can get cheap is Mosin Nagents and Turk Mausers.

HMTD Factory

August 22nd, 2001, 03:46 AM

1-in-6 is the new U.S. twist, I dunno about NATO specs. Both Turk Mauser and Mosin are decent guns. I reload for Mosin (A Polish M44) but hasn't found a decent scope mount yet for accuracy tests.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

For Mausers, pre-war or early wartime Mauser in Germany is very good, The best wartime Mauser I think are the ones made by BRNO under German capture, they are about as smooth as a custom rifle(It's true, I saw one before I can get it.) I heard the Swedish stuff is drying up in the US, but I still got myself another Swedish here in Canada, this time the rifle is stored in grease unfired. If anybody is into a "poor man's sniper rifle" project, don't use Swedish Mausers, cuz they are MINE!http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

HMTD Factory

August 26th, 2001, 08:37 PM

Ahh fenris you got what I was looking for... The Erma .22 carbine, probably the only gas operated .22LR rifle in the world. When it comes to M1 remakes...a company in Israel is offering new M1 carbine in either .30 carbine or MMJ5.7(.30 carb necked down to .22cal, makes the MMJ5.7 case a bit larger than the 5.7X28) The .22cal cartridge is very efficient, with less than 15grn. of powder the bullet will scream at 3000fps.

Agent Blak

August 26th, 2001, 09:41 PM

I would like to recomend the Lee/EndField .303 British; holds ten rounds in the Mag and one in the chamber, Bolt Actiopn like all descent Snipers use, Cheap($100-300), Scope Mounts. plus if .303 British brings down a deer with ease I don't think a human would be a problem. If it is a Duce-Duce you are looking for i recomend an Ant-Shoot Target rifle. The Russians use a .22LR to snipe. the beautiful thing about them is they can be silenced with a beverage bottle and anything beyond 100m I would worry about silencing. -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

raptor1956

August 28th, 2004, 07:48 PM

I'm inclined to think that the terms "sniping" and ".22cal short barrel" are somewhat mutually exclusive!

zaibatsu

August 29th, 2004, 05:28 AM

I'm inclined to think that that's a useless post, bringing up an old thread without reason.

tdog49

August 29th, 2004, 10:59 PM

Aguila makes a 60 gr. .22lr cartridge that is subsonic. It carries more energy at 100+yds than most of the high velocity 30-40 gr. cartridges. They claim 10+inches of penetration into ballistic gelatin @ 200 yds. I have used these and they are a little dirty but do perform well. For premium accuracy you do need a 1 in 9 twist barrel--most 22lr barrels ar 1-14 or 1-16--. Their website is here: www.aguilaammo.com/ vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> calculating # of shots

View Full Version : calculating # of shots Bignutsami

Log in

March 8th, 2002, 06:56 PM

In reference to here http://www26 .brinkster.com/fu llauto/index.htm l If I was to use a regulator to pressurise the pressure ch a m b e r t o 6 0 p s i a nd the "feeder ta nk" was presurised to 100psi, how m any shots at 60psi will I get from the gun if the feeder tank has 16 tim es the volume of the pressure cha m b e r ?

Bignutsami

March 8th, 2002, 07:56 PM

Thin k I m igh t of work ed it out. shot-feeder pressure 1 - 100 2 - 96 3 - 93 4 - 89 5 - 85 6 - 81 7 - 78 8 - 74 9 - 70 10 - 66 11 - 63 12 - 59 13 - 55 14 - 52 15 - 48 16 - 45 17 - 43 18 - 40 19 - 37 20 - 35

My calculation for the first shot was 100 x 1/16 = 6.25 60/100 x 6.25 = 3.75 100 - 3.75 = 96 (rounded to nearest whole) Then same done for every shot until pressure dropped below 60psi, where the second line of calculations wasnt necessary as f e e d e r a n d p ressure tank pressure was the sam e . Does that look right? That gives 11 shots at 60psi, which seem s pretty good. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Cattle Prods Log in

View Full Version : Cattle Prods mongo blongo

February 25th, 2002, 03:58 PM

Hi all! I have just tried out the cowprod method from the FTP and it kicks ass! For those who don't know, it involves using the inner parts of a disposable camera. I made some modifications to the method, nothing big, just added some different safety and charging switches and removed some parts that didn't need to be there. I tried it on some Al foil and it bade a small bang with a blue flash with some sparks and also melted tw o holes in the foil! I was impressed! After messing around with it for a while, the w ires I w as using were burned out! As I w as trying to repair the damage, I w as charging it up and I accidently hit the momentary safety switch shocked myself! The capaisitor w as only about half charged up, but it fucking hurt! It felt like all the molecules in my arms were vibrating really fast for a split second. I would NOT like to experience this when it w as fully charged! Try this out, It's cool! (not getting shocked I mean) :) But it's a good laugh for a few bucks. While on the subject, most of/all you know what a Van der graph (sp?) generator is right? I w as thinking, If you were to get a small one (like the ones in phsysics class) and hook the dome and the leaver with the discharging ball to some contacts at the end of a long stick. Have the VDG on some kind of back pack module and run it of a lawn mower engine! :eek: I have seen these things give a spark over a 5cm gap from about 10 or 20 SLOW manual turns. From a lawn mower engine, this would be fucking insane! I haven't given much thought to this and w ould be too scared to try it out (could get bolts of lightning discharging into my face!) but I would like to know your thoughts on this one. On a related subject I was impressed at A-Bomb's induction coils (video on the FTP)! Have you got any plans for them by the w ay?

ALENGOSVIG1

February 25th, 2002, 04:57 PM

i got a whole box of old disposable cameras from costco. if you think 1 capacitor fully charged is impressive then add 3 or 4 more camera capacitors and use 2 D batteries to charge it.

mongo blongo

February 26th, 2002, 10:35 AM

Cool idea! Would they be wired up in series or parallel? I think parallel right? (I'm crap at electronics). :) [ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: Mongo Blongo ]

Ctrl_C

February 26th, 2002, 11:42 AM

fyi, most disposable camera caps are 330v 1 micro Farrad. Also, shorting out an 8 Farrad cap (car stereo cap) is awesome. sounds like crazy arcing electricity going WAAAAP!. welds the screwdriver to the leads too. [ 26 February 2002: Message edited by: ctrl_c ]

A-BOMB

February 26th, 2002, 11:55 AM

If you think a car stero cap is cool, wait till you see this cap I got out of a bigass projection TV its a 8,000uf 192 volts its melts a friggin hole through a nickel.

PYRO500

February 26th, 2002, 04:06 PM

those caps from camera flashes are usually around 150 uf at 330-350V that is about 8.1 J (joules) now that is a pretty good punch in that size, I think the car audio caps are around 600 J but they are slow er to discharge than regular caps. and the projection tv cap is about 149 J now these all pack a pretty good punch, but my magneto charged blasting machine is 100 J at 100 V and I have a desktop cap bank of two huge electorlytic caps that are a combined energy of 2.11 KJ! that is 2110 J at 525V! I stumped the physics teacher by shooting aluminum disks with it, this thing is haxardous to discharge it sounds like a shotgun, will utterly explode little pieces of aluminum foil I think I can detonate NM with it, I have to experiment, I think it is around the power of 7 1/2 defibulators and if you ever touch it it will happily blow little chunks of flesh from your bone! when I trigger this it explodes a bit off the copper house wiring I am using (big 220V oven w ire)and it shoots liquid green vaporized copper balls all over, I almost had a fire beacuse of this, I am looking for a big scr to switch this, now I am working on a big switch that slams shut, I can take al foil and bunch it up and put it on the coil attached to this and w hen I touch the leads I get a loud pop like an explosion and the lump of AL foil will smack against my cieling!

DBSP

February 27th, 2002, 05:18 AM

I better source of power for a small blasting machine would be an external foto flash. I've got one and it's a lot more powerful than the ordinary built-in camera flash. This I understand isn't very powerful compared to etc PYROs blasting machine. But it more simple and easy to find than PYROs. I got a question. How exactly do you trigger and charge a cap. Does anyone have schematics. I tried dow nloading the cowprod file from the ftp but I got an error message when I tried opening it. I found it in recent. Has enyone else had problems opening it? I'm very interested in getting myself a blasting box. I've got some caps so all I need schematics to see what else I need. You se I'm fucking tired off draging around heavy carbatteries

DaRkDwArF

February 28th, 2002, 12:29 PM

Where abouts in the ftp is the file? I can't find it under IW...

DBSP

March 1st, 2002, 02:27 AM

The cowprod file is located in recent. And if you had read the last post you w ouldn't have had to ask!

xoo1246

March 2nd, 2002, 11:54 PM

If you want to keep it simple, hook your wires up to w here the flash lamp used to be.

xoo1246

March 3rd, 2002, 12:01 AM

You charge you capacitor through a resitor and you might have to use a transformator to get higher voltage. If the voltage isn't too hight you could use switch or you a transistor. Otherw ise use a tyristor.

Madog555

March 4th, 2002, 03:34 PM

i gotta have one of these im getting a camera tomarrow soon im gona have a new destructive toy to play with :D

mongo blongo

March 4th, 2002, 04:02 PM

They can be a pain in the ass though. The contacts keep on melting so I have to change the wires quite often. :mad: Good fun though. ;)

Madog555

March 4th, 2002, 04:29 PM

im gona just take a new camera and take it apart. im not gona wast my time w ith takeing all the pictures. [ 04 March 2002: Message edited by: Madog ]

Prodigy45

March 18th, 2002, 01:15 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Well, i've been trying to do this for a couple days, and here's my results: Saturday: I read a file about shock guns and how to make them out of disposable cameras. Simple enough. So i go to a local camera store (non name brand one) and ask the guy for a disposable camera without film for a "school project" (zapping people at school < img border= "0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ). He runs into the back, and comes out with this black one. I got all excited and w ent home and opened it up. I couldn't get the flash to work but i thought, hey, if i put more volts into it (a 6 volt industrial battery) it would w ork. I looked for a battery and found w hat looked like one. After 30 mins of trying i found out that the little bastard had taken out the batteries and i had wasted that disposable camera... oh well... Sunday: I went to london drugs and asked the same thing. This time i got 3 cameras. 1 w as a "Kodak advantix switchable flash camera" , another a "Kodak Max HQ" and the third one didn't have a flash. I opened up the advantix camera (quite difficult to open without breaking it) and had a look insite. I found the place w here you touch the button on the outside to charge up the flash. Thinking my screw driver was insulated, i pressed it with my metal screwdriver (plastic handle). Nothing happened. I pressed it a couple more times then ZAP! Both my arms felt like w hen you hit your funny bone. I dropped the camera and was stunned for a min or so. No permanent damage cept for some shaky arms. I picked it up and noticed the yellow LED w as on, and i didn't w ant to try touching it again. I put it on the floor, facing up and threw my screw driver on it. The flash it made was so bright it blinded me for about 20 seconds. That had shorted out all the circuts on the board... Oops :p I decided to try the 2nd camera. I opened it up and it works all fine now. I have to take out the flash and get some solder and solder some wires to where the flash used to be. I'll probably do that today (monday) and i'll tell you my results.

mongo blongo

March 18th, 2002, 01:55 PM

I just had an idea for these camera modules. They could be changed to w ork as short time delay ignition systems for grenades. Take the LED out (the one that flashes w hen the capacitor is fully charged) and attach a small relay switch from the contacts to the relay coil (probably have to use a small voltage transistor for this instead). Attach the wires from the capacitor to an electrical ignitor. In this firing circuit, make a break which is connected to the output contacts on the relay. So now, when you connect the battery (or have a slide switch to connect it) the capacitor starts to charge. When it if fully charged it will activate the relay coil and close the firing circuit which in turn fires a detonator. You can change the time delay by using a smaller or larger battery (smaller takes longer to charge the capacitor and larger w ould be quicker). Or use a resistor on the battery. You could also (more work) use a variable resistor and calibrate it so you can choose the time delay by turning the knob on the variable resistor. So what do you think of this idea? Can anyone think of any improvements on this? I would like to know your thoughts on this.

mongo blongo

March 18th, 2002, 01:59 PM

Prodigy45- Connect the w ires DIRECTLY to the capacitor. On mine there is a resistor before the flash bulb. I don't know if there is one on yours but better safe than sorry. :)

J

March 18th, 2002, 04:25 PM

Just a small tip: when you open up anything electrical that generates voltages of greater than around 50v, short out any caps with an insulated screwdriver. Getting shocked by one of these isn't too bad, but bigger caps are very unforgiving. I'd never w ant to rely on one of these circuits as a timer for explosives. If nothing else w as available, it could work, but I'd always use a secondary (pyrotechnic) fuse to give me a safety margin.

Prodigy45

March 18th, 2002, 04:28 PM

I found a zip file for a cattle prod on the ftp. I've done all of it and hooked up all the wires. Im just trying to charge the capacitor right now but it's not w orking. Im going to try some more things before i sw itch the capacitor.

Prodigy45

March 18th, 2002, 04:33 PM

Ok, i got it to Work! Damn im excited. I w as touching the leads to the wrong side ( instead of plus to plus, minus to minus, i was putting them minus to plus etc). I took the fully charged capacitor (in a film container wrapped with duct tape) and dropped it on a quarter. It made a nice little spark w hich is all i really want, not too much but not too little. If anyone has questions ask away

Prodigy45

March 18th, 2002, 10:43 PM

well, 5 hours later and 2 more disposable cameras later im still stumped. The zap gun i got working died after 2 or 3 zaps on a coin. I couldn't find out w hat happened, so i took it all apart. I figured i blew the capacitor so i took the duct tape off it and put it on the floor. Well i bumped my screwdriver into it and it made a huge crack and now i have 2 small holes on my screwdriver. I bought an insulated screwdriver and 2 more free disposable cameras. I took apart the first one and was holding the capacitor when i felt a prick on my finger then my arms went numb again, i had shocked myself :( (not having too much luck on this am i?). Anyway, i dropped the circutboard on my screwdriver and it went pop. Now that w as a dud i trashed it and opened the next camera. Everything was fine until i tried to take the capacitor off. It went pop when i accidently touched the 2 legs together. My observation is to make a working model, you CANNOT let the 2 legs touch together. That renders the capacitor useless... More to come when i find more cameras.

mongo blongo

March 18th, 2002, 11:56 PM

Dude! .. you sound like you are having the same problem as me! (look at my post above).The capacitor is not the problem. It's the wires! They keep on melting and create this black shit w hich acts as an insulator on the contacts! This is why when you remove the capacitor it will still make a spark (no problem with the capacitor). Don't take the capacitor off (as in the PDF file)! Just attach some wires to the legs of it! You w ill have to replace the w ires every now and again ( yes, a pain in the ass!) but I can't see any other w ay around it sorry! :( They are cool though! :) Good luck!

BaDSeeD

March 19th, 2002, 09:15 AM

These two need to post before and after pictures so w e can see the change in their hair after repetedly frying themselves..lol

Prodigy45

March 19th, 2002, 12:44 PM

Sadly i don't have a digital camera so i can't really take pics. Badseed: I went to radioshack yesterday and bought 10 alligator clips. I think i'll try using those and they shouldn't melt. <small>[ March 19, 2002, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: Prodigy45 ]

J

March 19th, 2002, 02:02 PM

I don't like flaming people for lack of knowledge, but for fucks sake, what do you think? Please do at least some searching on the net before posting here. You should be able to at least apply logic; the capacitor stores the charge at a high voltage, so of course you connect leads to it if you w ant to shock people w ith it!

Anthony

March 19th, 2002, 08:30 PM

Seriously man, how many more cameras is it going to take? At least it's funny hearing about you constantly shocking yourself:) Use some bolts (M4+) for electrodes, they stand up well to repeat discharges.

PYRO500

March 20th, 2002, 09:14 PM

The capacitors in camera flash circuits are usually around 330V max, they normally charge up to ~300V in circuit, the black stuff you refer to is probably oxidized coating of the metal, and beware these capacitors can be lethal, avoid a shock at all costs, they can kill you. I beleve they are around 8 J 20J being threshhold deadly, my home capacitor bank witch is 2100J can repell an aluminum disk from a coil of w ire fast enough to really smack my cieling hard and knock off the popcorn (ugly white bumps)

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Shiper

March 23rd, 2002, 01:32 AM

can you please post the plan for the cowprod?? i'm interested................

J

March 23rd, 2002, 06:30 AM

It's on the FTP, learn to read properly.

electric emu

May 10th, 2002, 12:43 AM

i made one of those zappers and it sounds about the sames as every one elses here but it seems fine and ive zapped many people, including me, also when i touched my sink to discharge it, it left a nice little dent and it burnt me when i got shocked. i think my camera was a fuji <small>[ May 09, 2002, 11:48 PM: Message edited by: electric emu ]< /small>

Tcell

May 20th, 2002, 08:28 PM

I've personally made two different models of this tazer... One is just the standard tazer except I upped the voltage to 9 VDC(a nine volt battery fits almost perfectly into the film compartment on a Le Clic camera) with the flash left on as an alternative to carrying many flash bombs. The object with this one w as to keep it looking as much like a camera as possible. The flash is operated independently of the tazer part (tazer just discharges the capacitor through wires, flash discharges it through the flash tube). My second tazer is my experimental one, which looks NOTHING like a camera... so far it has the flash removed, the tazer leads connected to the flash capacitator on one side and w ood screws on the other to keep it from melting, a headphone jack connected to w here the flash used to be, so that leads for an electrical detonator can be plugged in (they are soldered onto the male part of the headphone jack), and am w orking on adding a way to add a CO2 cylinder to shoot around 10' leads out of the front with enough force to stab through heavy clothing -- possibly using fishhooks so that it will stick. ____________________ Maj. Tcell Cyberarmy VB C:O:D:E:R:S C/O www .vbcoders.vze.com< /a> ____________________

mongo blongo

May 20th, 2002, 09:00 PM

The second one sounds cool! You might need a quite a few capacitors to put someone on their ass though. You could use some induction coils.

McGuyver

May 20th, 2002, 09:33 PM

A larger spark could be made by hooking the two wires from the capacitor up to a magneto (from a small gas engine), or a starter coil(the ones found in cars). The magneto or starter coil should make a decent-sized (long) spark. The spark w ill be much like that of a grill ignitor but, probably longer and more powerful. I built a stun gun like this. My stun gun uses two C batteries and that gets transformed up to about 600-700 VDC by a homemade transformer and capacitors, and that gets pumped into 2 magnetos. That makes about 105,000 volts(10.5 cm arc length). The magnetos are glued bottom to bottom to concentrate magnetitism and that increases curret. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Electromagnets on Gauss Gun Log in

View Full Version : Electromagnets on Gauss Gun TariqMujahid

March 17th, 2002, 04:40 PM

O n t h e p o s t a b o u t R ailguns, a few peo p l e m e n t i o n e d t h e gauss gun; a linear accelerator. I found it very interesting, m ainly because it can easily be m ade out of household materials. After thinking about it for a while, I con sidered several ways of how to m ake it as powerful as possible, as well as other ways to im prove upon the design of it to m ake it more practical. O n e i d e a i n v o l v e d h a v i n g t h e m a g n e t s o n t h e g u n b e i n g e l e c t r o m agnets, therefore when you flipped a switch or something, the m agnets would be charged for a split second, allowing the steel balls to m ove towards the m agnets and shift their kinetic energy to the magnet and so on... After the shot, the electricity would be s t o p p e d a n d t h e steel balls between the m a g n e t s would be allowed to m ove back to their original positions. It would have a capacitor bank that charges up for each shot, and d e v e l o p s a h igh volta ge to m a k e t h e m a g n e t s a s p o w e f u l a s p o s s i b l e , h e n c e m aking it shoot hard er. Does anyone know if this idea of m ine would actually work? And if so, what kind o f results could i e xpect from this?

Mr Cool

March 17th, 2002, 05:03 PM

You seem to have a very strange idea of what a coil gun is... Do a search on altavista.com or som ething. Try ("coil gun" and electrom agnets and capacitors), yo u should get quite a few detailed instructions on how they can be built.

Ctrl_C

March 17th, 2002, 05:52 PM

he wasnt referring to a coil gun, rather the kine tic transfer magnet gun that i m entioned in the railgun thread. this would work but a coil gun would be m ore efficient and easier. you really can get all that m uch speed from the other type because of firctional losses and heat g ained by the m a r b l e . t o o b t a i n a n y a p p r e c i a b l e s p e e d s , y o u w o u l d h a v e t o h a v e s o m any m agnets that the ball would build up enough heat to melt.

nbk2000

March 18th, 2002, 01:35 AM

I'm constantly am azed at how people divert their energies into trival ideas that have no hope of success. Do you REALLY think that you, with an obviously shoestring (literally) budget and no advanced eng ineering degree, can achieve what the U S Military Industrial Com plex, with unlimited funds and the best engineers and scientists in the world haven't in m ore than 20 years of experim e n t i n g ? Does that m a k e a n y s e n s e t o y o u ? I h ope so, 'cause otherwise, you're living in La-La Land. Now quite wasting our tim e with this no n s e n s e . This also applies to EMP, railguns, particle accelerators, cold-fusion, zero-point energy, perpetual motion, a nd other bullshit. End topic. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> I'm making a grenade launcher and need help

View Full Version : I'm making a grenade launcher and need help A-BOMB

Log in

March 20th, 2002, 11:56 AM

Hello this is A-BOMB and I'm makeing a 37/40mm grenade launcher and need some help with the specsfics. Now I have a 1.5" steel pipe that I've reamed out to 1.575 inches which is 40mm. Now is I need the help what are the outside dimenstions of a 40x46mm case? Now onto the action I'm thinking of a sharps rifle(dropping block) type action or a hinge type action. And anyone know where I can pick up some empties in the Pittsburgh PA area? or close to it?

nbk2000

March 21st, 2002, 12:26 AM

Pick up a copy of "Shotgun News" at the magazine rack or gunshop. Inside you'll find ads for nylon 40mm cases for $1 each in lots of 50 or more. I'd think a copy of the small arms ammo PDF, volume two (which I provided) would provide the answer for case size. It's on the FTP. BTW, 40mm is prohibited for civilian possession in the US. But 37mm is fine. Are you planning on rifling the barrel?

EP

March 21st, 2002, 01:30 AM

40mm is illegal but 37mm is ok? That seems a bit ridiculous. Any idea why? Maybe so civilians can't use the military ammo?

A-BOMB

March 21st, 2002, 02:07 AM

Well its 40mm for right now because I would need a barrel smaller that what I have for a 37mm(1.46") And now I think rifling the barrel would be to hard but I see about it. And I can't ever find a copy of "shotgun news" but "special weapons" and "solder of forture" are easy.

nbk2000

March 21st, 2002, 02:32 AM

Here, I'll make it easy for you: "Reloading Supplies" at shotgunnews.com Paper is so 20th century anyways. :p EP, that's EXACTLY why you can't own 40mm without a BATF DD permit. <small>[ March 21, 2002, 01:33 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

A-BOMB

March 21st, 2002, 12:07 PM

Would it be a DD if I made it so it couldn't take a standard lenght military 40mm round, like I make the chamber only 40mm instead of the standard 46mm? So a military round wouldn't fit in the chamber.

nbk2000

March 22nd, 2002, 12:22 AM

It's not the length, it's the caliber, that ATF would arrest you for. Download the PDF called "consequences" from the FTP. It's a good read, and explains what kind of people ATF is.

RTC

March 22nd, 2002, 12:48 AM

It's seem's pretty pathtic to be arrested over 3mm's!

nbk2000

March 22nd, 2002, 01:41 AM

The ATF executed (no other way to describe it) Randy Weavers dog, son, wife, and best friend over a shotgun barrel that was cut a half inch (1/2"!) under the 18" limit. And this was at the behest of an ATF informant who paid Weaver $200 to do it. Mind you, the guy kept refusing to do it, but financial pressures and lack of food for the family compelled him to do it. Set up all the way. So rest assured that 3mm difference WILL get you locked up. Read the book, it's just the tip of the iceburg.

ENGINEERKILLER

March 22nd, 2002, 11:41 AM

Keep in mind if you wind up with your ass in court your gonna be judged by people who haven't the slightest clue about weapons ,legal or illegal the only thing they are gonna know are the words "grenade launcher".I have seen more than one person get sent up the river because of jhon Q publics fear of the unknown.

A-BOMB

March 22nd, 2002, 02:07 PM

Damn now I have to get another barrel! DAMN YOU ATF! Now, thats out of my system, now I have to get a new piece of stock and find someone to drill it out to 37mm or I could just put a 37mm liner in the barrel I already have.

Xtramad

March 22nd, 2002, 02:39 PM

All you need to know and much more

Madog555

March 22nd, 2002, 04:30 PM

A-Bomb, why do you care, just make it 40mm. you didn't do anything wrong unless you got caught

A-BOMB

March 22nd, 2002, 08:14 PM

Xtramad, I already got that site booked marked, and now that I think of it who cares about the ATF. And I think I'll some drawings of what it's going to look like by monday or so.

A-BOMB

April 1st, 2002, 12:31 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Well I'm very ticked becauce I was looking at the inside of my barrel and notice that it is off center nere the chamber and that won't allow me to use it :mad: and the machine shop won't give me a refund :mad: . Well now I making a 38.1 mm one that just uses 1.5" copper pipe and fittings, so any one here should be able to build one from just one trip to lowe's or truevalue. This is how the barrel should look (I know this looks crappy) .........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[ ..............................------{------------------------======----|---}[ .................................................. ........................................|.....[ .................................................. ............................................)))))) ) .................................................. ........................................|......[ ..............................------{------------------------======----|---}[ .........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[ "~" is ABS pipe in 1.5" "-" is 1.5" copper pipe "=" is a 1.5" copper coupling "|" Is a washer that fits in the 1.5" pipe "[" is a washer glued to the washer that fits inside the pipe "(" is a #209 shotshell primer For get the periods their there to keep it all in place. Now that you seen this schetch, heres my Idea the barrel and all the shells are made of 1.5" copper pipe and are connected together by a 1.5" coupler that had the nibs inside sanded out. Now you need two washers one that fits in the pipe and another that is large anothe as to make a rim around the out side of the shell, both of these shells need to be able to fit a #209 shotshell primer. Now this hole barrel is put into a peice of 1.5" ABS pipe that has been carved out or sanded to fit the 1.5" copper barrel/coupler/ shellthing in. So what do you guys think of my idea? And Xtramad, didn't you have more pic and plans in this topic? or did you start another one? This topic here. <small>[ March 31, 2002, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: A-BOMB ]

BoB-

April 1st, 2002, 05:53 AM

I dont mean this as an insult, but it takes less than an hour to draw something in paint, compress it, then upload it to a webpage. I've been a member here for a few years and I have never ever understood an ascii drawing.

A-BOMB

April 1st, 2002, 12:40 PM

Well sorry BOB for the asci drawing, because I had drawn up some in paint but the FTP woulfn't allow me to conncet right then so I'll try late to link that one here instead. And that 40 mm Barrel has me so mad too I paid 20 dollars just for the steel rod stock, and another 15 for them to drill it out for me :mad: . And for any one in Ambridge(15003 zip) Pennsylvainia area (a old steel mill town 15 miles south Pittsburgh, at least I think its south could be wrong.) Well I was down there seeing some reletives on saturday and found this cool gunshop out on the edge of town, they are really well stocked with m-16's, any type of AK (sks,ak-47,ak-74,akm, ak-94 anything) and they have 40mm and 37mm nylon cases and a few alunium case too I think? and They just in one of those new AR-150's in .50 BMG, they also sell 50 bmg ball and traser(are traser the ones with the red painted tip?) and 5.45x39, 7.62x39 and they gas masks anying under the sun if your close to them got take alook. Oh heres the directions get one to DUSS ave. and go down it you should pass their highschool, then a old steel mill, then after that a dairy mart, and keep on going you will see on the left you should see Waste Managment of Pittsbugh then a (all of these first things are all on the left) then alittle past that on the right you will see Micheals bar then a intersection and right past the intersection you will see "GUZCKS gunstore and locksmiths" they are open from 1PM to 5PM everyday (i guess) and if you see a "jubleie" grocery store on the right you have gone to far.

RTC

April 1st, 2002, 12:47 PM

Use MapBlast Input the address/postal number of where it is, and where your coming from and it'll give you step by step direction's and a map too, and it's free!

Ctrl_C

April 1st, 2002, 02:48 PM

A-BOMB, when you make this, I wanna get together and see it. Whaddaya think? :)

A-BOMB

April 1st, 2002, 05:57 PM

Good lord! I have to save you from yourself. NEVER post your real name, face, address, phone number, or any other personal identifying information on the internet. EVER! And certainly not maps pointing straight to your house. :rolleyes: Can you say "Jack Boot Thugs, please come raid up so we can be Tyrone's and Bubba's bitches."? That why God invented e-mail. Use it. <small>[ April 01, 2002, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

A-BOMB

April 1st, 2002, 11:17 PM

NBK, it wasn't my house it was a map to a gun store I just found a few days ago when I was out visiting relitives, and by the way I don't every live it that town or county. And NBK why did you think it was a map to my house? its a map to a gunstore/locksmiths. So heres the map to Guzycks supply store.

<small>[ April 01, 2002, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: A-BOMB ]

nbk2000 Last I saw this topic I see ctrl_c saying "lets get together" and then you've got maps posted. Natural (if erroneous) assumption on my part.

April 2nd, 2002, 12:55 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter And it's better to err on the side of caution, now isn't it?

And while I've got your attention, why do you say in some of your posts "Hello this is A-BOMB ..."? It's pretty obvious who it is, isn't it? :D I take it your barrel was turned to 37mm? Perhaps the machinist fucked it up on purpose, knowing it's probably end use? Wouldn't be surprising.

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 09:20 PM

Browsing a link from NBK, I came across this: http://www.pop-inc.com/POP_Cat_Pg23.html Don't know if this fits the bill, but I have to say it looks a whole load cheaper, and much easier to conceal than a dedicated 40mm launcher. An uneducated porker is not going to look twice at something like this in a load of junk in your garage, and for that matter, the bits of a slam bang you made at the same time.

A-BOMB

April 14th, 2002, 02:13 AM

Well I started to design and get parts but have no real time to start get in it working but I did have time to make this animation of how the action on the launcher will work, there are 2 versions fast and slow. fast version (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/a_bomb_the_forum/vwp?.dir=/My+Documents&.dnm=grenade+launcher+animation+by+ABOMB.gif&.src=bc&.view=l&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/a_bom b_the_forum/lst%3f%26.dir=/My%2bDocuments%26.src=bc%26.view=l) slow version (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/a_bomb_the_forum/vwp?.dir=/My+Documents&.dnm=grenade+launcher+animation+(slow)by+ABOMB+.gif&.src=bc&.view=l&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/b c/a_bomb_the_forum/lst%3f%26.dir=/My%2bDocuments%26.src=bc%26.view=l) And this is a 20gauge idea demostartor that I built. http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/a_bomb_the_forum/vwp?.dir=/My+Documents&.dnm=Picture+46.jpg&.src=bc&.view=l&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/ a_bomb_the_forum/lst%3f%26.dir= /My%2bDocuments%26.src=bc%26.view=l

James

April 14th, 2002, 03:04 AM

IIRC, people were having trouble accessing files from NBKs Yahoo briefcase. I think Yahoo implemented a new security "feature", breaking access to briefcase contents.

nbk2000

April 14th, 2002, 03:56 AM

What's happened is that Yahoo! has gone punk on us! They're new thing is to make it so you have to pay for their "Premium Service" if you want to make your briefcase publicly accessible. They probably did this because of all the porn movie swappers using the yahoo briefcase for posting their movie series. Anyways, I'm no longer posting files to the briefcase anyways. All those files and more will be on the DVD. A-bomb, you'll just have to upload it to the ftp once that's up again.

A-BOMB

April 14th, 2002, 12:18 PM

Thanks NBK, I didn't know that. And is the FTP still down?

nbk2000

April 14th, 2002, 02:24 PM

It's down till we sort out the problem of leeches and passwords.

A-BOMB

June 7th, 2002, 01:49 AM

Well I have amassed the part and already started to build my launcher and it should be done by the end of this month. Its going to be a 40mm, and its going to look like shit(that happens when you put it together from bits and peices of this and that(rattraps,clocks and paintballguns). So as soon as I get some of it done I post some pics of what I have done. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Improvised "claymore" Log in

View Full Version : Improvised "claymore" xoo1246

March 22nd, 2002, 09:33 PM

Haven't been posting for a while. Felt like sharing a little experiment I have been dreaming about. In that dream I constructed a very basic "claymore", consisting of 63 nails placed against some 200 grams of AN/NM/AL and initiated by a 4 grams HTMD electric blasting cap. After that I placed the "claymore" some 10-15 meters from an old sheet that was hung up between to trees. I retired to some cover and detonated the thing. The sheet was ripped down and had 11 large holes in it(17% hit ratio on a farly large target ), one tree had holes in it and I recovered one nail. I also inproved my blasting box to use a 220000uF 25V condensator together with 3 9v batteries (yes thats 3 V too much but I don't charge it fully). I painted some pictures in psp to show you what my dream looked like . In no order at all: http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/ 200gANNMAL63NailsClaymore.jpg (yes it's uggly) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/ClaymoreAndTarget.jpg (back of claymore in the bottom of the image) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/ Condensator440000uF11V.jpg (discharge through a screwdriver) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/ImprovedBlastingBox.jpg (not very professional looking) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/RecoveredNail.jpg (note that the head has been blown off) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/TouchedByFragments.jpg (I found one nail here) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/TreeDamaged.jpg http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47804009/E&W/TreeDamagedClose.jpg I guess it would be more effective to use steel balls and use the monroe(same effect as in shaped charges can't recall if thats the name) effect to direct more energy torwards the fragments. Now please leave you comment and ideas. / xoo1246

DBSP

March 22nd, 2002, 10:23 PM

Wher tha fuck have you been Xoo I've been missing you. Nice claymore, what did you pay for your digit camera the cheapest I culd find costs 2000kr. I'll buy one soon.

RTC

March 22nd, 2002, 11:24 PM

You took a video of this if im correct, and the video show's something hitting the sheet. And something knocking back the sheet, (nails) right?

DBSP

March 22nd, 2002, 11:44 PM

It's not a video It's only pics.. How wide was the charge.. and how long was the distance to the target. An what was the size of the target.. sorry to bother you...

nbk2000

March 22nd, 2002, 11:49 PM

Check out this Sting Ball Claymore that the piggies get to play with. Seems simple enough. Just a solid steel box with a bunch of rubber balls on top of a flashpowder propellant charge.

RTC

March 23rd, 2002, 12:00 AM

I'm sure I've definatly seen a video of it.

DBSP

March 23rd, 2002, 12:05 AM

I don't know if Xoo has a digital video recorder, but as I remember it he only has a still picture camera (digital). <small>[ March 22, 2002, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: DBSP ]

Jack Ruby

March 23rd, 2002, 12:24 AM

I assume That that is in Sweden? It looks Beatiful there. How densely populated is it there? Good work. What about using Flechettes. They are supposed to go righte through Body Armour, Plant life, etc. like nothing. It is also my understanding that they have quite range due to being Dart Shaped.

DBSP

March 23rd, 2002, 12:50 AM

Sweden is lovely the density is about 19/km2 I belive. No one would object if you would like to shoot a gun (any kind). They are so used to hearing gunshots, since it's so many that hunt in sweden. A 200g ANNM charge is heard as a gunshot at a distance of about 4km if you are inside a house or similar. So NO problem!!!

xoo1246

March 23rd, 2002, 08:46 AM

DBSP: Had to pay 2500 kr (250$) for it. The claymore was 15 cm wide and had two layers of nails. The distance to the target was 10-15 meters and the size of the target is the size of your sheet in your bed.

ENGINEERKILLER

March 24th, 2002, 12:29 PM

A good form for an improvised claymore is a cheap plastic soap dish you can glue the frag to the top of the lid and pack explosives behind it try to keep your point of initiation as centered as possible this will give the most uniform frag pattern. <small>[ March 24, 2002, 11:31 AM: Message edited by: ENGINEERKILLER ]

Bitter

March 24th, 2002, 02:11 PM

Does the material the claymore itself is made of seem to make any difference to the performance ? Which would be the optimum shape for it ? Perhaps if the claymore was concaved instead of convexed, then perhaps you might get a 'shaped charge' effect and increased penetration of the target.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter xoo1246

March 24th, 2002, 04:42 PM

Bitter: I agree with you (read my post again).

quote:

---

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind." Says Ghandi. I say : Wake up and smell the coffee; dead men don't shoot back.

---

The problem is their brothers and sisters do. KCN in your coffee.

Bitter

March 25th, 2002, 11:34 AM

Not if you shoot them too.

xoo1246

March 25th, 2002, 11:53 AM

See, you started to poke out one eye. Now you are forced to poke out new ones not to get your eye poked out. And soon the world is blind. Solution: make it look like an accident.

RTC

March 25th, 2002, 12:55 PM

What does eye poking have to do with claymore's? Stay on topic! NBK, on that site you gave, it say's that that "non letal" claymore can be vehical mounted, well this has it's uses in the crimey world, perhaps you could take the headlight's of a car, and mould it into the headlight space? The headlights will still have to work so not to draw attention, unless your working during the day, but it's always a good idea to have lights when you need them. Oh, replacing the rubber balls for steal ball's, nail's, all sorts of nasty's, would make it more affective, unless that's not your aim of course.

vulture

March 25th, 2002, 01:36 PM

How about a starmine loaded with flash and nails aimed at the target? A little kewlish friend of mine once filled a drinking glass with nails and just stuck a firecracker (here in Belgium you can buy fairly powerful ones the whole year long) in it and set it off. He had to dive for cover to avoid the glass and nail shrapnel....

zaibatsu

March 25th, 2002, 02:08 PM

Could you not use a piece of steel channel, and then bend that either inwards or outwards to get a nice convex/concave shape? You could weld steel plate to the ends, or just bend the ends of the channel in.

Bubba

April 3rd, 2002, 06:30 PM

I have the Ragnar Benson book Improvised Claymores. Also have it scanned to .pdf format. Basicly he used a piece of steel plate for the back, an explosive charge, then MILD steel ball bearings in a matrix of wax (I believe). I'll get that .pdf back out and take a look to be sure. Decent book btw.

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 09:12 PM

That POP stingmore site has some amazing stuff on it NBK, thanks for that!

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2002, 11:29 PM

Why don't you upload the claymore PDF to the FTP so the rest of us can read it, hmm? I have one of ragners "encyclopedias" :rolleyes: wherein it describes his claymore. It uses cut up 8" PVC pipe sections, rebar, and plastic baggies with the explosive behind a cardboard retainer of ball bearings. Rather amatuerish I'm afraid. Maybe the book you have is a version 2?

Whitey

April 4th, 2002, 12:53 AM

The white resistance manual discusses homemade claymores. I uploaded it to the FTP a few days ago (it's in the "recent" folder). I am pretty sure it is the same design NBK is talking about. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> A Ray Gun Log in

View Full Version : A Ray Gun Stalker

March 26th, 2002, 12:47 PM

Hi @ all Iám new in this Forum, but not a Newbie!!! I have a little Question to you: Does somebody know the Book "Poor Man´s Ray Gun" ??? Have Somebody build this Weapon??? I have heard from this Book, but it is impossible to become it here in Germany. Have Somebody a Scan of it? If Yes, please send it to me, and i give you many other Dokoments like this (I have a lot of other Intresting stuff) I also Interrested in this Book "Butane Lighter Handgranade" Please help me !!! THX from Germany Stalker (Sorry about my Bad Englisch)

xoo1246

March 26th, 2002, 12:52 PM

Hrm.

PYRO500

March 26th, 2002, 01:07 PM

that book sounds like a book I saw for sale at www.amazing1.com their site is total crap, when it sounds too good to be true it always is.

RTC

March 26th, 2002, 01:10 PM

The lighter hand grenade is rather crude n kewl, but I belive it's in NBK's PDF. As for that book, check the FTP. And yet another n00b posting a new topic on there first post. :rolleyes: <small>[ March 26, 2002, 12:11 PM: Message edited by: RTC ]

Stalker

March 26th, 2002, 01:26 PM

Sorry where can i find the Ftp... Iám not so good with Computer, my Hobby´s are Weapons !!!

a_bab

March 26th, 2002, 02:00 PM

I can hear NBK's steps getting closer :D

zaibatsu

March 26th, 2002, 03:00 PM

They be not NBKs footsteps... I'll just close the topic for now, and leave it for the other mods to read. Talking of reading, why don't you give it a go? READ THE RULES 'nuff said

nbk2000

March 26th, 2002, 05:18 PM

I have a copy of the "butane lighter handgrenade" (Yeah, right!). It's total bullshit. Basically you put flashpowder in it and make a tube to run some cannon fuse down. Mind you, you're lighting an M-80 in your hand. Get it wrong, and they'll be calling you "Stumpy". And there's no way in hell I'm putting that crap in my book. www.amazing1.com is a rip-off joint. I bought something from them years ago. They called it a laser and charged $40 for it, but it was just a bright red LED with a lens mounted in a PVC tube. And they wouldn't refund my money. PUNKS! :mad: The "ray gun" book is also bogus. "Use a household microwave to set things on fire from 300 yards". Oh please! :rolleyes: If that's the case, why isn't the army carrying "ray guns" made by Amana? I'm going to lay off the n00bees for a while. I'll leave the HEDing of the idiots to our new mods. They need the excercise after having been cooped up in the TBA section. :D SEEK AND DESTROY! vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Spud Gun Log in

View Full Version : Spud Gun Ericm115

August 22nd, 2001, 02:42 AM

I m p l a n n i n g o n m a k i n g a p n e u m a t i c ( s p . ) s p u d g u n , a n d s i n c e I d o n t h a v e a c o m presser, I was thinking of adding an attatchment so I can refill It with m y 24oz paintball tank. Any idea what the psi of a co2 paintball tank usually is? And how m any shots I m ight get out of it?

Anthony

August 22nd, 2001, 10:02 PM

Around 800psi, proba bly quite a bit m o r e o n a h o t d a y . If you do this your gun will almost definitely explode. If you don 't know what you're doing with high pressure gas do n't m e s s with it.

CyclonitePyro

August 23rd, 2001, 12:04 AM

Hey, you cou ld buy a rem ote, coiled or steel braided, buy a m ale plug adapter, the rem ote will com e with one, insta ll that on t h e s i d e o f t h e g u n , t h e n p u t t h e t a n k o n t h e o ther side of the rem ote and use that little dial to let in just a bit of co2, put a pressure gauge on your gun to be safe.

DoH BoY

August 23rd, 2001, 10:20 AM

cyclonitepyro I think that would be a little to com plicated finding just the right valve and all (especially one that will hold the pressure of a co2 tank). And id have to agree with anthony dont try anything untill u know 100% exactly wh at u are doing. [This message has been edited by DoH BoY (edited August 23, 2001).]

CyclonitePyro

August 23rd, 2001, 09:43 PM

I don't think you understand what I am talking of, go here: http://www.calm edia.org/rem ote_system s.htm The side that has a little knob is where you screw in your tank, then glue the other side into the ch a m b e r o f y o u r g u n . I n s t a l l a p r e s s u r e g a u g e t h a t g o e s t h r o u g h t h e c h a m ber wall. Turn the little knob clockwise on the end of the remote line and look at the pressure gauge, when the pressure reads close to the burst pre ssure of your PVC turn the knob counterclockwise to stop the flow of air from your co2 tank. then shoot. [This message has been edited by CyclonitePyro (edited August 23, 2001).]

DoH BoY

August 24th, 2001, 12:56 AM

oh i see... well that seem s pretty safe to me. b u t r e m e m ber dont com e too close to burst pressure or else BOO M!

Anthony

August 24th, 2001, 08:10 PM

That isn't safe! What if the valve sticks open? W hat if the pressure gauge isn't working properly? W hat if he acciden tally leaves t h e v a l v e o p e n a f r a c t i o n ? T h e r e s u l t i s t h e g u n e x p l o d i n g l i k e a p i p e b o m b. Even if the valve were shut off at say, 200psi, the pressure in the gun wo uld still raise as the cold CO2 expands to room temperature. God forbid any liquid CO2 should pass into there! The only safe way to do this would be with a regulator and probably a pressure relief valve fitted to the gun too.

CyclonitePyro

August 25th, 2001, 02:02 AM

They already thought of that, this is a worldwide sport, it wouldn't be this popular if co2 tanks blew up when you left them ou t in the sun, buy the top part of a co2 tank, glue that to the side of your g un, they have burst disks, pressure goes to high... p o p s h h h h h h h h h h h . . . , s u r e t h i s i s g e t t i n g e x p e nsive but it's your arm , body, leg, face crotch at sta ke, but hey, your priceless. W ith all that pressure behind the pin valve of a co2 tank, it won't stick shut. And if you saw that the pressure was rising up just push the solo noid valve, or other valve opening m ech. a nd let all the pressure sho ot out.

BoB-

August 25th, 2001, 05:06 AM

W e're not talking about paintball guns here, which have high-pressure re gulators that prevent explosions. W e're talking abo ut PVC spudguns. B e s i d e s d u d e , I s a w a f o o t p u m p c a p a b l e o f o v e r 1 0 0 p s i i n W alMart yesterday for $15.00 there's no need to risk your life with expensive Co2, just buy a bicycle pump.

AmonDin

August 31st, 2001, 03:19 AM

Jesus christ, anybody who has ever m ade a spudgun knows how stupid it is to put 1200 PSI of co2 into their pneumatic spud s h o o t e r s d e s i g n e d f o r 7 5 - 2 0 0 p s i . I h a v e a f r i e n d w h o a s k e d m e t o d o a c o n v e r s i o n l i k e t h is for him. I told him it was a bad idea , but he didn't believe m e. So I did a little demonstration, I quick did a m o c k u p c o m p r e s s i o n c h a m ber like you would find o n a p n e u m atic spudgun, only with both ends sealed. I hooked it up with a few brass adapters to the large C02 tank I use to refill m y 9oz pball tanks. I had us both hid behind a very large and thick concrete wall, flipped the valve, and BOOM. PVC shra pnel eve rywhere. I put a waterm elon next to it to dem onstrate the effect such an explosion would have on a pe rson, the d a m n thing didn't have any pieces larger than 3" across left. It convinced him to drop his idea and stick to a bycicle pum p. I'm just happy he came to m e instead of trying it him self. I don't want to find bits of m y friend decorating his parent's garag e, and I don't think any o f you want that either.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Just drop the C02 ide a and spring for a small com pressor or bike tire pum p. Sma ll price to pay if you want to keep your hands/ arms/interna l organs attatched.

CyclonitePyro

September 2 nd, 2001, 03:40 PM

I just noticed som e t h i n g a b o u t my idea, the pressure relief valve for C 02 tanks lets air ou t at arou nd 900psi, that's obviously not gonna work for a pvc spudgun. If you can find a pressure relief valve under the rating for the PVC then I think this would be a perfectly safe idea.

Kdogg

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2001, 01:29 AM

I h a v e a p n e umatic spudgun with a 1 1/2 inch interchan geable barrel. I have a couple more sizes also. Anyways back to the subject. I just use an air com pressor O r a foot pum p. I would NEVER use c02. If you dont have an air compressor, buy a foot p u m p, or m a k e a c o m b u s t i o n g u n . -----------------Monkeym an

The_Coyote

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2001, 01:28 PM

at m o s t a d o m otive stores they sell sm all compressers that run of the cigarette outlet in a car, they are capable of 3 00psi, i got one for 30 bucks canadian, quite cheap actually.

-----------------Gun control is being able to hit your target. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Letter Bombs

View Full Version : Letter Bombs Fernet

Log in

March 26th, 2002, 03:42 PM

I h a v e s o m e q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g l e t t e r b o m b s ( i n m y eyes one of the m ost form idable weapons known to m an, perfect for reve n g e ) . D o e s a n y o n e o f y o u g u y s h a v e s o m e p l a n s o r d i a g r a m s of letter bom bs or som e g o o d i d e a s a b o u t h o w o n e c o u l d b e m a n u f a c t u r e d ? T h e o n l y i n f o r m ation I have is an not very detailed article in " Terrorist Explosives Handbook Vol.1 - The IRA " . BTW : I som ewhere read that copper chloride re leases its chlorine when heated above 200 degree celsius. 1. Is this true ? 2. W ould it b e effective to use a mixtu re of black powder/flash powder and copper chloride in a letter bomb ( would chlorine be released on ignition ? ) ? Every response is appreciated ...

HOOPS123

March 26th, 2002, 03:49 PM

you are fucked. nuf sed.

Xtramad

March 26th, 2002, 04:12 PM

If you don't have the knowledge to m ake it, yo u don't have the wisdom to use it. And anyway, you should have more sense than to ask. Read the rules!

mongo blongo

March 26th, 2002, 04:30 PM

K3\/\/3l! Die Die Die! :mad:

PYRO500

March 26th, 2002, 04:39 PM

Look it's the revenge of the kewls, don't post a topic as a first post!

zaibatsu

March 26th, 2002, 04:56 PM

I've closed two topics in one d ay! How m any m ore fuckers are going to post? Anyway, READ THE FU CKING RU LES. DO NOT MAKE YO U R F I R S T P O S T B Y S T A R T I N G A T O P I C . I n s t e ad, hang around a little, learn, then start to re ply to topics, and w h e n y o u h a v e b e c o m e l e a r n e d e nough THEN you can make a topic. NBK m a y h a v e m ore to say on this m atter, but until then, consider this topic CLO SED.

nbk2000

March 26th, 2002, 05:26 PM

W hy close a topic when you can delete a lam e ? Oi vay! :p End of topic, end of lam e. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Improvised E-Bombs Log in

View Full Version : Improvised E-Bombs cutefix

August 22nd, 2001, 07:51 AM

There is the latest issue in Popular Science Magazine dated September 2001.It is displayed in the cover , the E-Bombs(Electromagnetic pulse bombs) (I'm at the library right now and looking at the issue mentioned. Volume 178, #9. It's allright for what it is, but a much better explaination can be found in "Information Warfare, vol. 2, by Winn Schwartau (SP?). Also, look at www.infowar.com (http:// www.infowar.com) NBK2000).it say that it can be improvised easily, in the form of Flux Compression Generator.You will see in the diagram on page 50 its simple design.I was thinking that a fast (brisant) explosive like C-4/semtex could easily be used for explosive component..Somehow the bank of capacitors looks complicated.Guys what can you say about the feasibilty of improvising this weapon.? [This message has been edited by nbk2000 (edited August 30, 2001).] [This message has been edited by nbk2000 (edited August 30, 2001).]

Mr Cool

August 22nd, 2001, 05:14 PM

Easy in theory, hard in practice. It'd be easier just to blow up the electronics. Also, most designs I've seen use a capacitor bank of around 10kJ, pulse rated. If you can find one of them for less than £2000 I'd be very impressed. And setting of the device will destroy it.

DoH BoY

August 22nd, 2001, 05:34 PM

Talk about a waste of perfectly good money if u wanted to set somthing like this off u would have to be a rich terrorist or somthing. [This message has been edited by DoH BoY (edited August 22, 2001).]

Machiavelli

August 22nd, 2001, 07:17 PM

Can somebody provide a scan of said design? Popular Science is not that easy to get in Germany...

BoB-

August 23rd, 2001, 12:10 AM

It was popularmeachanics dude, I'm looking at the article, the diagram is overly simplistic, it gives an accurate description about how the device should work, but gives no detail in its construction. Nice read about physics though. More accurate diagrams of an easilly built EMP device is on Jhonbus' page: http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Curb/2003/

cutefix

August 23rd, 2001, 02:11 AM

Sorry about that ,these magazine if you only care too look in the int eresting cover you w ill overlook the title.Popular science and popular mechanics looks similar in coverAnyway I searched the web today and this what I found from this site: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/ebomb.html A s an example, the fabrication of an effective FCG can be accomplished with basic electrical materials, common plastic explosives such as C-4 or Semtex, and readily available machine tools such as lathes and suitable mandrels for forming coils. Disregarding the overheads of design, which do not apply in this context, a two stage FCG could be fabricated for a cost as low as $1,000-2,000, at Western labour rates. This cost could be even lower in a Third World or newly industrialised economy. While the relative simplicity and thus low cost of such weapons can be considered of benefit to First World nations intending to build viable war stocks or maintain production in wartime, the possibility of less developed nation mass producing such weapons is alarming. The dependence of modern economies upon their information technology infrastructure makes them highly vulnerable to attack with such weapons, providing that these can be deliver ed to their targets. Therefore it is not a remote possibility that it can be improvised easily.It was claimed in that popular magazine that with few hundred dollars, it can be built.The technology is simple.It was claimed to be a topsecret device;but I believe it to be easier to improvise than a simple fission nuclear device.Knowing how sinister these EMP to communication lines it would be a perfect weapon for terrorist who can fabricate and use it against their targets.

Mr Cool

August 23rd, 2001, 12:09 PM

Yes cutefix, the technology is simple. But the technology behind hydrogen bombs is also simple, it only gets hard when you try to actually make one. You could not make an effective one in your shed, that's for sure. But yes, it is simpler than a fission device. Basic electrical materials?! LOL! Maybe basic to research labs etc., but you couldn't pick the parts up at RS or Maplins!

EventHorizon

August 23rd, 2001, 09:31 PM

I seem to remember an article about a young, IIRC ~14, boy who had acquired a small amount of uranium 238 I think, and made a small nuclear reactor in his shed. Caused a big stink with the neighbors too. Apparently he had almost gotten it to work. Its been a long while since I read the story, but basically anyone who has the brains and knows what they want and how to ask for it can do quite a bit.

cutefix

August 24th, 2001, 01:33 AM

I agreee with you event horizon,why would western governments are worried about weapons grade plutonium, that may fall into wrong hands -because the technology for making a simple nuclear device is available.There are also nuclear scientists from east bloc states that may have mercenary tendencies,.The other thing needed is definite purpose by a wealthy patron who have the necessary materials and tools to build one.I donot believe the impossibility of the idea of building an improvised E-Bomb.The time will come for the end of western arrogance. The west are flaunting their skill in applying information technology to modern warfare,yet if their adversary disabled their advanced electronic equipment through these devices ,they will become sitting ducks... EMP hardening is still an imperfect art...

Mr Cool

August 25th, 2001, 11:20 AM

I'm not saying that an E-bomb would be impossible to make, I'm just saying that it'd be expensive, and you'd need to do a lot of testing to get one to work efficiently. The cost of making dozens to test would put it well out of the reach of people like us. Hmm... I read that story about the kid with the breeder reactor. He should've sticked to Americium, it's four times as radioactive as Radium. If the story was accurate he'd have been a long way from getting it to work.

the freshmaker

August 25th, 2001, 01:11 PM

This is not a electropulse bomb but is has a litle to do with this topic. A high explosive charge fx. C4 surrounded by a big charge of grafite dust. When the bomb is detonated near fx. eletronic station the HE will throw the very fine grafitedust everywhere and and create a electriccircut between the eletronics and then short circuit and damage the whole system. This kind of bomb was used by the US against irac under the bombardements in 1991.

BoB-

August 26th, 2001, 04:03 AM

The graphite would probably ignite since its touching the explosive.

cutefix

August 26th, 2001, 05:24 AM

I heard this bomb too,but not familiar with its construction.If the HE is used to disperse the graphite,then the amount of it is just enough to scatter and not ignite it.If an HE is brisant enough and there is an absence of incendiary additive;combustion of graphite will not occur Yet the effect is selective an limited not mass destabilization of the surrounding electronic devices.Supposing these devices are armored or well protected so that the graphite particles will just slide on the protective surface.I think and admixture of high density tungsten granules will have some penetrating effect so as to enable the graphite to penetrate the covering....But the projectile construction as well as its explosive filler will have to be modified.The metal should be cast with the explosive for optimum effect..

Fingerless

August 26th, 2001, 11:37 AM

graphite is very ignition-resistent.

nbk2000

August 30th, 2001, 04:33 PM

It was carbon fiber on spools, not graphite dust explosively scattered. -----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF. Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.

cutefix

August 31st, 2001, 12:37 AM

I found the site www,infow ar ,impressive.Thanks for that link NBK. Im still st arting t o browse on it and I found the BLU-114 carbon filament bombs,I think that weapon works best with power pylons,I also found the Russian high power microwave bomb which was effectively tested .This weapon is man portable but expensive and sophisticated yet there is already an available market for it...It would need advanced skill in electronics to fabricate it,therefore not for improvisation..

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter kingspaz

August 31st, 2001, 10:59 AM

not sure if this is of much use but i uploaded some text about EMP weapons. it was originally from www.abovetopsecret.com (http://www.abovetopsecret.com) but its gone under because of lack of funding. http://www.angelfire.com/mo3/kingspaz/emp.doc if it doesn't work copy and paste the link into your browser.

cutefix

September 1st, 2001, 06:27 AM

Thanks,Kingspaz for this link.in angelfire..that clarify some info that perplexed me.

I think your file is similar to abovetopsecret website where they used a fast explosive containing 95%HMX,but they withheld some information how can a plane wave from an explosive lens occur without the presence of a slo explosive.I think It uses the same principle as the conventional explosive trigger in fission type weapons.I anticipate that their explosive lens is a combination of this fast PBX(VOD >8800m/s) and a slow explosive like plumbatol(60/40)TNT/PbNO3 (VOD >.4000m/s)combination.in order to form a suitable planar compressive force that will help activate the system..Fast explosive alone will shatter the device instead before it can achieve its taskNow that ratio of two explosive combination is to be optimized,for best effect. Hello,NBK do you mind if I ask, what happened to www.infowar.com (http://www .infowar.com) I had difficulty accessing it recently.it is such an interesting and very informative site..and Im still not halfway browsing its voluminous infoagain, thanks for that link

Machiavelli

September 3rd, 2001, 02:42 PM

Instead of discussing endlessly about how it might work and what you could do and possibly and maybe and probably and instead of consulting pseudo-scientific sources how about consulting the scientific literature? Among the most important publications for us probably are the proceedings of the IEEEs conferences on pulsed power. These papers are talking about actual working devices and give you exact specifications. Additional information should be available from www.ieee.org (http://www.ieee.org) and any university library should be able to get the stuff for you. The whole research area of pulsed power generation and applications should be very interesting in this respect. As soon as I get back to university I'll have a look at it, meanwhile, if anyone else can drag his ass to the university we might be able to continue the discussion on a higher level.

nbk2000

March 19th, 2002, 04:20 AM

Here's video clips of an artist (yeah, whatever :rolleyes: ) who made an "I-Bomb" as in "Information Bomb". It uses a spark-gap with a huge coil to generate an EMP field. Check it out. http://www.eiu.org/experiments/i-bomb/video.html Unfortunately, the dickheads didn't include schematics. But, from the pictures, you can see what it's going to take to build even a small EMP device.

J

March 19th, 2002, 01:55 PM

Doesn't look too complicated at all. I'll take a guess at the circuit: A bank of HV caps are charged up through the coil, using a high voltage PSU. The PSU output current will determine the charge time. The spark gap's in parallel with the coil, and it breaks down when the cap bank has a high enough voltage on the plates. For best results, the coil and caps must be matched (using equations found on many tesla coil websites) to maximise ringing. This kind of device would have to be huge to be used as a large scale weapon, rather than just a demonstration project. A magnetic flux compression generator would be much more effective for a fraction of the cost.

nbk2000

March 20th, 2002, 09:00 AM

An FCG is a one use only device, plus need attention drawing explosions to work. Whereas, an EMP pulser (as shown) can be used infinitely, and quietly. Imagine it in the back of a van, driving along in a commercial/financial district. Silent e-death. And fancy e-bombs and EMP are the only anti-tech weapons available. Airfloat graphite or carbon particles could be blown into an area, causing shorting and arcing of delicate electronic circuits when it makes a conductive path across the circuit boards. And it's only a couple of dollars per pound in bulk.

J

March 20th, 2002, 03:12 PM

True, a vehicle mounted device would be effective. But 'They' would probably work out what had happened by studying CCTV images of the blacked out van driving down the street slowly, pausing, then moving a bit further as all the lights went out in adjacent buildings It would be extremely useful to have a directional device. This would have been great in my first year of uni for early morning 'music' lovers I intend to go into the field (no pun intended) of electromagnetics and RF eventually. This is the kind of thing I'll be playing around with when I have more money and spare time.

kingspaz

March 20th, 2002, 06:06 PM

wouldn't the EMP screw with the vans ignition and other circuitry?

Anthony

March 20th, 2002, 06:23 PM

Shouldn't do if it's a diesel engine with no engine management junk:)

nbk2000

March 21st, 2002, 12:58 AM

The good thing about an I-bomb is that it's adjustable too. You don't have to have it set high enough to vaporize circuitry. You can set it low enough to just cause glitching and errors. A "soft-kill" instead of a "hardkill". This can be repeate as often as neccessary to drive the target crazy trying to figure out the cause of the problem. I can also see using an I-bomb to nuetralize alarm or security systems. :) Or cause constant false alarms that eventually wears out the polices patience so they no longer respond. Many cities have alarm ordinances that say, if you get more than 3 false alarms in a given time, the police won't respond any more. :D I don't think EMP can be directed, being a magnetic field, but RF energy can be. The second edition of "Information Warfare" by Winn Schwartau (I have a copy) details all kinds of e-weapons. Good reading, highly recommended.

Zambosan

March 21st, 2002, 03:46 PM

An EMP device is going to produce electromagnetic radiation over a wide spectrum, since it is "fired" by what is essentially an impulse of energy (look at at the Fourier series for an impulse). Since it is electromagnetic radiation, it can be focused by a waveguide like any other, e.g. microwaves. However, since the energy is not concentrated at any particular frequency band, it isn't possible to optimize a waveguide to make the total emission directed... you'll just focus some of it, while absorbing other components. However, it's the wide range of emissions that make it so devastating... inducing destructive (or at least problematic) voltages & currents in all sorts of conductors.

J

March 21st, 2002, 04:26 PM

How deeply does Schwartau's book go into detail on the technical side? It's a book I've seen mentioned many times whilst searching for info on Tempest (I've decided this will be my next long term project when I'm in work and have space to set up a small lab). Your right Zambosan, that's why it's so effective. But if your target was a specific device that you had technical knowledge of, it should be possible to construct a waveguide tuned to a certain frequency. If your target was a computer, the CPU clock frequency range of the particular motherboard would be a good one. As computers are becoming faster, it's important to ensure the tracks on the motherboard are a certain size to allow correct transmission of data without reflections. Setting up a massive standing wave along one of these tracks wouldn't do the system much good

nbk2000

March 22nd, 2002, 01:45 AM

It doesn't provide schematics, but it does give a lot of the operating principles and the applications for various e-war scenarios. Plus there's a good bibliography of technical articles to look up. Check out the website at www.infowar.com for more info.

TheBicher

March 22nd, 2002, 07:21 PM

Not to change the subject, but if anyone saw the movie Oceans 11 (the new version) they stole some kind of thing that wiped out the electricity in part of Las Vegas for about 30 seconds, after which all the power was restored. Do they really have things like this? I'm assuming if they are real it would be a lot harder to make than the other types of E-Bombs here.

kingspaz

March 22nd, 2002, 07:30 PM

i haven't seen it. but stuff in films is bullshit. EMP weapons can either dirupt power causing malfunctions of equipment or permanently destroy circuits. everything pyro in films is bullshit, pure bullshit.

Anthony

March 22nd, 2002, 07:36 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Would probably be easier just to blow up an electricity sub-station if you want a black out and/or use the conductive fibre/dust idea suggested by NBK. Powercuts don't make alarms switch off or bank vaults unlock though, important systems will be equipped with a UPS system.

TheBicher

March 22nd, 2002, 08:13 PM

Yea Kingspaz, I know that pyro shit in films is bulshit (same with most other controversial things depicted in films), but it is usualy based on something that is real, which is what I was wondering. If you were going to try to take out power of a small area I would not try to take out the power sub-station because of the increased risk of getting caught/raising suspicion and because of the increasing popularity of people using their own solar/water power. If you had some type of E-bomb device that could take out the power in a small area temporarly you could set it to go off remotly and be doing the job while the device goes off somewhere else nearby, and posibly the police would not have any idea what is going on untill much later. I see that you are talking about taking down the power in a larger area, Anthony, and if you were doing a job that you needed the power in a large area to go off I agree that it would be much more practical to take out the power sub-station. Could you use a small E-bomb close to the power sub-station take that out temporarely? This seems like the most effective way of doing things, and I think would be a lot more practical than actually destroying a sub-startion. If this is posible you could even probably do this to key power plants during the peak usage hours to eliminate power to the whole city. So is this possible?

PYRO500

March 23rd, 2002, 12:29 AM

If you think about it all that EMP "I-bomb" is just a simple spark gap transmitter, the capacitors discharge through the air across a gap, the completed circuit goes through the inductor, the spark gap emits a RF pulse that is easily calculated by the length of the pulse the voltage, the gap where the spark arcs, and the inductance of the coil. Now just to warn all of you this is definitely illegal to run, spark gap transmitters were banned a very long time ago (I wonder why :cool: ) it should not be too hard to directionalize the cm field with a simple reflector, if I get around to it I may make some schematics of a possible transmitter and possibly a digital model.

Anthony

March 23rd, 2002, 02:36 PM

I don't get how that I-Bomb at http://www.eiu.org/experiments/i-bomb/video.html is a weapon in it's current form (unless you meant that it could be adapted into being a weapon?). It's affect on electrical equipment is obviously minimal because there's a video camera a couple of feet from the spark gap that is completely unaffected.

xoo1246

March 23rd, 2002, 03:15 PM

Patent: 5,059,839 and 3,564,305 might be of some interest to you. I wouldn't use a FCG to kill an alarm. That would be un-economical.

kingspaz

March 23rd, 2002, 05:59 PM

i just had an interesting thought. what are the pigs without their communications centre and walkie talkies? fucking useless. thats how they end up catching you in a chase. they can coordinate efforts to get you. so an EMP device planted outside a pig station would render the local forces almost useless = no piggies :p

nbk2000

March 23rd, 2002, 07:02 PM

The I-bomb is variable powered, so I'm sure they set it to the lowest setting. Plus, the EMP field comes from the coil, not the power supply, so there's distance too.

quote:

---

I wouldn't use a FCG to kill an alarm. That would be uneconomical.

---

I'd say that depends on what the alarm is guarding. For the local stop-and-rob liquor store, no. But a plutonium storage facility or precious metals depository...YES! :D Kingspaz, you're right about the piggies and their radios. Without them, they're back to being equal to cops of the Roaring '20s, only with nicer guns. Though you wouldn't need a complicated EMP device, just a simple tear gas bomb in their communication center.

xoo1246

March 23rd, 2002, 09:22 PM

Imagine setting a bunch of FCGs off in the financial center om some major city, you enclose the FCGs in something blast reducing(whatever), thus no personal damage but only technological damage to large cooperations and institutes. Would it create some confusion? How do they store their data? I don't think they are EMP hardened, are they? The data are probably stored at several locations though. Still, it would make my day. No motive but poetic terrorism.

TheBicher

March 24th, 2002, 12:02 AM

quote:

---

I wouldn't use a FCG to kill an alarm. That would be un-economical.

---

Of course I am only speaking theoreticly, of what you COULD do if the need arises. I only brought up the subject of Alarm Systems because it was mentioned in a similar post by someone else.

quote:

---

If you think about it all that EMP "I-bomb" is just a simple spark gap transmitter, the capacitors discharge through the air across a gap, the completed circuit goes through the inductor, the spark gap emits a RF pulse that is easily calculated by the length of the pulse the voltage, the gap where the spark arcs, and the inductance of the coil.

---

I was thinking about how easily it would be to trace an E-bomb, but it would probably still take the police a while to get the equipment ready (if they even have any), and that is after they realize what's going on (not sure how long that would take). If I were to use an E-bomb I would set it to go off remotly or by a timer. Unfortunately, if the cops did find your E-bomb you would have to abandon it, which could mean a lot of work lost and make it suitable only for big jobs.

quote:

---

Imagine setting a bunch of FCGs off in the financial center om some major city, you enclose the FCGs in something blast reducing(whatever), thus no personal damage but only technological damage to large cooperations and institutes. Would it create some confusion? How do they store their data? I don't think they are EMP hardened, are they? The data are probably stored at several locations though. Still, it would make my day. No motive but poetic terrorism.

---

I hope you're joking... Am I the only one starting to realize that most of the things on http://www.eiu.org/experiments/ are either fake or a joke? I mean really, a lethal biological pathogen vending maching? It is posible that the I-bomb is real, but it really wouldn't be that hard to fake (and a lot easier than making the real thing.)

nbk2000

March 24th, 2002, 12:53 AM

Of course the "Dispersion Customized Pathogen Dispenser" is real. :rolleyes: These are works of "performance" art. That means that they work (within sane limits). Thus I'm not worried about the I-bomb working. But I did like the biological agent vending machine. Makes me think you could set one up as "art", give it a couple of weeks with harmless sugar or whatnot, then switch anthrax for the sugar for the last few days before disappearing with the machine. By then lots of idiots would have opened up their vials to look at the "harmless" powder inside.

PYRO500

March 24th, 2002, 01:08 AM

for a FCG to work properly you need an extreme amount of current at high voltage for this you'll need at least a 50-130 pount capacitor as the priming voltage, then you'll need a very fast way of detonating your explosive lenghtwise, prefrerably an exploding foil detonator.the EMP weapon on their site is not only possible it WILL work, spark gaps from big cap discharges are very powerful and with the right inductor can put out EM all over the spectrum that will destroy electronics but are usually far from silent, the EM radiation is best directed though to increase power density in one direction. I am currently working on a 3d model of a spark gap emp and i'll post it when it is done. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> improvised air rifle munitions Log in

View Full Version : improvised air rifle munitions Azazel

April 2nd, 2002, 03:32 AM

anyone here made anything of the sort ??? better piercing values, poisoned, shattering, exploding... share your stories with me please

vulture

April 2nd, 2002, 03:38 AM

My grandfather gave me some 4.5mm (.175 i believe) pellets which had a needle stuck through it. 100% kill rate on pigeons and small animals at distance to 30m with 170m/s airrifle. Accuracy is somewhat compromised because fixing the needle perfectly straight and in the middle is difficult. I was thinking about adding some KMnO4/Al/S flash in the opening in the back of the pellets to increase muzzle velocity. Any ideas?

Azazel

April 2nd, 2002, 03:50 AM

duno thats why im asking... im thinkin bout gettin a webley... either way im spending a couple hundred on the sucker what im really after is ideas on pellets that perform better penetration wise.... ideas on exploding pellets is fine however id rather not go near making any sort of illegal munition. plus it would end up damage the rifle I was thinking along the lines of replacing the tips of the pellets with some kind of hardened steel (?). I say this because the tips of the pellets do not make contact with the barrel at all, so if i didnt want to risk damaging an expensive rifle i would go along those lines... | \,,;'. |.......|> (tip) |_/``;.' Sorry for the BullShi diagram... the rear section of the pellet on cathes the air which is released upon firing. The area behind the tip on the brand pellets i use dont actually have the same diameter as the rear part so it doesnt make contact with the barrel. I was thinking of just replacing this front area with a harder kind of metal. has anyone tried anything like this before ? Would it give any better kind of penetration <small>[ April 02, 2002, 02:51 AM: Message edited by: Azazel ]

Azazel

April 2nd, 2002, 03:58 AM

ohhhh by the way im concerned with penetration because the more the penetration the bigger the target i can take down. at the moment all the rifle will drop is a small rabbit but if i wanted to take down something slightly larger i most likely will just cause the poor creature a fatal injury. i dont like letting things suffer. but i dont want to go shooting them with powder rifles mainly because the air rifle is .22 cal anyway.

vulture

April 2nd, 2002, 04:01 AM

I used to have these grey and rather weak and heavy lead pellets, but now i have light and shiny (like aluminium) ones which are harder. The brand is Diana. About your point, it looks like a good idea to me, it's the same principle as the needle in mine. If you're going to buy one, buy a 320 m/s rifle, if possible with a scope. Walther has a 2-9x42 illuminated reticle for a very cheap price. I say this because with my 170m/s bullet drop is already substantial over distances more than 20m.

Azazel

April 2nd, 2002, 04:26 AM

ok cool thanks for the advice my friend... i have seen one which takes my fancy... Cometa Fenix 400 it has 320 m/s velocity after firing YAY its in my price range too... i think the webley rifles are rather costly. i would prefer to buy a .308 for the cost of the webley

Mr Cool

April 2nd, 2002, 04:59 AM

You can get lead-free air rifle pellets that are an alloy of bismuth I think, surrounded by a hard rubber jacket that engages with the rifling. These deform much less on impact, because they are much harder than lead. So you should get better penetration. Whatever you do, don't do any modifications to pellets yourself; you'll probably end up ruining the rifling.

BoB-

April 2nd, 2002, 05:42 AM

ohh, you poor brits and underagers.... Vulture, no cartridges in the world use flash for a reason, its extremly unpredictable and might generate enough heat to melt something important.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter As kids our favorite way to cause destruction was to over pressurize, and overload our guns, 6-7 BBs or pellets pumped 25 times would kill anything up to the size of a fox. But 'one shot and run away' kinda died out with the civil war. As for poisons ricin always comes to mind, if you can get even a single grain of the poison in a hollowpoint air-rifle pellet, then that is plenty enough to kill your prey. Of course ricin is slow acting and equally as dangerous to its maker. Something else is needed to make air-rifles into weapons... fullauto. I beileve that 10-20 BBs in someones face would be equal in destructive force to any commerically made cartridge, a single squeeze and the man is on the ground in agony, a few more bursts into a temple, jugular, or eyeball and its all over. You could even aim for his crotch :)

vulture

April 2nd, 2002, 06:29 AM

I know no cartridge comes with flash, i just needed a composition that will ignite reliabely in the rifle.

Jack Ruby

April 2nd, 2002, 06:46 AM

what displeases me about semi-automatic Pellet guns is: They have a low capacity for Ammo(8-10 rounds is the most I have seen) 12g CO2 canisters only have so much in them(12g is my guess) Your first few shots will be alright but then I can start to trace the pellets path with my Eye(slows down). CO2 Will only be so powerful. Where as you can over Preasurize the Pump style(the one I have is a cross man). Plus I find Semi-Auto in Pellet guns to be not accurate(Action doesn't cycle smooth enough for my liking). The above may sound very lame to the rest of you but are enough reason for me. Also A nice pellet pistol for me is about 1/2 he cost of a .22LR(Rifle Or Pistol). I might aswell spend a little more and get something that will have something behind it.

Anthony

April 2nd, 2002, 07:51 AM

Putting any kind of homemade projectile into anything put a cheap air rifle is a waste. You'll more than likely damage the rifle. Steel contacting the rifling will scratch and damage it - the rifling in an air rifle is much finer and more delicate than in a firearm barrel. Also, a projectile that is too light or ill fitting will cause piston slam if the gun is a springer, likewise an overly tight or heavy projectile will cause piston bounce, both are bad. Homemade pellets will also be widly inaccurate and unpredictable. If you want a kind of sabot round, try Prometheus pellets, they're like MrCool described - an alloy dart in a nylon sabot. More penetration doesn't mean you have more killing power. You'll likely have *less* stopping power due to over-penetration and also a much smaller wound channel - bad if you trying to kill by rapid blood pressure drop i.e throat/neck shot. CO2 airguns are generally underpowered because the tiny CO2 reservior (it is actually only 12gm), chills rapidly when gas is discharged from it, lowering it's internal pressure. I believe that some tests were done by one of the American airgun manufacturers (might have been crossman) whereby a quantity of nitrocellulose was placed into the tail of a pellet and fired from a spring/piston gun, the heat upon firing ignited the NC. I believe they had good results upto 2000-3000fps, although I doubt the pellet touched the rifling at those kind of speeds. If you really want more power than you might as well throw a 22LR into the breach...

RTC

April 2nd, 2002, 12:47 PM

Anthony, how hard is it to get two .22/.177 springs into a springer? I don't want the off chance of it flying out and giving me a eyeball poke. And is there much increase is velocity? I'm thinking about adding a new spring to a Hatson Mod 40.

Jack Ruby

April 2nd, 2002, 02:32 PM

What does 12gm mean?

Ctrl_C

April 2nd, 2002, 02:40 PM

12 grams of CO<sub>2 in a cartridge. They make pointed metal darts that fit in pellet guns. I will pick some up today, snap some pics, and if anyone wants them I'll mail them tomorrow.

Arkangel

April 2nd, 2002, 03:56 PM

I hate to pass on anecdotal heresay information, but a friend used to put a drop of diesel behind the pellet. He reckoned it worked like a diesel engine - compression ignition. I would like to point out that neither he nor I had any means of quantitatvely testing this (although it DID produce blue smoke from the barrel) and take no responsibility for your bitter

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

disappointment when fuck all exciting happens when you try it. Self modified pellets with pins in would be soooooo inaccurate unless you were a rock steady engineer. Prometheus discarding sabot pellets rock, but are slow to reload. In the words of Swiss Tony: "Getting the best from your air rifle is very much like making love to a beautiful woman: First you've gotta have everything well oiled. Then, when it's nice and slippery, you pump up your weapon. Carefully, open the breech, and check there's nothing in the way. Slide in your projectile and carefully take aim from behind. Reach round for her trigger and gently squeeze, until.........POP You shoot your load all over her tits." I don't think the last bit really fitted that well, but I suddenly lost me weaponry motivation and panicked into writing it.

Anthony

April 2nd, 2002, 05:36 PM

RTC, I'd say near impossible - presuming you could compress them into the action and fit the end cap, they would almost certainly be already coil-bound, so you wouldn't be able to cock the gun. Generally throwing a bigger spring tends to raise power a bit (few ft/lb) but accuracy goes to pot, the gun jumps all over the place when fired and it is eventually destroyed by the extra shock it takes during a firing cycle. Those darts might be the same as the ones you see used with Gat guns, they're generally not recomended for rifled barrels because the part which contacts the barrel is steel. Diesel does indeed work. I've used a drop of gun oil before through the transfer port and it gives a few ft/lb boost for about 34 shots. The more volatile the fuel, the greater the effect - petrol or nitromethane should be funny... Nice work Arkangel:) Would they be blue/greater/lesser spotted tits?

Arkangel

April 2nd, 2002, 07:19 PM

As long as I have some tits to aim at, I'm not at all fussed what variety they are, so long as they are not attached to some lard arsed builder! Steel darts are bad if they're the ones Anthony describes, as they're hard on rifling, AND have this ridiculous coloured fluffy tail that really slows them down. Only useful for a dartboard. Someone in the thread mentioned sticking a .22 LR down the spout, and that leads onto the question about converting a brocock. Anyone spent time looking at one yet? I think it would be a dumbass thing to do, as it's prison time, however, their .38 BACS air system looks really interesting in general - you can have a 6 round revolver with speedloader, or check out the fox - totally day of the jackal rifle! http:// www.profhk.com/product/brocock/fox.htm

Madog555

April 2nd, 2002, 08:04 PM

they make ones called "bolts" (like in a cross bow) and they are the same as the darts ony they have a plastic back with little fins. im sure they have a mutch better velocity.

nbk2000

April 2nd, 2002, 08:38 PM

An aquaintance of mine had a crossman CO2 BB pistol that he had modified by stretching the internal spring to twice it's original lentgh and reinstalling. It could shoot a .177 pellet fast enough to knock over a standard red brick at 40+ feet. A BB would puncture a steel wheelbarrow at 20 feet. 'course, you only got about 8-10 shots per CO2 powerlet before you had to replace it, compared to the usual 60+. I don't know the exact model number, but it was an all black plastic, with a slide that you pulled straight back for every shot. There was no magazine, and it was a long barrel style, like a target pistol. It can't shot pellets as is. We had to remove the barrel to manually load each pellet and reinstall the barrel in the pistol to do so. This thing killed pigeons with one shot out of tall trees, and easily busted thick spotlight bulbs on roofs. What could you do with that... Though it was LOUD compared to a regular air pistol. More comparable to a .22.

Pu239 Stuchtiger

April 2nd, 2002, 09:00 PM

I've been wondering about this for a while: just how harmful to the air rifle is overpumping it? It seems that a lot of people do that without trouble, yet the air rifle company strongly advises against overpumping it... Any idea just how much of an increase in velocity can be attained? My gun is supposed to be pumped a maximum of 10 times, and has a velocity of about 800ft/sec.

nbk2000

April 2nd, 2002, 10:47 PM

The maximum you're going to get is the speed of sound (1,100 FPS or less). But, what if you used a lighter gas than air? Like

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

helium? The light gas guns like the military experiment with use helium and hydrogen to accelerate the slugs to 10,000+ M/S. Perhaps it's the very low density and increased mach speed of light gases. I think the air-gun manufacturers recommend against overpumping because of the wear and tear on the seals and valves. Plus possible injury if the gun ruptures.

johnn 99

April 3rd, 2002, 03:17 AM

Yes. Arkangel, I think the Brocock system is great. Damned expensive though.They used to sell a canegun that used the bac 38 system. Do you know if they still do, and if so where I could view it? I recently read a book about airguns wherein the author said that he had designed an injector to feed light oil into the compression chamber of a springer, to boost the velocity, by diesel action. It shouldn't be to hard to build something like that. My personal project for an airgun is to design and build a 44 cal. walkingstick airgun circa turn of the century . These things were supposed to be able to take down deer.

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 05:33 AM

The Fox I mentioned above is a skeleton gun, not sure if you checked out the link, but it's super thin. Am going to have to take a look at one.

Anthony

April 3rd, 2002, 08:51 AM

You can definitely go over Mach1, indeed a lot of tweakers have troube keeping it under. Generally though you don't get supersonic airguns as if the pellet drops below mach1 downrange, the shockwave from going supersonic smacks it in the arse and accuracy goes to pot. Some people do charge their Precharged pneumatic guns with Helium, IIRC it doubles power output. A couple of hundred years ago, airguns were a more prestigious and feared weapon than powder arms. Some of the colonialists that went to America took .44 air rifles, with power compareable to that of a modern .45ACP cartridge, they used them to take buffalo. Apparently they scared they put the heebijeebies up the Indians - firesticks with no fire:)

johnn 99

April 3rd, 2002, 11:49 AM

Yes. Arkangel, that fox rifle looks like it would be very easy to modify into what I want. However the one I saw, was actually disguised as a cane. Has anyone seen a good simple inline valve design for a walking stick airgun? THANKS.

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2002, 12:49 PM

If you're making a single shot, why not try using a frangible valve? A small disc of tempered glass is the "valve", and a ceramic striker (or spring loaded center punch) is the "trigger". When the striker hits the glass, it instantly shatters, releasing the pressure. Easily replaced, and can hold thousands of PSI of pressure in small sizes.

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 01:16 PM

Great idea, The Brocock system uses a .38 cartridge, which acts as a mini reservoir of air, and holds the .22 pellet. The crims here are converting them to take a .22 LR shell, probably by replacing the BACS cartridge with a machined sleeve (external dimensions the same as a .38 shell) into which they pop the .22 round. I'm not sure how the firing mechanism works, as .22LR is rimfire, but if you could overpressure the BACS system using a glass seal as you describe, it would power the gun up, without it leaving firing residue on the gun. The only thing is you'd probably get a lot of glass up the barrel, which might cause problems for the next round.

RTC

April 3rd, 2002, 01:40 PM

Nothing a ramrod couldn't take care of.

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2002, 02:27 PM

I doubt there'd be any glass left in the barrel since it's own momentum would likely carry it out. You could always add a tuff of cotton into the cartridge that should "swab" out the barrel when fired. I was looking at the BAC site, and it looks like an interesting piece of equipment. The .22 especially. I could see pulling the bullets from real .22 rimfire ammo, and loading the bullets into the BAC cartridges. Then the piggies are looking for a rimfire gun, not an airgun. The Fox rifle has a moderator (AKA silencer). How effective are the silencers for british air-rifles? Because we can't own silencers of any sort in the US without an ATF permit. If they make it so quiet that you can't hear it past a few yards, than that'd be perfect for taking out lights. US SWAT teams are buying more and more silenced weapons for that very purpose. It also looks like it'd be good training equipment for crims. You can practice your disarming, concealment, CQB, and other pistolcraft tactics without having to use up valuable and rare illegal handgun ammo in practice. I wonder, does the 9mm version eject the cartridges automatically? Or is it manually cocked after every shot? How much pressure can the BAC cartridges hold? I've seen air-powered military simulator rounds similar to this that hold several thousand PSI and can fire lethal rounds. If the BAC can hold that kind of pressure, than you'd need something like a SCUBA tank compressor to get that level of air

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter pressure.

But then you'd have a lethal .22 pistol that uses residue free air and common .22 pellets. <small>[ April 03, 2002, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 02:43 PM

Or how about something like the old fashioned soda bottles, where you had a marble held in place in the neck by the pressure? You could use the principle with a small bb in the neck of your pressure vessel, and pushing against it vented the gas

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2002, 03:07 PM

Ah, but the more pressure, and the smaller the surface it's applied against, the more force it takes to overcome it. It could be nearly impossible to move the BB if you have it under a lot of pressure, which is the whole point. The glass will shatter with equal ease, whether it's sitting in your hand, or holding thousands of PSI of pressure. The frangible valve idea came from a military light gas gun design I saw somewhere. Though they use metal plates and detcord.

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 03:48 PM

The greater the pressure, the GREATER the area it's applied against, surely? That's why I said a small bb, although I do take your point. I had in mind some kind of lever/cam in the trigger mechanism, something like the 1st/2nd pressure of a normal rifle trigger, but with the 1st pressure doing most of the work, and the 2nd cracking the valve with a relatively light squeeze. I agree though, that a frangible disc is a better idea. I still think there would be a debris problem, especially in a .177 or .22 barrel of any length. Got any linkd to that gas weapon you described?

johnn 99

April 3rd, 2002, 05:45 PM

Thank you all very much for the ideas. Yes arkangel the marble/soda bottle valve is what I am looking at now, however it requires the gas to make a 90 deg. turn in my design, which I am trying to avoid. Also I have some doubts about a decent valve material for use at these pressures (500 psi). NBK I can think of several ways to apply your frangible disk idea. However I would prefer this project to be multi shot. Thanks for the info!

Anthony

April 3rd, 2002, 06:39 PM

Real crims in the UK just buy an illegally imported firearm handgun for a fraction of the price of a Brocock + conversion, reliability and safety costs. BACs work at around 200-230 bar IIRC, you can use a driver's bottle, a stirrup pump or a hand pump to pressurise them. The pumps are made for the purpose and special high-pressure jobbies, not your average bike pump. I like the frangible glass valve idea. Does the striker hit in the glass from behind? If so this would require the striker mechanism to be on the high pressure side, so how do you seal it seeing as you need something running to outside of the pressure chamber for a trigger. I guess you could use a solenoid to hit the glass meaning you'd only need to run a wire or two to the outside world. But at several thousand PSI sealing even a wire sound difficult.

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 06:55 PM

The BACS cartridge is made of a couple of parts, and you could probably do the same thing with the frangible seal - a pressure chamber at the rear, with the bullet (if it is one "cartridge" assembly) at the fron end. The hammer would push the pressure chamber forward, fracturing the disc on an internal "anvil" arrangement. Don't know if that makes any sense?

Azazel

April 3rd, 2002, 07:01 PM

Hmmm these Sabot rounds sound like my kinda thing...thanx for the info guys if you go ahead and buy darts for your air rifle make sure u get high quality brand that doesnt leave traces of material in the barrel after a number of shots. my friend and i found colored hairs in the barrel after shooting. later we were both told that the particular brand was cheap... cant remember which though was long time ago. Webley make these really cool air rifles. They have this one semi auto called the Webley Axsor... you can pump it 80 times i think and it has an 8 shot mag. Very expensive air rifle though wouldnt wana mess with its springs.

Sparky

April 3rd, 2002, 07:08 PM

I like NBK's idea of having a glass piece that would shatter. But instead of hitting it with a hammer maybe you could set off a small charge of BP in the air chamber. It would overpressurized the chamber and shattered the glass, as long as that was the weakest part. This way you could dispense with the hammer mechanism and use a sparking thing. I read somewhere that shooters sometimes put a grain of BP into the chamber, behind the pellet. This might put some residue on your barrel or damage a weak barrel. Flash probably wouldn't be a good idea unless you had a hefty barrel for the same reason it isn't used for a propellant in lift or guns. It burns too fast which would damage or blow up the barrel instead of providing an even pressure for acceleration. BP would probably be better than diesel since you could use it for both CO2 and pump guns. If your using a CO2 gun then the diesel, nitromethane or whatever wouldn't be able to burn (no availabel oxygen right?) thought it would burn fine in an air powered gun.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anthony

April 3rd, 2002, 08:31 PM

Low explosives like BP/NC etc or flammable liquids diesel/NM etc won't work in CO2, precharged or pump-up (multi stroke pneumatic) since there's no heat during the firing cycles to ignite them. In fact the rapidly expanding gas cools the gun. The air in the chamber of a spring/piston gun becomes rapidly heated because it is rapidly compressed by the spring. Might be interesting to cast some BP/dextrin or NC into the tails of pellets and fire them from a cheap springer. The Axsor (or "'acksaw") is a precharged pneumatic, you fill the chamber on the gun with compressed air with either a diver's bottle or and external and then you've got enough air in the gun for a days shooting, without having to pump up or cock a spring/gas ram between shots or change CO2 capsules every 10 shots (realistic if you want useable power). You must be kidding about the "Very expensive air rifle" though, as precharged goes, that's a really cheapy! In fact it's cheap as far as a nice springer goes too... Ask MrCool how much his SLR (springer) was:)

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2002, 08:43 PM

Using BP would defeat the whole purpose of using air in the first place, wouldn't it? :rolleyes: Though maybe a very small explosive charge (like AP) could be used to drive a ceramic fragment against the tempered glass disc to shatter it, rather than having a mechanical hammer. The frangible disc would be shattered by an external striker since internal raises too many problems of effective sealing. I don't have any URLs for the gas gun, but a Google search should reveal it.

johnn 99

April 4th, 2002, 04:00 AM

Personally, I would turn the whole concept with the glass disk around. When I first saw the brocock cartridge system I thought "gee I can build those" I would build them in 2 pieces out of brass. The idea being just a subminiature exaust valve phenumatc rifle (digaphram type) with the glass disk in place of the primer in the cartridge. ( I originally thought to use the bb idea ) so that when it is broken it lowers the pressure on the back side of the digaphram. I will attempt to build one of these out of tubing this week, and let you know how it goes.

FragmentedSanity

April 4th, 2002, 04:31 AM

Has anyine got any pic/plans/patents or anything for the old air guns - I love the idea of an air gun that can take out a buffalo. Those things sound insane! But keep all the ideas flowing - I think there should be more interest in air powered guns - they cant ban air - you dont need a licence for it and you dont have to be 18 to buy it :p FS

BoB-

April 4th, 2002, 11:06 PM

Ever since I realized that using 12gr Co2 cartridges in my spudgun would cost around $10,000 dollars a year I knew I had to find a better way. I've been conducting experiments that I'm going to post about if I ever have a sucessful one. My first Idea is really simple, bakingsoda and Vinegar, cheap, easy to get in large quantities, and both are non-toxic. A setup would be simple, a presure chamber would be set up with a large valve at its top, a tube, coming out of the side of the pressure chamber, will go through the side of another pressure chamber. This Chamber will be filled with water, and the tube from the pressure chamber will rest at its bottom, and the Co2 will bubble through the water, cleaning it, where it will then be collected at the top of the chamber. In use, the pressure generator would be connected to a thoroughly cleaned propane tank (the threads on the tank itself are 3/ 4" mnpt) after sufficient pressure has been generated, first a valve leading to the propane tank will be shut off, then the valve on top of the pressure chamber will be slowly 'cracked' open, and then a main shut off valve will turn off the air going to the water-filled pressure chamber, and the top valve will be (slowly) fully opened so the chamber can be cleaned and used again. Also another large valve could be connected to the bottom of the pressure chamber, it could then be opened and a cup of water could flush out all reactant. A bonus about this is that it could also be used to generate O2, by the common reaction of H2O2 and Mno2. The other idea isnt mine, its actually the way Co2 was originally discovered. in the 1700s Joseph Black discovered that by heating Limestone (CaCO3) Co2 was generated, he then discovered that by taking the residue left over (quicklime CaO), and dissolving it in water to make limewater, and then bubbling CO2 through it, the original amount of CaCO3 he started with would be his end result! What I'm not sure of is, after the CO2 reacts with the limewater, is there still any CO2 left? What other gas's (if any) are generated by the reaction? If the answers are yes and none, a *ahem* "perpetual Co2 generator" could be created. Frangible glass valves could actually be in a cartrige itself, exact amounts of reactants could be sealed in the pressure chamber, hell you could even add water to baking soda then compress it in a star press to make little prefectly measured cylinders of the reactant, these would also take longer to dissolve and therefore slower to react, giving you plenty of time to screw the thing together and seal it. Unfortunatly all those steel pressure vessels would get expensive. If you have access to steel nipples and endcaps, it wouldnt be too hard to design and build a nelson valve, if I'm still up after I get back from a party tonight, I'll upload pics of a makeshift nelson valve, and post them here. I love pnuematics :)

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter nbk2000

April 4th, 2002, 11:59 PM

You'd want to avoid any trace of water when working with CO2 because it dissolves 400 volumes of CO2 for every 1 of water. So you'd waste a LOT of CO2 saturating the water. A fire extinguisher shell will hold at least 200 PSI. And they're free for the stealing. I think you could make the little pressure shells, using a glass disk in place of the primer. Just whack it with your "firing" pin, and divert the exhausted air to propel the bullet. I don't see any reason why you can't have a screen or such to retain the glass fragments in the shell. Wonder if you could build a shell that has two reactive chemicals seperated by the glass disk that, when broken, would create an explosion to propell the bullet. I'd think H2SO4 + water = steam.

James

April 5th, 2002, 01:33 AM

I take it that loading up with dr?y ice is a really bad idea.

Arkangel

April 5th, 2002, 04:31 AM

Having the glass disk in the place of a primer makes it easier to "fire", but makes it much harder to divert the gas, plus you'd have the projectile loaded seperately somewhere else. If you're going to do that, you might as well pre load the projectile, then have the glass disk at the front of the pressure cartridge, and then the hammer bangs the whole thing forward onto an anvil (external to the cartridge) and off it goes. They can't ban air, true (although there were recent calls for it in the uk) , but they can regulate power. If you're going to power something up (and I too would love to see design for a buffalo killer), it would be a VERY good idea to be able to have it set at two power levels, one legal, the other lethal. And make sure it isn't obvious how you change it! :cool:

FragmentedSanity

April 6th, 2002, 08:26 AM

Lo again :) I think you missed my point Arkangel. They cant ban Air. and if they tried I think wed all have more things to worry bout unless your planning to evolve gills. As for legalities - who really gives a fuck! the therad was about improvise munitions for air rifles - now Im not sure about your local laws but shooting any kind of explosive or poison tipped dart out of an air rifle would contrivine a few of them. In Australia - you need a licence for any firearm - that includes air rifles - we can even have airsoft - and from all the checking ive done you need a licence for a paintball gun too. if you wanted a pistol - even a cheap nasty singleshot airpistol you need to join a pistol club - wait for a year - get a pistol licence, then a permit to purchase and then you can buy one, oh I forgot to mention the inspection the piggies have to do on your residence and safe. If you are going to make any kind of firearm, its a fairly safe bet that its illegal, regardless of how powerful it is. So why not make it really powerful! and if you can buy low powered air guns, why wouldnt you just buy one of those and work on making it shoot harder, if thats really what your after. Be damned if Id go to the trouble I have if I could buy it off the shelf. Anyway - the point I was making is that air is a cheap easy medium for projectile launching and the people who will see the most benifit from it are those who cant buy factory ammo or reloading supplies. Some survivalist (who can see beyond the need for lots of flash'n'fancy AKmp5MIAr97magnum style guns (with all the extras of course)also see great potential in air weapons. Not only is the propellant naturally abundent - you can shoot almost any projectile you want to if you vary the design enough. Personally Im working (slowly)on a pumpup pneumatic designed to fire 1.5v (AA) batteries (cast lead will also be used). The (theoretical) benifit of this is that a bore that isze allows for a range of projectiles, including shot. Id like to see a coroner scratching his head, wondering how john doe got an everready lodged in his chest anyway - I do have a little idea for an improvised round for an air rifle, based mainly upon NBK's fetish with horse shit Now as a kid I discovered that stock feed pellets fit nicely in the barrel of my little air gun - Id sit there with a handful of pellets and shoot for a couple of hours at targets or those horrid parrots that stole all my fruit, cleaning the barrel only involved shooting a couple of lead pellets through it after I was done. Now the point is that these little pellets held together faily well, werent too inaccurate and still flew hard enough to dent a soft drink can. So why not make a pellet out of horse shit, iron filings and possibly a binder (dextrin? not sure what would work best here) in a mould and a press (Id make a mould with a point for penetration) The theory is that some of it gets under the skin - at best not enough to warrant a visit to the doc, and make the target thing it was in insect. but even if the pellet penetrated, it would fragment all the way through the wound - leving little bits of shit and shit encrusted iron filings everywhere - Do you think a surgeon would get it all? And id assume ballistics would have a hard time tracing a round like that. later FS

johnn 99

April 6th, 2002, 02:22 PM

I'm sorry, Arkangel. I don't think I explained what I'm doing very well. I was talking about building a bac 38 cartridge, The projectile is contained in the front of the round, And the glass disk at the rear is not to vent the compressed gas. just to lower the pressure behind the diaphram valve to let it open venting the gas to the front, propelling the round out of the barrel. On the above post. I think that ground glass would work well in place of the iron fillings also. I read a book by Dean Ing ( soft target?) Where the villain uses something similar That is impregnated with the acid that is the main component of ant venom to disable people (PAIN ?). I always thought this might work pretty good. By the way, here is something about a large calliber air rifle www.history.rochester.edu/ appleton/a/airgun.html <small>[ April 06, 2002, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: johnn 99 ]

James You mean like formic acid or something.

April 7th, 2002, 01:49 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Azazel

April 7th, 2002, 05:42 AM

im aussie too... dag nam gun laws... it breaks balls down here getting a gun licence. i got one. i dont fool around though and make improvised munitions. im just interested in all of these topics. information is power is what most ppl would agree. i have actually been on the forum for a long time, well before it was changed in 2000, i have gone under the names boba_fett and now azazel. In all of those years i havnt tried many things Cough*ap*cough. But i dont think local law can put what used to be a 12 year old in jail for trying anything of that sort. Im currently studying chemisty under my science degree at uni and i find this forum to be a most excellent way of studying the laws of chem in a fun way. Hell even the techniques to making some things can improve greatly ones skills in the lab. anyways... I didnt know that you could purchase air soft in australia with a gun licence. In what state have you seen them on sale. I would like to purchase one if thats the case and practice my plinking skills on full automatic... hehe nah i really want an mp5 lookalike :) i have also gone around lookin for sabot rounds for an air rifle and the guys at the stores just ask why would i want that... C$#k S@#$*rs god damnit

mr.evil

April 7th, 2002, 05:53 AM

i use 4.5 mm pellets for my airrifle.. here the link: http://www.geocities.com/evilpics2000/ index.html (NBK, oke) Cya <small>[ April 07, 2002, 05:50 AM: Message edited by: mr.evil ]

nbk2000

April 7th, 2002, 06:15 AM

People need to realize that geoshitties...I mean geocities doesn't allow linking to pictures or files from outside sources. Thus, you picture doesn't show up here. In the future, just post the link so we can cut and paste it without having to right click on the red X box, OK? BTW, a picture of a pellet tin does nothing to help eleveate this discussion. :rolleyes:

FragmentedSanity

April 7th, 2002, 12:48 PM

Az - Sorry for the confusion - Airsoft are illegal imports here - but I dare say you could get one if you acquired an armourers licence.. maybe. But all that does is make them expensive. What I want to know is how an airsoft gun works so I can make my very own AEG :D Oh - and I have found that a lot of places in the states will ship stuff too you - but if customs nabs it then youve done your money - and if you were silly you might get a nasty visit. They consider the auto airsoft guns to be that same as a machine gun and will prosecute accordingly. But if all you want is a springer pistol then you might get lucky as they are shipped as toys, and as such you can plead ignorance. Now for todays idea - a small steel bb set in the business end of a lead pellet should help it expand more and cause more damage - the same idea is used in normal bullets with pretty good results - why not in an air rifle. FS

RTC

April 7th, 2002, 12:57 PM

If I lived in a country as fucked as that, I'd be on the next boat out of there, money or no money! I grew up around guns, knifes, improvised shit, from sharp sticks to improvised shotguns. If someone took away my right to buy pellet guns, that'd make me hit the roof! If your country get's any more backwards it'll be eating it's own arse!

Anthony

April 7th, 2002, 01:18 PM

I never thought that a country with more fucked up gun laws than the UK existed, but live and learn... Speaking of adding a BB to a lead pellet, that reminds me of some pellets I saw in my local gun shop. They were a lead pellet with a steel ball inside the lead in the head. I can't remember what they were called but there was a description on the tin which read something to the effect of: "a hard hitting lead pellet with a heart of steel".

mr.evil

April 7th, 2002, 01:40 PM

hey anthony, were it cannisters with an round red top? the local gunshop is gone now, so i can't take a picture of it... i thought they were called: Fireshots or so... anyway something with 'fire' Cya

endotherm

April 7th, 2002, 03:10 PM

Mr.Evil & Anthony Steel Pellet

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

PyramidAir.com is a great and reliable airgun sight btw. The steel tipped pellets look wicked, i'm probably going to buy a pack soon, probably great for busting windows.

mr.evil

April 7th, 2002, 03:24 PM

Hello, hey, i've been right! on the cannister it sais "Fireball" i think that pellets are very good to penetrate things... i will search the city, if i can found those things :) Cya

kvitekrist

April 7th, 2002, 05:41 PM

hello. i've been planing to make a cast for something like this: it would be about twice as long as an normal airgun pellet

DBSP

April 7th, 2002, 06:26 PM

The steel tipped bullets are simply nylon bullets tipped with some steel. It makes them lighter so the V0 gets a bit higher. I don't like them it no energi on them. Kvitekrist: If you make a bullet twise as long as a normal one it will simply drop out of the barrel since it will be to heavy. If you want something with power buy a weably tracker, I've had one for about three years(don't use it anymore since I bought a .22LR). Magpies and crows are no problem at all, I've even shot to badgers with it, They where shot in a trap but still and they died from a single shot.

Anthony

April 7th, 2002, 09:21 PM

They're probably the ones, the name "Champion" rings a bell, they must have redone the packaging though. Those aren't nylon, they're lead, I'm 99% sure of this because of two things: Nylon isn't metallic grey/silver in colour and those pellets are 10.5gr, whilst most lead .177 pellets are 8-9gr. That means they're also have good energy retention so should be good for window busting. One thing I have noticed about glazing pane glass is that when shot it doesn't tend to shatter, but rather the pellet punches a small through it and cracks the surrounding area. Possibly a frangible pellet would have better effects? Edit: Someone asked how quiet silenced air rifles are. They can be very effective, I've fired silenced, precharged pneumatics and if it's a good silencer then due to the lack of recoil and a smooth trigger, you often don't realise that the gun has fired until you hear the pellet hit the target. I doubt someone a few yards downrange would hear anything. <small>[ April 07, 2002, 11:53 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

johnn 99

April 8th, 2002, 01:11 AM

Kvitekrist, the main problem with your design isn't weight. Although that is always a factor in a weapon with such limited power. The real problem, is to much surface area touching the barrel and creating drag. That is why the diablo shape of pellet replaced strate sided rounds in the first place. You might try taking 2 of the pointed pellets, and glueing the skirt of one to the nose of the other. BTW I just blew an O-ring out on my crossman 600 doing something similar.

nbk2000

April 8th, 2002, 01:22 AM

I asked about the silenced airguns. It's good to know they're silent enough for night work. The steel tipped pellets ARE good for shooting windows, car windshields, and spotlight bulbs. I know because I've done these things with them. However, they don't have accuracy worth a shit out past 10 yards. Either too much drag from the shape, or uneven weight distribution. Whatever the reason, you've got to be up close and personal with the target to get good accuracy.

FragmentedSanity

April 8th, 2002, 05:14 AM

Lo again Australia does have its advantages - it is the land of WIDE OPEN SPACES after all :) and as everyone should know by now prohabiton doesnt work - guns are there if you want them. In the case of air guns, I see a birght future in home made weapons. To all those who poopoo the use of homemade guns for anything serious - it all comes down to how well they are made - even factory guns jam and fall to bits sometimies - if you make it yourself you can be confident about the workmanship - and you know how well you can make something. But I digress. I really dont think the secret to drastically increasing an pellet guns effectiveness lies in the pellet - Think more on how to improve the gun. The barrel just isnt big enough to shoot an effective load. But if your desperate you could try some thin metal tubing filled with something sensitive and capped with a small rifle primer - as mentioned these fit nicely in .177 air guns - tassles at the other end to stabalise in flight and youve got your self an exploding arrow - but it would be easier to scale it up and use a bow or a crossbow An arrow like this could also be capped with a little wax and filled with a liquid - poison - tranq - narcotic whatever - but I doubt youd have the accuracy required to be effective. In the end the best way to increas your damage with a air rifle is shot placement. If your going to spend up on the rifle - get a good one with a good scope - chose a good pellet and stick with it and nothing else - then practice. I used to shoot 2cm groups at 35m with the cheap open sight break barrel springer I got for christmas when I was 11 (best

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

damn christmas presant I ever got) Mind you that was after multiple thousand rounds - I loved that little gun, and it showed in the results - with open sights I could hit targets reliably to about 50m or a door at about 200m (not that it was effective at that range - but thats not the point) - simply coz Id shot it so much It was almost an extension of my body (melodramatic I know, but how else do you describe it) -But I expect everyone is the same with their favorite piece. Remeber - Head shots will kill bunnies!

Azazel

April 9th, 2002, 06:10 AM

i have interests in crossbows and hunting bows... from my experience they are not anything i would use to fire an improvised projectile... 1. they take to damn long to load. especially if u use cross bows... even hunting bows take ages b/cos u may have to use u wrist pully thingamajig. 2. the accuracy over longer distances is greatly reduced for larger weight loads... as it is hunting bows only have a decent shot from a max of 40 m away from target... and thats with a lightweight arrow with a teenie weenie arrow tip... if u want to use expanding heads u compromise a few meters... fhark it i think i will stick to a rocket launcher haha jk :p

johnn 99

April 9th, 2002, 08:38 AM

How about a rocket boosted arrow? Something with an inertia activate powder train delay to fire the rocket motor say 5 M after you lauch it.

Charlie Workman

April 10th, 2002, 02:53 AM

There was a technology developed on the early 70's called ballistic innoculation. Basically, they made a hard pill in the shape of an airgun pellet. The components were the sam as used in the common aspirin (minus the aspirin, of course). They are used here in the western states to vaccinate wild game (principally elk). Though they've been in use for over twenty years, it's been a very low profile affair. I've got a couple of .25 pellets a friend sent. They look similar to the old Whitworth hexagonal bullet and are made to fit a special airgun. You could probably think of a few things to press into pellets. I'm working on a set of dies to press the pellets, for an upcoming book. If anyone's interested, there were several patents issued in the 70's for them. If memory serves, 3M was the primary assignee. -------------------"To paraphrase Aristotle; life is a gas" -Gidget <small>[ April 10, 2002, 03:10 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

mark

April 11th, 2002, 08:38 PM

I shoot strike anywear matches out of my bb gun at hard objects from 10 feet and they explode nicley with a flash and a crack. Not realy a weapon, but entertaining.

RTC

April 11th, 2002, 08:44 PM

Does it not gunk up the barrle?

mark

April 11th, 2002, 08:57 PM

Nope, they just drop right in.

knowledgehungry

December 27th, 2004, 02:18 PM

Well I have succeeded in making explosive air rifle ammunition, it was much easier than expected. I used AP as the explosive and Remington pointed 4.5 mm lead pellets. I drilled out the inside of the pellet from the flared end. I first used a 1/8 inch drill bit to hollow out the first few mm's, I then used a 3/32 bit as the diameter got smaller, and then finished with a 1/16 drill bit which I drilled all the way through the tip of the pellet. I then proceeded to fire the pellets from my pneumatic airgun at both a hardwood plywood board and a coffee can. I also fired unmodified pellets for comparison purposes. Here are the results: The explosive pellet put a hole of 20mm diameter in the can, the unmodified pellet made a hole of 8mm. Looking inside the coffee can the explosive pellet was shattered into many small pieces, the other one hit the other side of the coffee can made a dent and was in one piece inside. The explosive pellet put an 8mm diameter hole in the plywood, and only penetrated about 5mm. The non explosive pellet put a hole 5mm wide and penetrated about 10mm into the wood. I will run tests on whether it detonates when hitting a softer target like some meat or something.

knowledgehungry

December 28th, 2004, 01:04 AM

Well I shot a few of my rounds at some oranges. 3 out of 5 detonated, however I am not sure if they detonated on impact with the orange or the board which the orange was in front of, it would appear that they detonated on the orange by the way the remnants of the orange looked, but I am not sure. I will do more tests tomorrow when everyone isn't asleep. UPDATE: Shot at oranges on stand, detonated 100% of the time. Started casting my own pellets and filling them with explosives(for bigger charge) 1 out of 2 worked. I have discovered that the key ingredient for detonation is for the rear of the pellets to be glued, this makes it so that the AP cannot move back thus lessening shock of impact.

wrythawk

December 28th, 2004, 06:01 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

well if you want to get a higher velocity with a spring air rifle you could put a pellet in your breach and push it 1cm deeper with a needle or something, then put in a drop of ether and put another pellet in youre rifle, close it and fire. I haven't tried it myself but i've heard it a couple of times from other people, try it at youre own risk.

Anthony

December 28th, 2004, 09:23 AM

A drop of pretty much anything flammable behind the pellet or into the transfer port will increase power due to dieseling. It won't turn an airgun into a .22 rimfire though. I'd just like to remind everyone not to try knowledgehungry's explosive pellet idea in a spring/piston gun - at least not without some adaption. The exposed AP at the rear of the pellet will ignite on firing and the pellet will detonate in the breach. This is due to the heat generated when the spring compresses the air in the chamber. A trick that uses this effect is to place a small amount of nitrocellulose in the rear of a pellet and fire from a springer.

Skean Dhu

December 28th, 2004, 10:00 AM

I read this on a air-rifle site a while back, but supposedly bars of soap are good for ammo comparison when trying to see what it will do to the internals of your living target ie; hunting small game. I've been considering getting a pellet/BB repeater for some time, any one got any suggestions.? right now I'm looking at the Daisy Powerline 880.

cyclonite4

December 28th, 2004, 11:10 AM

I live in australia too. Our gun laws may suck, but guns arent exactly hard to get (illegaly that is). I make my own pneumatic weapons with PVC pipe (much like spudguns). I have made a rifle that stores about 10L of air @ 150psi, and fires projectiles about 15mm in width. I'm not sure on the muzzle energy of the weapon, but it can fire special homemade ammunition through a car door from about 20 metres away @ 120psi. After buying all the parts (pipe, solenoid, etc.) it cost less than $100 Australian to build, and the local police don't really give a shit about 'spudguns'. The only unfrotunate thing is that, unless i carry my 1.0kg air tank, i have to manually pump it up, which takes about 30s. I am working on designs for a smaller, more powerful pneumatic weapon to be powered on some kind of gas generating chemical reaction and have been thinking about decomposition of concentrated H2O2.

FUTI

December 28th, 2004, 07:18 PM

to Skean Dhu: I think that gelatine is standard material when it comes to testing of what projectile would do to body, but soap isn't bad idea although it's density and viscosity can be very diferent but then again velocity, mass, contact surface, balistic properties, material strength of air rifle projectile is diferent from the standard weapon so it may be best choice for simulation task. to wrythawk or Anthony: it does make sense what you write but does that pellet actualy get to the target or explode? Is it posible to cover the rear side of pellet with nitrocellulose varnish to get the same effect? to cyclonite4: good work. decomposition of H2O2 can make a lot of gas but is also little unpredictable as you go to higher concentration. What % of H2O2 you planed to use? And what kind of catalyst? Water extract of raw finely choped potato can do the job but I doubt it will improve recharging tank time. to knowledghungry: I apologise if I didn't understand corectly what you done... you made a hole in the pellet form the front to bottom to fill it with AP, then you glue the rear end (bottom) to avoid AP ignite inside the rifle but on the contact with target? Please confirm or correct me.

knowledgehungry

December 28th, 2004, 08:58 PM

You are more or less correct, however I glue the end not to prevent ignition, but to ensure detonation on impact. If there is nothing in the rear of the pellet the AP can fly out the back on impact rather than detonating.

wrythawk

December 29th, 2004, 04:43 AM

to futi: no the pellet won't explode on target, te flammable liquid will combust in the barrel and will incease the pellets speed. but why would you make a .177 pellet explode the hole in the back is to small I think to do decent damage, maybe fill them up with mercury :d if you want an airgun to kill a buffalo with take a look at shin sung career rifles http://www.asportingchance.org/excerpts/shinsung.html it isn't getting any better than that :d

cyclonite4

December 29th, 2004, 08:49 AM

I was actually thinking like this, rather than have a refill source, power the cannon DIRECTLY (Well not directly, but hold the pressure developed behind a solenoid, or use a high concentration to propel it by the fast formation of O2, with the projectile blocking the barrel) on the H2O2. I got the idea when reading about H2O2 propelled rockets at some site (can't remember URL). As a catalyst is concerned, I was thinking about KMnO4 (a tad unsuitable for my current design ideas), MnO2, or Silver (MnO2 preferrable). Basically the reaction would be started by forcing the H2O2 to contact with the MnO2. For H2O2 concentration, I would experiment, starting from lower concentrations, and keep upping it until i find suitable power (of course i would do calc. with pv=nRT so as to make sure i dont have too much pressure from a given amount of H2O2). I can get a 15% H2O2 solution very cheaply from my pool store, so I would start with that and see how i go. The only problems I can see is the effort in concentrating H2O2, and not being able to predict how exothermic the decomposition would be (in concentrated amounts). I will post results here whn I have finished, and when I get my website up I will put information on pneumatic weaponry there.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I just fired one of my completed rifles (cost me $5 in parts, the rest was 'acquired') and it pushed a marble (15mm bore) @ 90 psi, straight through 10 layers of folded up cardboard boxes, and (unexpectedly) through 2 high-density (i don't know what material is but its strong) fences, and because I couldn't find the marble after, I assumed it fragemented into many small parts, infact, I am suprised it didnt shatter after hitting the first fence.

knowledgehungry

December 29th, 2004, 11:49 PM

I am working on making larger rounds by casting pellets myself, this worked reasonably well for me I just need to tweak it. I want an exploding pellet because .177 pellets are so weak and I want something that will take down squirrels a little quicker, I don't like making them suffer. Also my larger rounds might have some home defense uses.

Jacks Complete

January 4th, 2005, 11:06 AM

cyclonite4, don't forget that marbles are designed to be thrown, and to hit concrete, other glass marbles, etc. They are toughened glass, quite often. It wouldn't be a suprise if it simply carried on through then rolled away, since it is far tougher than the targets you shot. Shooting it at a steel or ceramic plate would be a way to get it to shatter, though even thin steel is likely to not be hard enough. Sounds cool, anyway. Was this the H2O2 powered version?

xyz

January 5th, 2005, 05:05 AM

SWIM once fired some 30mm marbles from an aircannon, the target was some 20mm particle board, the marbles (as expected) passed through it completely undamaged. They blew some very nice holes in it though :D

grendel23

January 5th, 2005, 06:22 AM

I once shot a glass marble at a brick wall with a sling shot and was astonished to hear it whistle past my ear after it bounced off the wall and came straight back at me. Be careful of hard projectiles together with a hard target.

wrythawk

January 5th, 2005, 07:56 AM

just a little historic background info :d did you know that airrifles already existed in the time that napoleon was concering big parts of europe? the airrifles in those days were used as sniper rifles because they were more accurate than blackpowder rifles, and also they didn't produce smoke,muzzle flash or a lot of noise. anyone who was cought with an airrifle got killed immediatily. so airrifles have been fearsome weapons, so with modern technology they could be even more powerfull. but .117 is just to small to kill something of decent size, I'd rather use blackpowder rifle calibers like .50 .577 .600 ... these have much more impact power and have enough room to fill with explosives ;) just my 2cts greetz

cyclonite4

January 5th, 2005, 09:04 AM

Well, I am so impressed with the marble's performance, it's now my standard ammo, the great thing is that the air rifle/ cannon is so simple and made from the same parts as a spudgun. No, this was not the H2O2 version, it should be much more powerful :D. This was a simple pump-up style pneumatic charged to 90psi. I just found a huge marble lying around that fits my somewhat large 40mm aircannon, so I'm gonna see what that does. :P I wonder if i could put a hole in a car :D.

Mardec

January 6th, 2005, 10:02 AM

You could also make a rifle grenade like in Band of brothers. It is nothing more then a impact detonition grenade with a stick attached that fits into the barrel. --------------------------------- |¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯| ===================|xx The Grenade xx| --------------------------------- |_______________| Oke now the --'s is the barrel of the gun and the =='s is the stick of the grenade. The stick will also bring balance to the grenade when it falls from the air so it will land on its nose. Ps. This thing will NOT SHOOT STRAIGHT!!!

Jacks Complete

January 6th, 2005, 10:38 AM

Cyclonite, Probably! Are the plans anywhere?

cyclonite4

January 7th, 2005, 11:38 AM

You won't find the plans anywhere on the net right now, because they are self designed, but once I finish the basic framework of my website, and find a decent host, I will put them up for all to see. Also I might need to get another camera because the

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

current one I have (a webcam actually) takes REALLY shitty photos. Noone here knows of a decent, free website host do they, the best I've found so far is Freewebs :(

workstation

January 12th, 2005, 12:40 PM

Does any body know what kind of energy improvement you get from putting nitrocellulose behind the pellet in a spring air gun? Anthony maybe? I know it "works", but does anyone know how well? If not, I will try to find out. Thanks

Anthony

January 12th, 2005, 03:24 PM

My reference for this is long gone, but definitely supersonic. I recall the figure of 2000fps+. The limit will be either the mechanical strength of the gun, or the pellet breaking apart. I wouldn't expect much in the way of accuracy though - airgun pellets are not designed to go supersonic! vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> PVC C e m e n t s t r o n g e n o u g h ?

View Full Version : PVC Cement strong enough? Ericm115

Log in

August 22nd, 2001, 09:25 PM

If i was to put two peices of pvc together, 1 being made to tightly overlap the other, and had coated them both with PVC c e m e n t , W ould they hold in a com bustion potato gun? I will be using that method for all peices except the endcap for the spra y . T h a n k s

CyclonitePyro

August 22nd, 2001, 11:55 PM

That sounds like a rather silly question, since its invention, there have been thousands of spud gu ns m ade over the years m a d e o f P V C , I don't know of any other m ethods of putting two pieces together b e s i d e s u s i n g g l u e a n d t h e b e s t g l u e t o u s e is the glue that's m ade for it!, PVC cement. The correct way to do it is to p rime both pieces with PVC prim er which is methylene chloride which softens the PVC, then one puts on the glue and inserts the pieces together turning one piece 1/4 of a turn while inse rting. T h i s m ethod, the only method, literally m ake the two pieces one, it softens the two the bonds them together. The PVC will burst out the sides rather then where you glued it, if it burst at all. M a k e s u r e y o u u s e P V C c e m e n t n o t C P V C c e m ent. Sorry about the double post there, I hit submit and as it was loa ding I saw som e m i s t a k e s a n d h i t s t o p , t h e n s u b m i t t e d t h e new one. [This message has been edited by CyclonitePyro (edited August 22, 2001).]

DoH BoY

August 24th, 2001, 12:59 AM

PVC cement is pratically liquid PVC plastic. kind of like liquid paper. [This message has been edited by DoH BoY (edited August 24, 2001).] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Liquid Fuel Rockets Log in

View Full Version : Liquid Fuel Rockets TariqMujahid

April 5th, 2002, 12:26 AM

I've searched this board pretty thoroughly, and only found topics on Solid Fuel rockets, like a mix of AN and Al and charcoal etc... On the internet, i've found some plans for building a liquid fuel rocket booster. It uses a fuel of Hydrogen Peroxide (i think 30%, but i cant find the website anymore) and Gasoline. That's well and good, but the plans cost $25. As NBK2000 pointed out, yes, i do have a hairstring budget and i don't feel like spending that much money. Why am i bothering with this then, you ask? For knowledge; i doubt i'll be building a rocket booster in the near future. Perhaps someone else has bought the plans and is willing to share the knowledge with us? Anyhow, if you don't know how a liquid fuel rocket works, here's how: It pumps the pressurized fuel into a combustion chamber, where it is burned (duh), and the pressurized gasses are released from the nozzle and thus propel the rocket. My "improvised" or "ghetto" version of this rocket would be to use a PVC pipe as the main body. It would be divided into 3 sections: The main fuel tank, the combustion chamber, and the area connecting the Combustion Chamber and Fuel Tank. The Fuel Tank and Combustion chamber would be of equal width, but the connecting piece would be narrower. The Fuel Tank would be pressurized right before launching the rocket using a CO2 cannister perhaps, thus pushing the fuel into the Combustion chamber to be burnt. My problem is- if i use a CO2 cannister to pressurize the fuel, could that cause the PVC pipe to explode? Also, what would be a good liquid fuel to use? The fuel must include an Oxidizer, in my case Hydrogen Peroxide, and something else that burns nicely. Thanks

Ctrl_C

April 5th, 2002, 01:00 AM

Another solution is H<sub>2O<sub>2 over a silver catalyst. It reacts violently, producing hot gases. Silver however is expensive and you would need to make some sort of screen out of it. Hydrogen Peroxide can be distilled to save money.

TariqMujahid

April 5th, 2002, 01:12 AM

As a substitute for silver, i've heard of Iron Oxide being used and yielding very similar results. Silver is expensive, which is why i'd prefer the Iron Oxide. Silver is a catalyst in the reaction, right? So simply putting silver in Hydrogen Peroxide shouldn't cause the reaction you speak of right away...shouldn't you have to apply heat to the mixture? I'd prefer this, because it seems a lot safer than having a binary rocket fuel. Then again, the whole idea of an improvised liquid-fuel rocket doesn't seem all that safe to begin with.. You say Hydrogen Peroxide can be distilled? My method of purifying it was to freeze the drug-store version or hardware store version and separate the H2O2 from the H2O that is mixed in with it. For rocket fuels, it is ideal to have 90% H2O2. Could freezing or distillation be used to bring the H2O2 up to this concentration?

James

April 5th, 2002, 01:28 AM

I remember seeing a couple of tables that I think might be relevent.

H<sub>2+O<sub>3	607	H<sub>2+O<sub>2	450-460
CH<sub>4+O<sub>2	385	jp5 + H<sub>20<sub>2	330
H<sub>20<sub>2	160	Kerosene+O<sub>2	355

but check out Analog July 1996, and something called 'The Starflight Handbook' <small>[ April 06, 2002, 11:19 PM: Message edited by: James ]

Machiavelli

April 5th, 2002, 02:12 AM

This one might be helpful: http://www.gramlich.net/projects/rocket/ "HOW to DESIGN, BUILD and TEST SMALL LIQUID-FUEL ROCKET ENGINES"

vulture

April 5th, 2002, 03:34 PM

Why use silver if you can use copper, brass, manganese dioxide and potassium permanganate as a catalyst? And I don't think 30% hydrogen peroxide is gonna work. You'll need at least 60%. Dinitrogen oxide (also called laughing gas) is used as a double based propellant together with organic fuels. Shouldn't be too hard too find it or you can make it by heating ammoniumnitrate. However, the liquifying is all yours...

Azazel

April 9th, 2002, 09:20 AM

i would presume this rocket would be hard to construct on a low budget due to size constraints vs material costs. I love topics like this however there are so many things to consider. here are some things i have picked up along the way in concern to making such a rocket. I must admit that i am not quite sure as to what the h2o2 fuel would actually perform like... anyways From what i know so far, is that for a rocket with liquid propellent there are many factors which are relevent to the thing actually working. One major concern is the quality of the fuel itself. It must be able to travel through an injection system effectively so as not to create any inconsistansies within the system. There must be 2 injection systems by the way which exert high pressures by filling the combustion chamber with an oxidiser and the fuel. Now... The parts to outline 2 injection systems are required 1 liquid oxygen is needed 1 Fuel sorce is needed Now when taking these into consideration the rocket would actually be quite large... or larger than most would expect. Remember there would be 2 sections to house the seperate fuels, and then 2 injectors pumping away constantly. The injectors, im not too sure where you could get these from. If your have a good understanding of mechanical engineering you may know how to extract these efficienty from a fuel injected engine. But thats just an idea. Apart from that you must work out what suitable volume combustion chamber is needed. Could be alot of maths in working that out and to tell you the truth i have no clue as to what you even need to take into concern in regards to that. I think you would need to know how much hot gasses are created so you can determine combustion chamber size. Remember equast gases will choke the combustion reaction if they dont escape but the injectors pumping in product fuels should compensate for this. The combustion chamber must also be equiped with an igniter system. I have heard of alcohol and petrol [not too sure what type but i would assume from the generalisation it refers to common car type fuels, but i dont know if these burn fast enough ] being used as fuel types. I could go on for ages my friend but it would take a long time... However hard it may sound this would make an excellent project. One which may produce excellent results. Nothing better than being proud for what you made. best of luck

Anthony

April 9th, 2002, 11:42 AM

I don't think liquid fueled rockets are really suitable for the kind of things we tend to do. I get the impression that liquid fueled motors have a much poorer power/weight ratio than solid motors. The fuel just doesn't seem to pack enough energy per unit weight. The motors are controlable though, you can turn them off/on and throttle them, something you can't do with a solid fueled motor, but in our applications I don't think this advantage outweighs the benefits.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Bitter

April 9th, 2002, 01:26 PM

Military missiles use solid propellent, so why argue with that ? They can't be wrong can they ?

RTC

April 9th, 2002, 01:29 PM

The V2 rocket's use h2o2.

Anthony

April 9th, 2002, 01:45 PM

I think cruise missiles (tomahawks) use some kind of gas turbine... with a solid booster to get them off of the launch pad anf up to a decent air speed though.

TariqMujahid

April 9th, 2002, 04:41 PM

I'm interested in Liquid-Fueled rockets not as a weapon; but simply for learning and trying something new. Maybe the military does use solid propellants, but that's not what i'm interested in. If i want solid propellants, i can buy rocket engines from the hobby store. Of course it is a difficult project and i doubt with my limited budget ($7 and a $20 gift certificate to a mall), i'll be building one any time soon. It's fun to talk about though, and give myself and some other good minds something to ponder about.

HOOPS123

April 9th, 2002, 05:48 PM

Check out project "R.U.S.H." http://www.rocketguy.com/oldhome.html

nbk2000

April 9th, 2002, 08:36 PM

Russian ICBMs use liquid fuels because they're more powerful and controlable. US ICBMs use solid fuel because they're less maintainence, and store for years. Cruise missles use solid-fuel booster rockets to get them up to flight speed before the gas turbine kicks in. I'd have to stick to solid fuel for any improvised weapon. Liquid propellants are dangerous.

cutefix

April 9th, 2002, 09:23 PM

The engine design for liquid fuel rockets is more sophisticated.It was very popular during the rocket development years after the second world war,as was led by von Braun in White Sands.However,for practical reasons,during the latter years,miniaturization of missile components,and improvement of guidance,favored the compactness of solid fueled rocket design.There were fewer accidents related to storing of hypergolic rocket fuels which led to deadly accidents that occured with the Titan liquid fueled rockets.previously.Even Russia spent so much time to "copy" the Minutemen ICBM solid fuel propulsion system.This development by the US made them superior in missile technology,that was envied by China and Russia. I think only aspiring nuclear capable countrries like India,Pakistan,and even North Korea still favores the obsolete technology of liquid fuel rocket propulsion. <small>[ April 09, 2002, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: cutefix ]

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 10:09 PM

Tariq, for a variation, you could have a go at a steam powered rocket. Can't remember if it was on the forum I saw some info, but the one I saw most detail on was powering a car. Have a search around, they are simple and powerful.

TariqMujahid

April 10th, 2002, 04:57 PM

Hydrogen Peroxide + Silver, from what i've heard, produces adequate amounts of steam for propulsion... What happens, is the reaction causes Oxygen to form and be expelled through the nozzle very quickly. At the same time, being an exothermic reaction, a lot of heat is developed and the H20 that is then in the combustion chamber is converted to steam and aids in the propulsion. Still, it requires the very pure H202, which can be hard to come by.

Anthony

April 10th, 2002, 07:15 PM

If you want steam propulsion but don't want to mess around with high conc H2O2, it can also be made from tap water :) You need a pressure vessel full of water and attached to the exhaust is a valve which can be opened remotely. You heat the water, possibly via an emersion element on board, or more simply (and lighter) with an external gas burner. Once the tank is pressurised and the water super-heated, you open the exhaust valve, the pressure in the tank drops rapidly and the water flash boils, shooting large amounts of steam out of the exhaust. Same sort of concept as an air/water rocket in that you leave everything on the ground. Range might well be quite limited though, but the fuel is cheap.

Arkangel

April 10th, 2002, 07:23 PM

A frangible disc is often the valve, located just inside the nozzle

BoB-

April 11th, 2002, 04:02 AM

Pyro valves are much simpler to design than frangible barrier valves, basically a small pyro charge slams a piston forward aligning the vent holes, opening the valve. Its intstantanious, reusable, and its what pro liquid rockets use. Heres some links for you; http://www.rocketryonline.com/ -Online rocket mag. http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/websites/rock.htm -rocketry webring. http://www.tripoli.org/ -Online model rocketry fanclub.

Azazel

April 11th, 2002, 09:36 AM

and plus why would a nation want to waste money on a weapon which can be oposed by a safer system, which has simpler parts, needs only maintenance on the warheads b/ c rocket body has expiry date, and is safer to store... i think a really awesome project would be to design a solid fuel rocket about the size of a car. The maths behind that would be awesome. If you managed to get it all right after all of the test flights [and thousands of dollars] im sure you would be quite proud. has anyone here come up with an idea to control a rocket from ground ??? i was thinking along the lines of model airplane r/c... im not too sure on the distance these things work on though... can anyone help me out here

nbk2000 The SALT treaties limited the number of ICBMs each country could have. The US missles have superior accuracy, so we could use smaller warheads.

April 11th, 2002, 01:57 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The russians weren't as accurate, so they needed larger warheads, which required more lift. That means liquid fuel rockets which have superior fuel weight/power ratios. Plus, they used larger missles so each one could carry more warheads. I thinks some of the SS-2x series carried almost 30 nukes each.

TariqMujahid

April 11th, 2002, 02:33 PM

To put any sort of guidance system onto a rocket is illegal in the US...however, no one here cares about that. =) The model airplane idea isn't a bad one; but you'd have to get the rocket aligned onto the target at the beginning of the flight so it doesn't drift out of range on you. To do this, you would simply attatch different servos (sp?) onto the fins of the rocket to guide it. The servos would be controlled by a remote control on the ground. Apparently, you can have servos that attatch video to it too...of course, this will cost money. One of the big problems with this though is keeping the rocket stable. The rocket may tend to twist, so that "UP" on your remote control is no longer "UP", etc. I've heard a suggestion from somewhere else of using a gyroscope to keep it stable? This is getting off topic though; i think it's worthy of a new forum post, provided it hasn't been mentioned before. We're talking about Rocket Guidance in a section about Liquid Rocket Fuels =).

BoB-

April 13th, 2002, 12:59 AM

If you've got a R/C model airplane, you dont need a missle, you've already got a stable guided aerial vehicle. The weak propeller that drives most of them could never carry an effective explosive charge, heres where a liquid fueled rocket comes in, it should serve as the main engine. In effect a mini cruise missle. It could also be launched straight up with the aid of a few model rocket engines.

Azazel

April 16th, 2002, 03:07 AM

yea but i aint bin laden man... i aint gona go arming an RC model plane with H.E... its too disrespectfull vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Guns for those under 18

View Full Version : Guns for those under 18 ImaPyro

Log in

September 1st, 2001, 09:42 AM

Do any of you know a good place to purchase weapons if you are under 18? Like online or something? I've been visiting these forums for a while, I just decided to register today http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

madog

September 1st, 2001, 09:57 AM

here is your 3 choices: 1. Buy one ilegaly from someone you know, (not off the internet!!)use cash. 2. Make a zip gun. 3. Convert a blank firer or deactivated gun. -----------------"True freedom is not without anarchy"

ImaPyro

September 1st, 2001, 11:58 AM

Damn, I was kinda hoping someone knew of some gunrunners or something. I know a drug dealer that will sell me his .32 Snub-nosed revolver for $30, but I want a pistol preferably. And I dont want to make a zip gun, those things are way too dangerous.

Maddoc

September 1st, 2001, 02:19 PM

IMAPYRO - So a revolver isnt a pistol then? ImaPyro wrote ---.32 Snub-nosed revolver for $30, but I want a pistol preferably. ----

AR-15 Man

September 1st, 2001, 02:25 PM

Some people consider Pistols to be autoloaders. These terms have been interchanged over the years. But expecting people to give you the name of a gun runner over the net is crazy. And if there was some site that sold guns illegaly to kids how long you think it would last? [This message has been edited by AR-15 Man (edited September 01, 2001).]

Mr Cool

September 1st, 2001, 05:00 PM

Buy the revolver!!!! OH MY GOD, IT'S ONLY $30!!!!!! JUST BUY IT!!!!

Victim

September 1st, 2001, 05:24 PM

Does anyone else smell bacon..? -----------------"Death, The End Of Hope, The Friend Of The Friendless..."

ImaPyro

September 1st, 2001, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by Victim: Does anyone else smell bacon..? I'm not a goddamn cop. Im 14 for crissakes.

madog

September 1st, 2001, 08:45 PM

BUY THE FRIGIN 30$ REVOLVER!! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MUCH GUNS COST NOWADAYS!! -----------------"True freedom is not without anarchy"

ImaPyro

September 1st, 2001, 09:27 PM

Heh, Oink Oink Oink....

I think I'll joint the rest of my kind and go roll in my own shit.

[This message has been edited by Maddoc (edited September 01, 2001).] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> W TF? Log in

View Full Version : WTF? ImaPyro

S e p t e m b e r 1 st, 2001, 10:50 PM

I m n o t a m o t h e r f u c k ing cop, alright? W TF do I need to do to prove Im not a fucking cop? Jesus christ. Fucking asshole m oderator.

ImaPyro

S e p t e m b e r 1 st, 2001, 11:03 PM

Alrig ht, sorry for calling the m o d e r a t o r a n a s s h o l e . I r e a lize that you all must be paranoid about th e pigs coming to this forum and cracking down on everything, but I assure you im n o t a c o p , p l e a s e d o n t e v e n m e n t i o n m e in the sam e sentance with those cocksu cking fudge-pack ers. Maybe m y m essage on getting guns if under 18 was too straight forward and m a d e i t s o u n d like a crackdown, Im new to these foru ms, cut m e a bre a k p l e a s e . I want som e g u n s b e c a u s e m y parents are those "anti-gun" type so I realize the only way to get them is either by making t h e m o r g o i n g through the black m arket. I also have the option of stealing them , but our gunshops in town all have a good chunk of employees and lots of security cams.

ImaPyro

S e p t e m b e r 1 st, 2001, 11:04 PM

I'll try to rem e m b e r n ot to ask about that kind of stuff if its goin g to get you all p aranoid and shit. I'll just ask som ewhere else. A n d y e s , I a m 14.

ALENGOSVIG1

S e p t e m b e r 1 st, 2001, 11:22 PM

The other thread got closed becuase it was a stupid question. not becuase m eglo mania thinks your a cop. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Cheap delay fuse Log in

View Full Version : Cheap delay fuse oODarkVisionsOo

April 5th, 2002, 02:56 PM

I just ran accross something interseting this moorring and I have being experimenting with diff ammoounts but basicly I took three fuses from some old(1987) fireworks I found in the barn and tried to make a little crater maker in a 35mm film can I took and crushed all the powder both propellent and stars and put them in the can and taped it up, but I wanted to make sure it would go off so I braided three fuse's together and they kpet coming undone so I put super glue all up and down the fuse waited for it to harden when out to light it and fter 2min the 5inch fuse quit burning only half way done where I had went over board. After further testing I found that a light amount applied to the fuse drasticaly added time to the burn rate form 1 sec per inch to almost 40 sec per inch. I just thought it might be helpfully if it is, or you try it and it works or doesnt please post your findings. Thanks J.

oODarkVisionsOo

April 5th, 2002, 03:07 PM

I just light it and it 1.48.12 to go and that was with a 5 inch fuse lightly dabbed all the way down with superglue *Nasty Smell* It did not blow but made a foot 3'6"solid shower that went from green to blue/green/blue I think I will try and layer the next one but I dont have a Digital camera but I will dig out the Poloroid and use the webcam if any one wants to see pics well Thanks J. <small>[ April 05, 2002, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: oODarkVisionsOo ]

Jack Ruby

April 5th, 2002, 05:15 PM

A Cratermaker, CO2 Bomb, Valcun Grenade, etc. Aren't made from Any thing but CO2 Powerlets(Usually 12g). Don't use the tissue Paper fuse like is used on Chinese Fircrackers for you devices. It burns to fast and is unreliable. The fact that you could make a "Noise Maker" from a film canister is not somthing I would Advertise. I will help you out. When using Plastic Casing(ie. Film Canisters) put some Tissue Paper in the Bottom; The you powder; your fusethen more tissue paper. Then put the lid on. Tape it up tightly with Electrical tape. Fuse Either make some or Buy Visco. It is not that hard to find. <small>[ April 05, 2002, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: Jack Ruby ]

Bitter

April 5th, 2002, 06:33 PM

Hahahahaha...I'd edit that 'plastic egg' thread if I were you, dark vision, or you're gonna get H.E.D. BTW, homemade fuses should be a no-no unless in a life-death situation.

nbk2000

April 5th, 2002, 10:29 PM

Too late for him. :D

Jack Ruby

April 6th, 2002, 12:15 AM

Bitter I disagree. I have made Homeade fyse many times. Once you get it right it is great. Not as good as the Visco but Work quite well. like everything it should all be practiced before hand that will make you more effective when you need to be. I have method I forget how I came across it but it makes a core burning fuse. You then coat with NC laquer and you are in business. I use Ping Pong Balls for my laquer for this. Why waste Smokeless.

BoB-

April 6th, 2002, 03:24 AM

Dark VisionsNot to insult, but several online dictionaries are available, and a simple proof-read would make you seem slightly more intelligent. http://www.dictionary.com There are even thesaurus's that are linked from this page.

nbk2000

April 6th, 2002, 03:48 AM

Bob, feel free to insult the idiot because he's now nothing more than a collection of randomized magnetic fields on the servers HDD. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Im provise d electrical weapons Log in

View Full Version : Improvised electrical weapons Azazel

April 9th, 2002, 06:49 AM

anyone devised anything which charges up capacitors or capacitor type projectiles which offer a decent shock and are then fired from s o m e k ind of weapon... ??? sound gay ? not too sure myself n ever eve r really thought o f anything like this before ... m y ideas are that the weapon has som e kind of battery or power source which charges up some type of capacitor able to hold a large charge... i think something of this sort exists in disposable cameras. i got shocked to this shit house once when i opened one up... so i figure why not m a k e s o m e k i n d o f p n e u m atic weapon which charges them and then shoots th e m a t a target [living of course] kind of like a stun gu n... what kind of cappacitor would i be looking at ??? how do you make your own capacitor. The simple design is basically 2 m etal plates close to each other but not touching. the plates are hooked up to some kind of power source creating + and - charge on the plates. when disconnector from the power source the capacitor holds that charge effe ctively. So... physics ppl... tell me how i can m a k e s o m e kind of missile shaped capacitor which could hold a large charge, large e n o u g h t o s t u n a n a n i m al. I g u e s s t h i s o n e s f o r p h y s i c s p e o p l e m ore than it is for m e... i havnt taken many physics classed b4. if im com pletely wrong plea se tell m e if i got it all wrong. thanx guys :confused:

Machiavelli

April 9th, 2002, 07:52 AM

About the subject of charging up capacitors by variable m eans to shock people, especially with disposable cameras, there was a thread a short while ago, http://www.roguesci.org/cgi-bin/ewforum /ultima tebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000341 please fucking search before asking will you? Now as far as projectiles go, it shouldn't be too difficult to fire charged up capacitors from a blowgun or som e i m p r o v i s e d breach loading toy. I f y o u w a n t e d t o s t u n s o m e o n e, you probably wouldn't use a capacitor as these will only give you a sm all shock and that's it, what you'd need is a stun gun projectile. Jaycor is developing such a thing to stun two-legged anim a l s : http://www.jaycor.com /eme/sticky.htm I'm sure this could be m initua rized, but I'm no expert on stunguns, maybe J can help you with this. Btw, anyone tested the effects of capacitor shocks on electronic equipment?

Azazel

April 9th, 2002, 08:05 AM

ya i checked them bu t this topic is abit m ore broad...discusses firing the projectile and devising a weapon which wou ld charge them before firing... thanx for the info though i appreciate it very much :)

J

April 9th, 2002, 01:55 PM

W hat are your objectives? Do you want to kill or simply hurt/annoy? You won't stun someo ne with a cap, you'll either kill or m omentarily hurt them d e p e n ding on how powerful the cap is. If you want to kill them, just use a gun. And you'll never make a hom emade cap that's anything like as good as what's needed for this purpose. T h e m a i n p r o b l e m I can see is turning a large cap into a good p rojectile. That's n ot really my field, perhaps som e o n e e l s e c a n help with that. You'll also need pointy barbed e lectrodes that will penetrate clothing and stick into skin. This would take some getting right, and I don't know how you'd safely test this. That Jaycor link is very interesting, I didn't know anyone was m aking such a device. A stungun co uld be m a d e t h a t s m all, but it would be difficult to im p r o v i s e . T h e m a i n p r o b l e m s are the pulse transfo rm e r a n d capacitor. Both are usually bulky, but I've seen comm ercial 50kV pulse transformers that are only 20m m x 5 0 m m (http:// www.global-com p o n e n t s . c o m / m ag/triggers.pdf). Unfortu nately, they won't sell/give me any because I don't live in the U S. They refered m e to the Chinese off-shoot, but the cunts didn 't even reply. Stabilising such a projectile would be difficult. A bullet has uniform density. This device wouldn't, since there are lots of individual com ponents inside. I think this would be your m ajor problem , rather than the circuitry. If it's for a 37m m calibre gun, y o u c o u l d t a k e a p a r t a s m a l l c o m m ercial stungun, use a different battery (it doesn't have to last that long), and change the PCB design to fit into your pro jectile. You could change som e of the com p o n e n t s a t t h e s a m e t i m e i f s m aller equiva lents were available. My advice is buy a taser! But if you're serious a bout building one, I'll help with any questions on th e electrical side.

Jack Ruby

April 9th, 2002, 03:47 PM

Stablizing projectiles is easier to do than most think. The m o s t c o m m on ways are : Fins(like on a dart or rocket) Spin ning(Like a rifle does to a bullet) Tassels(Creates resistance at the rear. To projectile takes the path of least resistent). If you don't under stand what I mean I can draw a picture for you and post it.

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 03:56 PM

The sticky shocker system is interestin g in the way it's fired, in that it uses a compressed gas-charged laun ch system . R e l a t e s a little to the link on air weapons in that respect. I'd be really interested to know how they fire this if it's from a " s t a n d a r d 40m m" weapon.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter nbk2000

April 9th, 2002, 08:39 PM

Alliant Techsystems Disorientation Device - 5.56 mm 1-(201)724-6053 A m m unition fired from an M16 rifle which upon im pact inflicts an electric shock which potentially causes disorientation. That's pretty tiny folks. And it'll only get sm alle r.

Azazel

April 11th, 2002, 09:39 AM

wow that pretty cool... cool crowd control device... it would rock to open fire on civilians with full auto and not actually harm anyone...

FragmentedSanity

April 20th, 2002, 03:39 PM

I think this would be an intere sting device to piss people off. for lethal results the cap would have to be fairly big and as said a gun would be easier - things might be interesting if som e o n e h a d a p a c e m a k e r - w o u l d m ake yet another interestign m unition for pnumatic cannon tho. but I like the idea of frying electrics with it better. shot at a TV antenna there m ig h t b e e n u g h p o w e r t o c a u s e d a m a g e t o t h e set. and J - would you rea lly need barbed tips? dosent the cap discharg comp letley as soon as the contact is m a d e ?

vulture

April 20th, 2002, 04:30 PM

How bout a dart fired from a crossbow with a cable to the high voltage de vice you're using? This wo uld ofcourse only work for short distances, but then you won't have to worry about capacitor size. Also, you can deliver m ultiple shocks once the target has been hit.

J

April 20th, 2002, 05:11 PM

The speed at which the cap discharges is propo rtional to the resistance of the load. IIRC, the time it takes (seconds) to discharge to ~70% of it's capacity is 0.69(RC ), where R = resistance of load (Ohm s ) a n d C = c a p a c i t a n c e ( F a r a d s ) . I m a y h a v e got this sligh tly wrong, I can't be bothered to look it up. But anyway, a cap fired at som eone will likely b ounce off quickly, especia lly when clothing com es into play. So they won't get the full charge. I've just had an idea for an im provised taser that doesn't use barbs. Instead, two velcro p ads could be used, with a conductor behind each one. They would have to be held apart obviously. The disadvantage is that the target can easily pull th e electrodes off, but if the shock's sufficiently powerful then they'd have to act quickly.

mrloud

April 21st, 2002, 07:12 AM

I h a v e h e a r d of 2 parallel lasers a few centim etres apart being used to ionise the air between a gu n and the target. The idea is that a high voltage is applied between the ionised paths the lasers create in order to 'zap' whatever you point the gun at. I suspect any such device that was built was high ly experimental and didn't work properly. Not to me ntion the cost of tens of thousands of dollars. But it gives me an idea. Two supersoakers from the toy store could be m ounted together and filled with a conductive solution. Apply a high voltage between the resevoirs and squirt the target with both guns. A pair of guns tha t shoot a thick stream of water would be more effective in providing a go od electrical conn ection between the gun and the ta rget. It would pro bably still only be any good over short d istances. Like a Kwik-E-Mart counter. It would also give you the elem ent of surprise in a hold up. The victim, u pon seeing your Super-Soaker contraption with connecting wires and flashing lights, will either: A) Fall down laughing or B) Hand over the cash while thinking "W hat sort of twisted freak is this guy?!?!? I Better do what he says" o r C) T ell you to "Fuck off and stop wasting my time!". In which case you ca n g i v e h i m a h o s i n g s o m ewhere sensitive to show h im the error of his ways. Like in the face and neck. W hen you're developing any sort of electrical weapon you are going to need som ething to test it on. Try the neighbours cat (or dog if you are a cat p erson). If your weapon is designed to be fatal to the person o n t h e b u s i n e s s e n d , y o u m i g h t n e e d t o invest in the time to go and steal some kids gerbils/guinea pigs and start breeding your own lab a nim als. But thats another topic.

J

April 21st, 2002, 07:26 AM

T h e m a i n p r o b l e m with that is that the water streams break up into droplets very quickly. You would need some kind of agent a d d e d t o t h e water to prevent this. Any ideas? And testing it on the cat is a bad idea, because they hate water anyway so you'll have no idea whether it's the current or water p i s s i n g t h e m off :D My choice of test animal would be a cow. They're big, so there's no chance of killing it (ele ctric shock device s a re used to control them anyway - cattle p rods!), a nd you'd be able to tell if it was sim ply the water or the current by the way it m oved.

BrAiNFeVeR

April 21st, 2002, 11:16 AM

I don't think this would work very well. a few con's: -water breaks down when high current flows through, thus extra interuption of the water beam -water (or an y liquid for that m atter) tends to g et on your own hands too ... 8 0 % H 2 O + 10% H2SO4 + 10% plasticizer m ight do the trick.

Machiavelli

April 21st, 2002, 07:17 PM

Feels like history repeating... W ell, some time ago, people were discussing the subject of electrified water cannons, I believe the topic was called "death ray" or som ething like tha t. W e l l p e o p l e h a d a lot unpractica l ideas, a lot of "this might work, I've seen this in a m ovie, this would

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

be kewl" kinda stuff. Then alo n g c a m e lil m ac with som e practical ideas and som e b a c k g r o u n d a n d s u d d e n l y t h e d i s c u s s i o n stop p e d f o r s o m e s t r a n g e r e a s o n . Anyway, I'll try to put together m y ideas from b ack then . T h e b a s i c i d e a c a m e f r o m Jaycor again, if som e o f y o u h a d r e a d about the sticky shocker you should have noticed their other toy: http://www.jaycor.com /eme/watcan.htm "An electrified conductive fluid is ejected from a gun at high velo city, m aking contact with stationary or moving targe ts. The single stream of fluid delivers a high-voltage pulse capable of delivering a shock even through thick protective cloth ing." "The wireless stun gun delivers a high-pressure saline solution with additives to m i n i m i z e t h e b r e a k u p o f t h e b e a m into droplets, thereby m a x i m i z i n g r a n g e . R a n g e s o f u p t o 2 0 f e e t h a ve been demonstrated, while ranges of up to 100 feet or m o r e are believed to be feasible with improved nozzles and fluids." "A high-volta ge electrical signal with low current is generated in a com pact electronic package with 9-volt batteries. T h e im p e d a n c e o f the water stream is sufficiently lo w that it cannot b e relied on to lim it current to sure-safe levels; consequently current-lim iting resistors are u sed to lim it currents to sure-safe levels. A single stream is used to d eliver the current. The return path from the target is through the capacitive im p e d a n c e b e t w e e n t h e g u n a n d t h e target." My suggestions: -play around with a saturated NaCl solution and different thickeners (soluable starch, agar, gelatin, alginates, etc) whether you can obtain a suitable liquid -use a plastic tank system thats pressurized with eg a small com pressor and finish it up with an im provised m etallic nozzle, m aybe a syringe needle to wh ich you can hook up a stu n g u n , t h e o t h e r p o l e o f t h e s t u n g u n g o e s t o g r o u n d -post test results instead of m ore idea s, forumites tend to com e up with a lot of ideas but don't follow up o n t h e m

vulture

April 22nd, 2002, 01:44 PM

There are m olecules which loa d up on static because of the friction with e achother. If you could fire them in a way they would bounce alot against eachother, they would load up and discharge if they hit some thing. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Rearward-firing missile Log in

View Full Version : Rearward-firing missile inferno

April 14th, 2002, 05:21 AM

I TAKE NO RESPONISBILITY FOR ANYTHING ANYONE DOES WITH THIS INFO, AND ANYONE WHO USES IT FOR AN AGGRESSIVE PERSON IS A SICK AND TWISTED INDIVIDUAL AND SHOULD BE COMMITTED IMMEDIATELY. IF YOU HURT/KILL YOURSELF MAKING THIS DONT BLAME ME, I TAKE NO RESPONIBILITY. THIS IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. (im paranoid) Something i saw on the news recently made me think about a weapon that could have numerous uses. I wont go into them here, im sure youll figure them out. In riots (this is where i got the idea) people often take cover behind cars, bins etc, when the mob starts throwing molotov cocktails, rocks, etc. This can include police. These people are hard to hurt in any way, besides an accurate throw from a molotov cocktail or the like. Here is my idea to counter act this. What inspired this idea, was a clip i saw from ireland a few days ago. It was a camera crew sheltered (with police) behind a car. A home-made rocket was fired about 4 metres over their head and exploded with a flash behind them. While a lucky/well aimed shot might do "damage" to people behind things, its not feasible to fire 10 shots at people hoping for a lucky shot. So here is my idea. My simply taping shotgun shells to the front of a rocket, and adding tacks to the primers, you could have an effective impact sensitive weapon that could be aimed at a hard surface behind a barricaded target, which would then fire the shells backwards. Im sure this idea, or one like it, has been conceived or listed before, but this is just my idea of it. The shells would be taped to the end of a D engine, with the shells taped/glued around the front, and the tacks taped on to the shells. When the tacks hit, it fires behind , with a high likeliness of hitting the target/s. The only precaution would be to make sure you are in cover before the weapon hits, to avoid shooting yourself.

J

April 14th, 2002, 05:46 AM

A high explosive warhead filled with BB's will do the same thing, and be a lot more powerful. A shotgun shell exploding on its own won't have much power beyond several meters (I'd guess, I've never tested this out ), unless you used a short barrel.

Azazel

April 14th, 2002, 10:22 AM

a slight [ i add slight ] adjustment may need to be made... the shottgun shells have that plastics cup wadding shite inside which holds all of the shots together as they are thrown out of the barrel. Im not too sure how much distance these buggers have to travel until it actually splits open in the air and scatters the shots... but if you want to harm someone behind something you would need to shoot the mongrel fairly close to the target area to be effective because acuracy is greatly decreased. The chance of tightly grouped shots hitting the targets may not be as high compared to a shotshell which doesnt have the side bits on the plastic wadding. this way the shots are dispersed as soon as they leave the shot, giving a wider field of damage and further more increasing your chance of hitting the target. if i were to make such an improvised weapon i would try to make some kind of claymore device rather than use shotshells. i just get a feeling that a shotshell wouldnt do enough damage. A more ideal weapon in my opinion would be to create a delayed explosion through the means of shortening the burn time on the estes D engine... work out how much powder be removed from the back in order to cover say 70 meters... that way as soon as 70 m is covered the powder has reached a heat sensative primary explosive which then sets of your secondary High explosive... If the target is closer than the required distance fire the rocket at an angle... kinda like that pythagorarse theorum shite [sorry bout spelling and language] i got a question dude.... i dont know if you know this already BUT its very hard to get a hobby engine to fly horizontaly...they were designed for vertical flight... so if you want to make a Surface to air your fine... but surface to surface will be a challenge... before you go making shottgun shell rockets i would try to work out this little problem otherwise you might find that your rockets land 5 meters in front of you... with a shottgun shell aimed right at you !!! be carefull my friend :)

Anthony

April 14th, 2002, 10:39 AM

If we're talking 70m, why not just a frag grenade? A stick grenade would be easier if you're having trouble covering the distance.

DBSP

April 14th, 2002, 10:46 AM

Please forget the shotgun shell, it wont do shit, the shots will just drop out of the shell unless confined in a pipe, hmm maby a bit to heavy for a rocket to carry huh.

nbk2000

April 14th, 2002, 11:15 AM

I see two mods who've let this tripe post run on for too long. End topic. And dude, we don't do bullshit disclaimers here, alright? This is just a rocket propelled variation on the "nutbuster" idea from the PMJB book. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> C annons Log in

View Full Version : Cannons Monkeyman666

S e p t e m b e r 2 nd, 2001, 01:06 AM

I a m in the process o f m a k i n g a s m a l l . 5 0 c a n n o n . I a m going to shape it a little in a m atal lathe m aking it more realistic. Has a n y o n e o n h e r e e v e r m a d e o n e ? I a m w o n d e r i n g h o w m uch powder to use, It doesn't need to be able to hurl a ball 3 m iles. Bein g it is a .50 caliber I am making it about 2 inches in diam eter. Its about a foot and a half long. I will be using a 1/2 inch titanium drill bit in a drill press. -----------------Monkeym an

Anthony

September 2 nd, 2001, 08:50 PM

T h a t ' s g o i n g t o h a v e t o b e a d a m n l o n g drill bit...

Kdogg

S e p t e m b e r 3 rd, 2001, 01:17 AM

It is. -----------------Monkeym an

SMA G 12B/E5

S e p t e m b e r 2 1st, 2001, 12:15 AM

Y o u m e n t i o n e d s h a p i n g t h e c a n n o n i n a l a t h e . W hy not drill the device in the lathe, assuring a m ore likely chance of a concentric bo re.

Agent Blak

S e p t e m b e r 2 1st, 2001, 10:49 AM

Let m e get this straig h t y o u a r e g o i n g t o m a k e a . 5 0 c a l cannon that is 2" in Diameter. so you will have a wall thickness of .750 +/- .015. what type of metal are you going to use for this? High Carbon Steel, Mild, Cold rolled, hot rolled, Al, Bronze, Brass... W hat do you plan on using for a propellent. -----------------A wise man once said : "...T here Will Be No Stand O ff At High Noon ... Shoot'em I n T h e B a c k And, Shoot'em I n T h e D a r k " Agent Blak-------OUT!!

EventHorizon

S e p t e m b e r 2 1st, 2001, 09:46 PM

I k n o w s o m e one who made ju st a cannon, .50cal and all. I was an absolute m asterpeice!!!! He sca led it down from replica c o n f e d e r a t e p l a n s h e ' d f o u n d s o m ewhere I think. Even painted it the rigth color and m a d e t h e s p o k e w h e e l s . T h e t h i n g w a s gorgeous. Printed a nice group at 25yds too. Used FFFg powder and IIRC ~60grains. Its was a bronze barrel too btw. ------------------cha n c e f a v o r s a p r e p a r e d m i n d P G P I D 0 x 1 4 7 C EF54 vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Solid Fuel Rockets Log in

View Full Version : Solid Fuel Rockets Azazel

April 16th, 2002, 09:54 AM

I dunno what section to put this under.... I.W or L.E ... anyways its in here so what does it matter... what i want to find is a compolation of known solid fuels for rockets... so far i know of Amonpulver, Estes rocket powder [unsure of what it actually is] could anybody here please enlighten me on this subject... and yes this may have been discussed in some other msg board, but then hasnt half of the H.E , L.E and E.P sections been over the same material... just a re-cap my friend has made his own powders before but he simply refused to tell me how he made it... it worked fine... his rockets were quite impressive and the powder seemed to be of a high standard. Also... does anyone know what i could do to find out the height reached by the rocket at its apogee, and possibly determine velocities... is there some kind of small mechanism i can put in the nozzle/head of the rocket to determine the height reached... if i can determine approx. values for this i can then work out velocity and all that shite... i wana compile some work together with notes on powder types, velocities and heights obtained for particular powers in relation to different weights of the rocket etc etc... this way everyone on here could determine what is a suitable fuel for a solid fuel rocket for their particular experiments. Any information regarding powder compositions or height measuring devices will be greatly appreciated. NOTE - i have some kind of ancient device to determine the height, but im not too sure on accuracy. Its a triangle shaped thing which sits on the ground and yer does something... more on that later... :( :confused: <small>[ April 16, 2002, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: Azazel ]

Zambosan

April 16th, 2002, 01:58 PM

You can buy all sorts of data acquisition boards for high-power rocketry, including altimeters, accelerometers, and even miniature cameras. Search around for rocketry club pages & suppliers. The device you're referring to is most likely a sextant. You can use it to determine the angle between the horizon and the apogee of the rocket. You then make the assumption that the rocket went straight up (or you figure in the estimated drift), and use the angle and the distance between you and the launch site to determine the vertical distance: height = (distance to site * tan(angle of inclination). Crude, but it works pretty well when you have decent distances involved, as that tends to minimize the % impact of any error.

Arkangel

April 16th, 2002, 02:07 PM

I hate to be petulant, but there is so much information on rocketry on the web - sooooooo much. Also, you need to kick this "friend" up the arse - how does he expect you to have rocket duels if you can't get one to work? To measure the height, you need some geometry (it's a lot easier). HAve a friend 500m away measure the angle the rocket reaches and it should be simple to work out the height! :p

xoo1246

April 16th, 2002, 02:09 PM

If you know the angle from your rocket to the ground and the distance between where you measure the angle to the launch site you could calculate the aprox. height(if the rocket flies straight up). This is only one of the sites out there: http://nakka-rocketry.net/ Search and you'll find hundred of other good pages, covering everything you ever wanted to know. Edit: You post too fast for me! <small>[ April 16, 2002, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

Cricket

April 16th, 2002, 09:22 PM

I heard that S=1/2AT squared (don't know how to make the little exponents). S=Altitude, A=32 (gravity), and T= the time it took to fall. The fall time is, of course, if you don't have a parachute and begins at the apogee. So lets say I launched one that fell for 17 seconds. 17 squared = 289, times 32 = 9248, divided by 2 = 4624. This is in feet by the way. 5280 feet in a mile. And you can order an altimeter from www.pyrotek.org for 90 USD's. It will let you seclect the ejection delay in incriments of 4 seconds (I think) and up to 12 seconds. Sounds fancy, but before I get one I will have to prove to myself that I have a reliable parachute (90 dollars is a lot to me)! Also, to The entire Forum, my cousin has recently bought the HRP guide thing from Pyrotek. HIGH POWER ROCKETRY - COMBO PACK You get a beautifully printed fully illustrated 160 page book which includes lots of photos. You receive a video so you can see the motors being cast and assembled right before your eyes! "TEST SHOTS, HIGH POWERED LAUNCHES - record altitude flights by amateurs. The tape is awesome! Also included is a software package for your computer that has everything you ever wanted to know about rockets - propellant formulas, how to design your own motors from scratch, figure out center of gravity, static and dynamic centers of pressure that will insure your rockets will fly straight - So much included we can't list it all here. If your not into designing things by yourself don't worry many proven motors and model rockets designs are included in the book - so you know they'll work the first time." "ROCKET ALTIMITER (COMPLETED UNIT) User can set to fire main parachute at apogee (peak altitude User can set to fire a small drogue chute at apogee with a backup if necessary User can set to fire main chute at apogee with a backup if necessary User programmable Mach flight inhibit timer (switch selectable to 4, 8 and 12 second delays) Reports peak altitude - accurate to the foot upon recovery Ejection charge continuity verification before flight Igniter test mode to pre-test and pre-fire on ground before flight Operational status LED indicator - lets you know which mode the altimeter is set for Surface mounted parts on a preprinted circuit board - very compact - ready to install in your rocket. All you need is a 9 volt battery and electric igniter. Ship wt.1 lbs." 70 USD's, sounds worth it. Anyway, I will be there in a little over a month so I can burn the CD, copy the tape and I don't know what do do with the book except read it. And I have seen a rocket at my school where the nosecone has a little lump in it and it had a camera in there. Really cool. I can't remember the name now so I will tell you tomorrow. I think it had an X in it. Well good luck and I am sure you know this but never use chlorates (well if you wanna keep your launch rod/pad ). Bye. <small>[ April 16, 2002, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: Cricket ]

BoB-

April 17th, 2002, 03:19 AM

You can easilly predict the max altitude of your rocket, but it will take sophisticated measuring equipment to measure the exact area of your rocket at all points, so instead, grab a fat straw, and a protractor. This is probably what the people above are talking about. Attach the straw to the top of the protractor with lots of tape, try to make it as straight and paralell with the protractor as possible.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/5421/protract.jpg (copy and paste link) Place a 20cm string through a hole just like in the picture, tie it to itself then tape the string to the back of the protractor. If theres no hole, just lay the string flat against the protractor (even with 90deg.) and try to tape it as neatly as possible. At the other end of the string tie a washer of a decent size (I used 1/2") then tape the washer to the string securely. If you intend to use a high powered rocket, and are assuming it will go very high, you could also attach the protractor to a zoom lens from a camera, or a rifle scope, or a monocle. First measure the baseline distance, this is the distance between the person holding the altitude measuring device, and the launcher. Now Follow a test rocket of the exact same proportions/weight up into the sky as its launched, keeping the rockets nose sighted in the straw. When its about to flip over, it has reached its peak altitude, hold the string against the protractor exactly where it is at this moment, record this angle, then subtract from 90deg. Okay, now that you've lauched the rocket, and recorded its angualr ditance (the protractor deal), and you know the baseline distance, you're ready to calculate its height. Height = B x TAD Or Height = Baseline x tangent of angular distance Example; Baseline = 200ft Angular distance = 70deg. tangent of 70deg. = 2.75 So; height = B x TAD, or heigth equals 200ft. x 2.75 height = 550ft. To find the tangent of angular distance, use a calculater, or use this plagarized graph from Estes; http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/5421/tabletang.jpg So in other words, assuming you have picture perfect 90deg. flight, and you are standing 200ft. away, the distance from the launcher to the rocket, is its height, and you observing this rocket from a baseline of 200ft. forms a triangle of sight, which can be measured. And since Velocity = Acceleration/distance traveled you can also determine the speed of the rocket fairly easilly. <small>[ April 17, 2002, 02:26 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Azazel

April 17th, 2002, 07:19 AM

that device rules...thanx guys :)

Cricket

April 17th, 2002, 06:57 PM

Here, this looks good. http://www.hpr.org.uk/science/qref.htm

HOOPS123

April 21st, 2002, 02:29 PM

Estes Rocket fuel is pressed BP. My friends and I are working on a rocket as we speak. After doing quite a few burn rate tests with KN03 and NaN03 oxidisers we found that a 1-1-1 (KN03/Sucrose/Sulfur) burns fastest for KN03 based and a 1-2 (NaN03/Sucrose) burns fastest for NaN03 based. Out of the two the 1-2 NaN03 based burnt the fastest. Hopefully in a few days we can finish a rocket so I can post some results.

EP

April 21st, 2002, 03:23 PM

Here is a large list of pyrotechnic rocket comps: http://www.geocities.com/extremepyro2/compoDB.html#chapter1

HOOPS123

April 24th, 2002, 11:24 PM

I just finished the engine of my rocket. Its 1-2 NaN03/Sucrose. I mixed it with 91% alchohol and fit it into a 1'' Diameter by 1' long pvc pipe. Im planning on just attaching the wings to the engine the first time, just because im testing more the mixure than the Design. The core is 3/16 ''. Photo(s) *More in the next few days* http://www.villagephotos.com/pubbrowse.asp? selected=35959 UPDATE: Ive uploaded the final product. For scale Ive placed a quarter in most of the pictures. The other picture is of my launch equipment. <small>[ April 26, 2002, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: HOOPS123 ]

randomquestion

May 22nd, 2002, 11:33 PM

The pics look extremely similar to what im making -- I look forward to seeing the rest of the pictures -- damn I wish I had a digital camera...

xoo1246

May 25th, 2002, 04:55 AM

I'm doing some testing with BP rockets currently, thinking of moving on to some Ammonium perchlorate/PVC/Al rockets later.

HOOPS123

May 25th, 2002, 06:07 PM

Today I bought a little cheap stove so I can use the Nakka Method. The other method failed terribly

Sparky

May 25th, 2002, 10:41 PM

When you guys make rockets you might want to try spinning ones. They are called "stinger missiles". They are like a normal rocket motor but usually shorter. They have an extra nozzle in the side of the rocket to make it spin and provide stability. They go very straight and far. Dan Williams has a good procedure for making them on his site. I dreamt I used rammed ball milled meal powder added to KNO3/sucrose as the grain and it worked very well. I don't like using melted sucrose/kno3 because it goes bad quickly and is hard to pour into small rockets. Even kno3/dextrose (dextrose is used in beer making) is hard to pour and burns slower but it does keep better. As for rocket fuels, the space shuttle uses ammonium perchlorate/aluminum and something -butadine (polyisobutadine?) as a binder. When I dream of making rammed black powder rockets, I have only had success with them without nozzles and of course with a core. There are zinc sulfur rockets that some people like. Some people even make H3 rockets (potassium perchlorate and charcoal I think)! Look for the "comp-db.html" that some people have on their sites (I think practical pyrotechnics has it). I think it was Noltair who did some great work on smokless powder rockets.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Try signing up at passfire, if you search google in rec.pyrotechnics then you will be able to find information for a guest account. It has a number of formulas for drivers and I think rockets too. <small>[ May 25, 2002, 09:45 PM: Message edited by: Sparky ]

xoo1246

May 26th, 2002, 05:25 AM

Since no-one seems to notice my post in "rockets", I'll post it here instead: I have been experimenting with small BP rockets for a while. Core burners in plastic pipe with PVC nozzles. Since I have access to ammonium perchlorate(AP in this post) I'm planing to test a AP/Al/PVC engine when I get my ball mill and some milling media. Dhzugasvili: When you casted your engines, how do you avoid bubbles in the cast? Here is some pictures of a protype nozzle, it should be longer and maybe contain some internal steel parts in the core to avoid too heavy nozzle erosion. Maybe one could add Al (or dry, milled clay powder) to the PVC in the nozzle to make it more heat tolerant, what do you think? Here are the pictures: http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/nozzle01.jpg http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/nozzle02.jpg http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/nozzle03.jpg

10fingers

May 28th, 2002, 11:11 PM

Has anyone got a hold of the formula for the HTPB/ammonium nitrate rocket motors that Cricket mentioned above? I've got the ingredients but I need the formula. If anyone has it I would appreciate it they would post the info. Thanx

Cricket

May 29th, 2002, 06:02 PM

I can call my cousin and ask what all the book and CD says. He is never home, but I can get to him somehow. I may also need to include the way to make it, like how to mix it all up. I'll see what I can do. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> pirotechman Log in

View Full Version : pirotechman pirotechman

September 2 nd, 2001, 05:35 PM

Sehen Sie sich m eine W a f e : http://republika.pl/pirotechm an/film /sam ochod.avi Auf diesem Film schiese ich in Auto. Ich bin Diplom insprengingenieur. Ich wohne in Polen. Mit freundlichen Grussen. AREK http://pirotechman.republika.pl

kingspaz

September 2 nd, 2001, 05:57 PM

FUCK OFF!! if you can 't speak english why post in an english speaking forum ?

Rhadon

September 2 nd, 2001, 07:53 PM

I will translate for you what pirotechma n said: ------This is my weapon: http://republika.pl/pirotechm an/film /sam ochod.avi In this clip I'm shooting a car. About m yself: I'm a q u a l i f i e d e x p l o s i v e s e n g i n e e r . Greets, AR EK http://pirotechman.republika.pl/ ------P l e a s e d o n ' t f l a m e h i m anym ore. He didn't know that foreign languages aren't allowed on The Forum , and he didn't understand that you told him to stop it. I sent him a m ail, so this problem s h o u l d b e s o l v e d . T h a n k y o u .

Anthony

September 2 nd, 2001, 08:18 PM

Thankyou Rhadon I m ust agree, the rules need updating to include such matters a s English only. The guy wasn't to know.

kingspaz

September 2 nd, 2001, 08:35 PM

i see now. sorry pirotechman i didn't realise you couldn't speak any english at all. thanks for the video though. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Me is back! Log in

View Full Version : Me is back! Igenx

April 18th, 2002, 01:38 PM

Hey all... Know it's be en a while since I posted (since before the move) but I'm back and kicking. My sched u l e h a s b e e n a b i t c h t h i s s e m e s t e r , t o o m a n y c l a s s e s a n d d i s c u s s i o n b o a r d s f o r o n e o f m y c l a s s e s . D o h a ve two questions to ask that have come up since I was here last. How long of a le ngth of pipe (1 1/4 in) is needed to m a k e t h e b a r r e l s l e e v e o n a S t e n M k I I I ? Nothing I've seen for the Mk III has that piece of info a nd I wan t t o g e t t h e r i g h t l e n g t h . A l s o d o e s a n y o n e h a v e a g o o d p l a c e to find plans for silencers? I rebuilt a nice old rife from the Korean war (7 . 6 2 x 5 4 M 1 ) b u t t h e t h i n g s o u n d s l i k e a d a m n c a n n o n since I shortened the barrel. Also not quite sure how I'd b e a b l e t o m ount a silencer if I chose to, can't thread the b arrel so best I would be able to do is a pressure sleeve clam ped on it.

Azazel

April 19th, 2002, 09:36 AM

welcom e back igenx... i have a CD com piled with all kinds of files i have collected on vario us topics related to things spoken of in the forum . I have a section on this CD of m ine based on silencers/suppresors ... if you want i can em ail it to you... m m m m m m is that ok ? I also have sten plans... not too sure if they have what you want but i can send u those too... Its in pdf form at... :)

Igenx

April 19th, 2002, 02:19 PM

k... C reated an accou nt to get stuff fro m here sent to. Should be safe to use, didn't require a ny other email to s e t u p a n d I h a d m y add ress run through a proxy to set it up. Plus a few m ore things.... :) a u t o 3 4 4 1 7 8 @ h u s h m ail.com I already have the usual copy of Sten plans running aro u n d o n t h e n e t . M k I I n o t M k I I I . I p i c k e d u p t h e p a r t s o n t h e c h e a p and figured I'd play around with them . Just need the overall length of the sleeve, template for the cuts would be nice to but I d o h a v e t h e m achinists diagrams. Just don't know m uch about them . Definitely want the silencer stuff.

BoB-

April 20th, 2002, 02:47 AM

O n " m y f r i e n d s " d e s i g n , t h e s l e e v e i s t h e s a m e length as the barell.

Azazel

April 26th, 2002, 11:15 AM

ok dude i sent u the silencer stuff i did nt send u the Sten pdf tho because you probably already have it. enjoy the reading m aterial d u d e : ) vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Possible airgun conversion Log in

View Full Version : Possible airgun conversion HMTD Factory

September 2nd, 2001, 05:35 PM

There was this thing called "caseless .22" developed and maketed(now discontinued) by Daisy(the airgun company). I saw a few brick still in wrap in a gun show last year, didn't buy something I don't know yet could not examine closely(and it is pricy too). The caseless .22 is the only commercial caseless ammo ever marketed. The caseless .22 has no priming compound but it is fired in a special airgun(now discontinued) that uses a spring piston; the piston compresses and heats up the air, the air shoot through a tiny hole in the chamber, ignites the propellant. The caseless ammo is easy to improvise (smokeless, acetone, lead balls, doesn't need to be .22cal). Without a traditional mechanical firing system, there is less modification to worry about. IMO the gun can be converted with a lathe : a recess for cartridge groove, a chamber reaming job, and one or more air channel(s) on the chamber wall.

zaibatsu

September 2nd, 2001, 07:22 PM

But surely you could just use a smokeless blank instead, just make the hole at the breech wide enough to take one and then attatch a .22 cal (or whatever) ball to it, then mount a firing pin system to the air port of the airgun, then when the piston was released, the compressed air would push the pin forwards quickly enough to hit the primer, setting it off. However, you'd have to have some small holes to let air leak out, so that the piston wouldn't have too great a bounce.

Anthony

September 2nd, 2001, 08:23 PM

The beauty of using caseless ammo is that the gun requires no modification. Which means less work and also won't arouse suspicion if viewed/handled by your average cop (person to most likely catch you using it, or if it's found in your home during a search). Nice idea, just gel some NC with acetone and press it into the skirt of the pellet.

twinkle

September 3rd, 2001, 05:27 AM

I assume that the compression of such a special airgun is probably higher then a normal airgun to ignite this caseless ammo but what you could do is adding some drops of ether into the "air chamber" long ago they sold special ether "injectors" sort of hypodermic syringe which you could attached to the airgun . It let your airgun shoots almost as hard as a normal .22 only the lifetime of the gun is shortened while you burn the oil as well in the chamber(cylinder) I think that it would certainly work to ignite some ammo in the barrel but I think that you have to reinforce the barrel to for this.( also in the past the tiny vent whole of he chamber to the barrel was in a straight line nowadays this tiny vent whole is in an angle from the barrel to the chamber so putting an firing pin through it won't work.) what also might be of interest is they sell special airgun ammo which consist of a hard steel ball which is in a plastic"shell" they are sold in .17(4.5 ) as well as .22 (5.5) nice for armor piercing ammo

zaibatsu

September 3rd, 2001, 03:47 PM

Adding some kinds of oil INTO the compression chamber (or whatever its called) can result in detonation, or so I am told, which gives enough energy to actually re cock the rifle, bends out the compression chamber, and fucks up the main spring. However, dieseling happens in practically EVERY air rifle, and adding more oil may just result in a badly firing rifle, whats power without accuracy? Pellets start moving before the piston has finished its stroke, this may be something to think of. You can get an oil dropper from companies such as Maplin and RS Electronics that could also be used. The airgun ammo you are talking about (twinkle) is known in the UK as Champion Fireball, and known to ricochet. Try Dynamics, they are made of a tin alloy, and as such are harder than lead, but lots of people don't like them. I do understand your point though anthony, but some coppers don't even know that theres a power limit for airguns... Gotta add that much of what I've posted comes from a book... [This message has been edited by zaibatsu (edited September 03, 2001).]

twinkle

September 3rd, 2001, 04:50 PM

the "ether injector" I was speaking of was a factory made thing , but it is all long ago and in those days there was no limit to air-rifle power you even had these pump-up guns which were very powerful when you used the 12 strokes it could pump but I agree the newer guns has limited power and yes you can damage (or better will damage) an airgun in this way ,I also agree with you that this steel ammo can ricochet they are very light of weight I have not thought of that . but one could made a sabot with a heavier (longer) steel "slug" this way wit ha plastic coating

era5or

September 3rd, 2001, 06:01 PM

The factory was Weihrauch/Beeman, the rifle was called HW35 with Barakuda System. The modification was made by Barakuda-Gesellschaft Hamburg. The HW "Barakuda" gun used small glass ampules of ether which were crushed into the auxiliary cyliner. Pretty safe. The HW "Barakuda" pellet, sold also as a Beeman under a different name, was developed to handle the high energy of this gun. It is basically a common spring-piston gun with the add-on chamber.

[This message has been edited by era5or (edited September 03, 2001).]

zaibatsu

September 3rd, 2001, 06:29 PM

Ah, the effects I was describing were on a normal rifle, not built to operate in that matter. Anyway, could be interesting, but homemade methods of production seem pointless if shot at a long range, I doubt they'd be accurate enough. But close range work could be promising, all depends on how accurate you can make them.

Anthony

September 3rd, 2001, 07:10 PM

A normal spring/piston will certainly ignite the NC on a normal firing cycle - it will also ignite all but high temperature lubricants. A small amount of dieseling is essential for a springer to fire properly - they won't work properly in an inert atmosphere. A gun dieseling excessively tends to be innacurate and damages the seals. A fixed barrel underlever gun may be best for such a conversion as there is no danger of the breach flying open.

twinkle

September 4th, 2001, 10:28 AM

Era5or is right about the factory I know mine was also Weihrauch . In that time you only had normal common oil for lubricating but nowadays you also have teflon lubrication and this can hold temperatures up to 300 C fo short times so maybe when a normal airgun is lubricated with teflon this can be done to though a special designed gun for it would be better

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter BoB-

September 4th, 2001, 06:02 PM

There isnt a maximun power level for airguns in the US, the manufactuers simply changed the recommended amount of pumps to 10. I have pumped my Daisy rifle 23 times, and the pointed feild pellet went completly through my pellet trap.

HMTD Factory

September 4th, 2001, 11:11 PM

Looks like I have to give serious thoughts about going to a deer hunt with a Daisy pump riflehttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

zaibatsu

September 5th, 2001, 02:40 PM

They used to have rifles in the region of 1000ftlb which were pumped thousands of times (by the servants of course http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif) and they would hunt boar with that. Gary (?) Barnes does high power large calibre air rifles in the US, only in the region of around 500ftlb, and PCP. In britain you're talking about Stalker rifles, up to around 300ftlb, and about 6 shots per charge. Some people use the 100ftlb models for shooting foxes. It'd be better for consisitency if airgun manufacturers in the US made a pressure release valve, so that at a certain pressure it wouldn't hold anymore air. Then, you could make sure that you didn't put any more air in. -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

BoB-

September 5th, 2001, 03:38 PM

Over-pumping your rifle can get unreal velocity, not to be too graphic here, but I've hunted using this, and the pellet bore a hole completly through a rabbits head, killing it almost instantly. I was using pointed feild game pellets.

zaibatsu

September 5th, 2001, 04:01 PM

Hehe, you shouldn't use pointed pellets either, if they are pointed sharply then it is easily damaged, and ones that aren't pointed sharply have little over ones that are domed. At the higher velocities, and at reasonably close range, try hollow points, supposed to expand fairly well at high power and close range. Airgun pellets are very interesting things... But whatever works

Anthony

September 5th, 2001, 04:10 PM

The only thing with over pumping a rifle that much is one time you might do it and the seals will blow and you'll be "aw shucks!"http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ smile.gif If the pellet went straight through the rabbit's head then some of it's energy was wasted. Only if the target (wabbit) stops the pellet is all it's energy utilised and maximum damage done. For this you want pellets that expand, such as Zaibatsu said, hollow points or even the nice cheap flat heads which tend to deliver the largest shock damage which makes things drop stone dead even if not hit in the head. Which model is your Daisy rifle? I think many of them are available over here, might make a nice plinking gun.

BoB-

September 5th, 2001, 05:42 PM

I dont really mind the risk of blowing the seals because the rifle was bought "spur of the moment" because it was only $40.00 heres a pic: http://www.airgunstore.com/RIFLES/DMOD856.JPG I use feild pellets because of there increased penetration in this cheap ass gun, its M/V being 650fps.

PYRO500

September 5th, 2001, 10:27 PM

I have that same pellet gun, I took the side panel off and removed the safety and lubricated all the internals woth a syringe and have it in good working order and I can get it to shoot after many pumps. I once pumped it to 65 pumps, I got 2 shots 1 strong 1 weak so there is a limit to the power, possibly a flow restrictor, maybee it could be removed if you knew what you were doing.

Anthony

September 6th, 2001, 04:52 PM

I take it the MV is 650fps at 10 pumps? If you're pumping it 20 odd times then it'll likely be a lot higherhttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif PYRO500, I don't think it's a flow restrictor, more an inherent flow restriction as only so much air can escape in the time the valve stays open. A stronger hammer spring/ heavier hammer may help but you'll reach a point where to get any more MV you'd need a longer barrel.

zaibatsu

September 6th, 2001, 06:01 PM

I could probably post some basic figures for air reservoir volume against pressure that will tell ou (roughly) what ftlb it should be doing if you all want, although this varies from gun to gun obviously. 650fps in .22 (if its .22) is pretty crap for a US airgun, if it was doing about 1000fps that'd be a lot nicer http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ smile.gif vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Improvised explosives Log in

View Full Version : Improvised explosives Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 04:20 PM

i got a few good ideas about a week ago, im no chemist, im only fourteen, but im learning and im signed up for a basic chemistry class already. well here it is. 1) a low puddy exploseive idea i had was mixing plaster of paris and some gasoline and maybe some sort of oxidiser or some solid form of an easyly ignited metal/fuse (al?) 2) figured out a good way to grind down al, at the cost of a blender: mix sand and al in a blender and add a bit of water, it would be best if the sand ratio was about 1(sand):3(al), just turn it on for along while then get a thick piece of paper and a strong magnet to seperate the al from the sand, and when its collected, just pull the magnet away from the paper and have it over something to collect the falling al :cool: well thats sorta it right now, i havent really been thinking much lately, just bummin around. later.

megalomania

April 30th, 2002, 05:00 PM

Well it's nice to see your thinking of new ideas, but I have to point out flaws... First of all, I don't see how gasoline and plaster of paris would be explosive, or even flammable. I may be wrong on that as I have never done it or seen it done, but it dosn't feel right. Second, aluminum is not magnetic, so you cannot seperate it from sand that way. You will however get the bits of blade that wear off from the blender. <small>[ April 30, 2002, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: megalomania ]< /small>

Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 05:06 PM

just read your post mega, for some reason the electro magnet i have picked up the al, it was a nice fine mesh too

Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 05:11 PM

forgot to add: the gasoline if its in a higher ratio than the plaster should beable to create an epoxy of some sort, so flamable, maybe not exploseive without other chems, but i just came up with the idea w ithout testing it, the al in the mix would help it burn i bet, and it would probobly make it easyer to ignite, if its in high count, i dunno, but it seems that it might work if mixed right,,,,,,, ill get backto you on it w hen i find some shit.

Snipie

April 30th, 2002, 06:09 PM

I don’t think that your magnet is picking up any Al. The permeability of Al is 1.000021 (paramagnetic), so in theory it IS possible to pick up Al with a magnet, only the magnet w ould be very very strong, much more stronger than you have. If I recall right, a couple of years ago they let water drips fly with such strong magnets (permeability of water is 0.999910)

Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 06:33 PM

it is al, because ive been sifting through it and shit, and theres no metalic shit in there at all, and the magnet i have can lift about 1-2 tons if i w ould beable to get the power for it, but i cant. its industrial :) but neways, seeing as you guys dont think thats al that its picking up, im taking and looking at a bunch of shit under a microscope and such, its sorta hard to see since its wet, but in the parts that are not w et i see no AL, i see some coper, but thats from the little nub in the blender. im sure that theres gotta be some gay reason that my magnet is picking it up when it shouldnt be then, so im going to try to seperate it as much as i can, but i have not much to work with, seeing as im just a kid. im thinking of talking to danny, im also w ondering about some other sort of stuff that can grind dow n the al (in replacement of the sand), something that w ould be easyer filtered out, w ether it be coffee filter or magnet, or even chemicly, :( i know its al though, but i haveto be sure, because it doesnt make sence by w hat you said. i checked the blades of the blender, theyre in pretty good shape to tell u the truth. anyone know a good w ay to get some mg(magnesium), or where to get it :confused: ? gunna fiddle with that. im thinking of paying a visit to the schools science lab "after hours". ive also cometo notice that smoke alarms use some Am(americium {did i spell that right?}), i bet i could play around with that provided i can get lead gloves and vests and such, no ideas what id do w ith it though. anyone else got any good ideas for a bit of fun? its gotta be pretty easy to get the stuff for it though, cuz like i said, im just a kid.

TariqMujahid

April 30th, 2002, 06:58 PM

I got my Magnesium on Saturday from an outdoors store in the local mall. It was sold as "Coghlan's Magnesium Fire Starter". It comes in about a 1"x3"x1/2" block. There is a thin layer of (something) over it to protect the block itself from flames. But this is easily sanded off. I've spent a few days sanding this bastard down with 40 grit sandpaper, and it's a serious task. I don't have any power tools, unfortunately...atleast none capable of sanding. Therefore, I'm left to do this by task. The 40 grit sandpaper is very nice though, it gets the Mg down to a very fine pow der. Fine powders are good, right? I'm still sanding it dow n though, I'm about a quarter through the block. It's doing a good job, but it's slow as hell...I'm sure there has to be a better way of doing this. Americium in Smoke detectors... That reminds me of an article I read in Readers Digest a while back concerning the "Nuclear Boyscout". This guy managed to get U-235 and some other Nuclear crap with his knowledge of chemistry. He was going to build a Nuclear Reactor in his backyard (and had actually started) when his Geiger Counter started recording high radiation several blocks aw ay, which w as harzardous to his neighbors. So he decided to dismantle the reactor and bury the parts in the desert. However, the police caught him stealing tires (i don't know what for), they searched his car and found a tool box w ith a Nuclear symbol on it. Thinking it w as an Atom Bomb, they called a HazMat team and they took all his nuclear toys.

kingspaz

April 30th, 2002, 07:02 PM

who the hells danny?! hmmm....i can't see anyway that that would be aluminium...maybe w hat you added to the blender wasn;t aluminium. it could have been steel, nickel, or alloys containging them. i think the best way to grind aluminium, not speaking from experience as i have little use for Al, is to grind up a piece of Al w ith a file, collect the filings then ballmill that. also a similar method by placing pieces of Al foil in a coffee grinder and grinding it to a coarse powder then ballmilling that. basically a ballmill is a tube w ith some lead balls in the bottom. the tube is attached to a motor to turn it round very fast. if you add something to the tube it will mix w ith the balls and the balls will bash it up and grind it dow n to a finer pow der. this is the only way to get good quality Al without buying it. i've made this sound simpler than it is but you'll get the idea since your willing to learn. also why not just use petrol alone? it would surely burn much better. try to avoid contact w ith petrol since its 2% benzene which is carcinogenic (cancer causing). if you want an incedary add lots and lots of polystyrene (stryofoam in american ) to the petrol. keep adding it until no more w ill gel with it. you will be left with a highly flammable, long burning syrup. makes a good first project - the fun pyro without the risks! good luck! oh yer, its never a bit of fun. thats how you get burnt (pardon the pun). treat this hobby seriously and you will be rewarded. if its treated as a bit of fun and nothing more you are likely to get busted or lose limbs or get permanently disfigured in some way. if your not sure what something will do when you mix it do it in a VERY small amount (like half a pea sized) and w ear some safety goggles. also cleanliness is important. keep all chemicals pure, keep work areas tidy and un cluttered. and most of all, read the archives here asw ell as current posts. there is an almost infinate amount of information here! the more you learn the more you will be rew arded. edit: never ever play with radioactive shit. its cancer in a can! although the radiation sources used in smoke alarms are very low level alpha sources. this is the most ionising radiation and hence the most damaging. it is also how ever the most easily protected against due to its large particle size. paper for example can stop it. thats what my point was! americium is a gamma source only i think. releases gamma rays as its nucleas reorganises. half life of around 6hrs or somthing. (can;t find my physics book at the moment!) <small>[ April 30, 2002, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]

J

April 30th, 2002, 07:19 PM

Plaster of Paris is Calcium Sulphate. It is an oxidizer at very high temperatures, there is a paper floating around on the 'net detailing its experimental use in flash, along with other Sulphates. It can be used in Thermit instead of Iron Oxide, I believe NBK made a post about this way back. But I think it's safe to assume your mixture won't explode, and the CaSO4 w on't perform as an oxidizer. You'll ruin your blender doing that. Far better to search for the posts that have been made about grinding Al in a blender for the correct w ay of doing it. If you had a ball mill, running it for many days on end with sand/abrasive grit and Al foil might work. If you used course grit, you could sieve out the Al. And don't ask people for ideas for 'fun', that doesn't exactly inspire confidence. If you don't take a professional approach to this hobby, you'll kill or injure yourself eventually.

Celtick I have a dutch article about David Hahn, He used Americum-241 and thorium-232 to build his ow n Nuclear reactor at the age of 17 :D

April 30th, 2002, 07:27 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I found this article from Harper's Magazine witch is almost the same as mine http://w ww.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1111/n1782_v297/21281407/print.jhtml< /a>

Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 08:35 PM

dude: (Learning == fun;while fun = doing stupid shit i shouldnt be doing at my age) i know to be carefull, one of my friends went boom in a fireball playing w ith some AP, :(. neways, in responce: danny == a friend whos a chemist who helps me out :) anyways, thanks for the input, but neways, i looked at it closer and took the mesh to danny, its not pure al, damnit. :mad: heh. anyways, just on a totally off-subject mater: why hasnt roguesci gotten an ircd yet? i think if you guys set up an ircd that would be pretty cool for real-time idea exchangeing :)

Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 10:39 PM

ive been trying to get saltpeter for aw ile, and i just heard from a friend, that sounds mentaly retarded, that u can pee in a w ooden cup or something and let it sit out, then the scrapeings on the cup u purify somehow and thats as much as he told me, is he on crack? :p

0EZ0

April 30th, 2002, 10:59 PM

Hehehehe. Sounds like you need to read up a bit mate. Hit the search button at either the top or the bottom of the page and type in KNO3 or Potassium Nitrate, or in your case Saltpeter. You will find a plentifull supply of information there from the search results. If you did not find what you were looking for then that is the time to post your question.

Wicked

April 30th, 2002, 11:09 PM

i get a 403 on search dude, i have for months, rofl.

0EZ0

April 30th, 2002, 11:53 PM

Ok then. Well your 'friend' is tripping or has read too many of those stupid kewl crapbooks that are floating around on the internet. :rolleyes: If you want KNO3 then look up the farm supply stores near you and see what they sell. If you find it, it is sold as a fertilizer packaged in 50kg bags. I would be suprised if you did not find KNO3 there at all. Also it can be found in Garden supplies stores as the same thing. Another interesting place to get it is at a high school science lab. Brings back memories. For basic Chem in science we catylised a solution of lead nitrate and potassium dichromate w ith Hydrochloric Acid(HCl), and ended up w ith a precipitate of Potassium Nitrate. Hehehe. The Grin on my face :D . Usually synthesising KNO3 is not w orth the effort, it is obtained much more cheaply as the fertilizer. Anyway hope it helps you on your road to finding some KNO3

nbk2000

May 1st, 2002, 12:11 AM

Wicked, you're spelling sucks. Learn to capitalize the letter "i" when referring to yourself. As in "I need to learn to spell properly.". It w ould also be advisable to occassionaly add a paragraph in you replies. I do not enjoy having to plow through 12 sentences nonstop. Did I mention spelling? :mad: Since the others haven't seen fit to delete you, I'll go with the group opinion and let you stay. But work on the grammer...PLEASE! :rolleyes:

Wicked

May 1st, 2002, 12:30 PM

Sorry NBK, I'm used to IRCing, so I dont worry about spelling and such, as when your typeing 60-120 words per minute you tend to miss the shift key anyw ays on this laptop. :( I'll try to make it better spelling and such. see, I can type < img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> and yeah, I figured my friend was on crack when he heard that. This morning I was cooking some bacon for breakfest(breakfast? hrmz.) and I took a shit, I walked out and there was a greese fire, to get to the point, I looked around for something to put it out with, seeing as we didnt have a fire extinquisher(argh, atrotious spelling right there.), I grabbed a can of "Resolve", a foaming carpet cleaner, seeing as there w as a 50/50 chance it was/w asn't flamable. It w as killer affective, spread out too, so I've been experimenting with it, and it doesnt burn unless at very high tempretures. :D

megalomania

May 1st, 2002, 03:08 PM

We have come to a consensus that real time chat may not be protected free speech, ie it can incriminate people. Therefore I do not support it. I also have no desire to chat myself, so that's one more reason for me not to bother :) Hmm, that quip about my search engine got me scared for a second... anyw ay, I got 42 results for potassium nitrate, so it works for me. :p

Wicked

May 1st, 2002, 03:45 PM

mega: my ip block maybe banned, check the hosts.deny in /etc/ if that doesnt work, my routers being a fag and I gotta fix it again

Wicked

May 2nd, 2002, 07:20 PM

Ok, tw o things I have noticed. 1) I've been playing with that resolve shit, I made an adapter to use 9 at once, and found out that theres hydrogen bubbles in there, bummer. If you use too much of it, or if the bubbles pop at an extreme rate, it will cause a worse fire, I covered a five foot area of flameing gasoline, and it put it out, I did the same area again with a thing of paintthinner, and it made the bubbles go away too fast, and it made a big ass fireball. 2) In responce to mega, IRC logs arent idmicible in court, federal or otherwise. And since its a private server, you can put a disclamer in the motd that no law officials can be there investigateing without a warrent, at which point the ow ner of the account would be notifyed first. :) anyw ays, just wanted to point out a few things.

Anthony

May 2nd, 2002, 07:56 PM

Seriously, I'm not sure where you going w ith this carpet cleaner thing, but I doubt it w orks any better at extinguishing fire than other inert, or mostly inert substances. I.e baking soda, salt, sand etc. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> s p u d g u n / m icrowave? Log in

View Full Version : spudgun/microwave? A-BOMB

S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2001, 03:26 PM

I have this old spudgun that never fire d that good and a few old m icrowa ves. And I was wondering what I could do with them then I rem e m b e r e d s o m e o n e h e r e s s i t e t h a t h a d a m i c r o w a v e b a l l l i g h t i n g p l a s m a g u n t h a t u s e d a m a g n a t o n e a n d 2 carbon rods and a capsitor and a co2 blast to shoot out the ball lighting a n d p l a s m a. So here is what I'm thinking of doing that old spudgun I have I would drill a hole in the endcap and put the magnatone in the hole and seal it and get it powered up and goin g then I would fire the spudgun with no spud in the barrel. What do you guys think would happen if anything? b e c a u s e I don't want to d o t h i s i f n o t h i n g i s g o i n g t o h a p p e n a n d a n y o t h e r i d e a s a b o u t t h i s k i n d o f d e v i c e s o m e t h i n g a l o n g t h e s e l i n e s ? -----------------live by the bom b die by the bomb

BoB-

S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2001, 03:42 PM

You dont honestly think that your pipe will insulate the m agnetron enough to not leak microwave radiation? Most likely this will do m o r e d a m age to you (literally cook you) than your target.

A-BOMB

S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2001, 04:12 PM

No, I just forgot to put this down that I was going to put the device in a 2" thick walled cast iron drain pipe. I also was going to fire it rem otly from inside a steel tool shed. -----------------live by the bom b die by the bomb [ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y A - B O M B ( e d i t e d S e p tem ber 05, 2001).]

Anthony

S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2001, 04:15 PM

You need a source of carbon for a plasma ball to form. That's why putting powdered charcoal or BP in the microwave is fun.

A-BOMB

S e p t e m b e r 5 th, 2001, 04:46 PM

W hat, if I took a piece of toilet paper and put powdered carbon on it and put another piece on top and put it in the barrel so when I fire the spudgun the paper wou ld rip apart and put out a cloud of carbon dust in the path of the rays from th e m agnatone? -----------------live by the bom b die by the bomb vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> detonaters for m unitions

View Full Version : detonaters for munitions drstrangelove

Log in

May 12th, 2002, 05:52 PM

After spending tim e learning how to produce reliable explosives and detonate the m I now want to concentrate on im provised explosive wepons. I worry about improvised primarys in the wepons exploding when subjected to rou gh treatm ent like running, jum ping, throwing t h e m , a n d o t h e r o u t d oor activities. I definatly don't trust the peroxides for personal use so I was wondering what primary is least sensitive to shock, friction, temperature changes and static electricity but still works well and can be produces at hom e without anything to exotic.

kingspaz

May 12th, 2002, 06:31 PM

haha...all good things need exotic ingredients. i think h owever silver azide m ay b e a g o o d i d e a i f y o u c a n o b t a i n t h e s o d i u m azide from car airbags. its mo re powerful than lead azide and m aybe if cast with NC it could be dam g o o d .

Microtek

May 13th, 2002, 04:06 AM

W ell, if you take a look in Misc at the topic called im provised sodium azide you'll find a way to m ake silver azide ( or lead azide for that matter ). The chemicals needed are: s o d i u m hypo chlorite NH4O H gela tine ( as used in cooking ) sulfuric acid ice lead nitric acid ( a ny conc. ) NaOH d e m ineralize d or distilled water ( tap water is useless fo r this lab ) ethanol isopropyl ( or butyl ) alcohol silver ( or lead ) nitrite ( can be made from nitrate reduced with lead ) I think that was all of them. O f c o u r s e y o u n e e d s o m e g o o d w a y o f p r o t e cting yourself from the interm ediaries which are rather p o i s o n o u s , b ut this is not really hard to do; m ost of the reaction s c a n b e l e f t u n - a t t e n d e d m o s t o f t h e t i m e , if you just com e back to check on them e v e r y s o o f t e n . T h e s e c h e c k s c a n b e d o n e while holding your breath as they only take a few seconds. If the reaction is done outdoors or with som e i m p rovised ventilation system , you should be allright. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> spigot mo rtar instead of mortar Log in

View Full Version : spigot mortar instead of mortar twinkle

S e p t e m b e r 6 th, 2001, 11:51 AM

I have looked at the archive but I could not find inform ation about it so I post this topic . I saw that there was a lot of intere st in m a k i n g a m o r t a r b u t h e r e y o u n e e d a b i g g o o d s e a m less tube where the shell fits perfectly in so why not m a k i n g a s p i g o t m ortar instead . A spigot mortar is more or less the opposite you need a sm aller steel tube (spigo t) where a bigger steel tube fits over this is a part of your shell it has just lik e a mortar shell sm all win gs but the load of your shell can variate from beercan size to trash can size whatever you want (within lim its of course of the size of the "launching" tube ) but you can make it the size for lauching an arrow to what you like . I don't know how to post som e pictures so I have searched for some links to show what I m e a n T h e s p i g o t h a s s o m e benefits , yo u d o n ' t n e e d t o m a k e p r e cize shells , an tube which fits good over another one is easier to find , you can shoot in a "straight" line at short range and are Ith ink safer to launch as a shell in a tube here are the links http://www.dm na.state.ny.us/slater/weapons/m k10.htm l the above shows the hedgeho g an antisubmarine weapon http://m e m ber.nifty.ne.jp/takixxx/artillery.htm a b o v e l o o k a t t y p e 9 8 a s p i g o t mortar a big one http://www.wwiitech.net/britain/weapons/index.html above look at the PIAT a short range anti tank weapon it is also a spigot weapon this was invite by C olonel Blacker there is also a thing called Blacker bom b a r d a b i g g e r o n e a s t h e P I A T the spigot mortar is gun of ww1

Heavy Recoil

S e p t e m b e r 6 th, 2001, 07:53 PM

W hen I was at one of m y friends house (he lurks here) He showed m e a d e s i g n o f a f e w g r e n a d e l a u n c h e r s , H e t a l l e d a b o u t a spigot launcher but did not go into any great detail. He will be em ailing me a work of fiction to post on here that m ight have the application of one in it. Edit: He also talked about a K-gun sistem to fire a gren ade (he had a working m odel that we tested, underground to absorb shra pnel. It was a m odular sistem , like NBK2000's grenade, with a s h r a p n a l s l e a v e m a d e f r o m a c o k e c a n a n d b a l l b e r r i n g s . [ T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n e d i t e d b y H e a v y R e c o il (edited Septem ber 06, 2001).]

sealsix6

S e p t e m b e r 1 2th, 2001, 12:24 PM

W ith this design what would you use as the propellent? PB or som e other m ixture? vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Motion activated sprinkler Log in

View Full Version : Motion activated sprinkler Tyler_Durden

May 13th, 2002, 12:20 AM

I foresee many possible uses of this little gadget I stumbled upon... Motion Activated Sprinkler

quote:

---

Scarecrow Motion Activated Sprinkler The Scarecrow is a motion activated sprinkler that chases animals away. It is a clean and effective alternative to smelly, poisonous, or visually disruptive repellents. Just hook up to your garden hose, plug in the battery and point it over the area to be protected. It's that easy.

How it works Scarecrow senses animals the same way security lights detect people; movement and heat. When an animal is seen, a valve opens instantly releasing a three-second pulsating spray of water. The combination of the sudden noise, movement, and water frightens animals away. This startling, yet harmless action is a remarkably effective deterrent. What it needs 9-volt battery power and a hookup to a garden hose. Scarecrows easily last through an average summer's use. Installation It's easy! Just install the battery, hook up the garden hose and plant the stake in the ground. Coverage Up to 1000 square feet can be covered by one Scarecrow. A 35 foot deep and 45 foot wide 100 degree sensor detection zone provides plenty of garden protection.

---

The $65 price tag bothers me a bit... but I can't think of any way to easily improvise something similar in a manner that saves money. Modification for the device to spray something other than water would be very easy... just hook up a small section of hose (a few inches or more, depending on how much of the chemical you want to spread you have), insert the liquid you want to disperse (be it tear gas or something more lethal), and somehow create some pressure behind it to ensure the chemical is pushed into the device properly. It requires 30-80 psi. Could probably be easily modified to fire in one direction only (if your use requires it) as opposed to what I assume is a 360 degree spray it does by default.

hodehum

May 13th, 2002, 07:19 AM

The only thing that could stop it from covering 360 degrees (other than the sensor) would be the fact that it cant turn, this could be solved with a servo type motor and more than one sensor covering different sectors. Although I would have no idea what electronics would be needed to implement this. A better option (although possibly more expensive) would to just have more than sprinkler. But why would you need one to face more than 90 degrees anyway? Just place one by each entrance way, activate them each night before you go to bed with a switch rigged up by your front door, deactivate them when you wake up. For a more lethal type fill the tank with ethanol and adapt a lighting mechanism to light just before it sprays. It would only work reliably once, but it would stop anyone approaching the building in their tracks. Of course you would have to make the senor less sensitive so as to not fry the neighbourhood pets.

Tyler_Durden

May 13th, 2002, 08:34 AM

Yes, I would consider it more of an indoor thing to prevent wasting your chemicals on pests. I didn't mean modify it so that the sensor detects all directions, I meant modify the spraying mechanism so that it sprays in only one direction, instead of 360 degrees. Does anyone have any idea how something like this could be improvised?

PYRO500

May 13th, 2002, 05:17 PM

I wouldn't use ethanol, it's flame propegation speed is too slow and it dosen't burn long and hot enough. I would modify it to make it water tight and have it spray toxin possibly a nerve agent. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Simple grenade design Log in

View Full Version : Simple grenade design Igenx

S e p t e m b e r 6 th, 2001, 10:31 PM

Hey all. Just an idea for a really simple (not using any chemical explosive) im pact grenade. Don't know how well it'd work, but h e r e ' s t h e i d e a . T a k e a glass bottle with a screw on lid, such as a tea bottle. Drill a hole in the cap, glue in a tire valve so that the air wouldn't leak, and pressurize with a com p r e s s o r o r b i k e p u m p ( I w o u l d u s e a b i k e p u m p with a pressure gauge built in so it'd increase relatively slowly and I could monitor the pressure without changing it). Throw it. A n y o n e d r e a m t of such a device, specifically ab o u t m a x p r e s s u r e s o r r a n g e o f s h r a p n e l ?

mongo blongo

S e p t e m b e r 7 th, 2001, 04:44 PM

I don't think this would work very well since there would not be enough pressure in the bottle to do what you want it to do. I guess that if the pressure is n ot enough to breach the glass then we are talking about a lower pressure tha n you want. It could work with a very very thick glass walls. T h i s w o u l d a l s o b e q u i t e d a n g e r o u s b e cause you don't know the max pressure the bottle can withstand when pressurizing!(could go off in your face). Also the max pressure would be different for each bottle e.g hairline fractures,defects when manufactured a nd uneven thickn e s s o f t h e g l a s s . I think this would be a bad idea.

Fingerless

S e p t e m b e r 7 th, 2001, 06:18 PM

That just sounds, well, kinda lam e , a n d d a n g e r o u s - m ore than likely it would go off in your hand, a nd it wouldnt throw shrapnel m uch farther than a empty bo ttle thrown.

DarkAngel

S e p t e m b e r 8 th, 2001, 01:05 PM

Yeah same for me it's dangerous and it's useless if you whan't to m ake a granade stick to explosives and no kewl idea's -----------------ÐarkAngel For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www.run.to/section1) s e n d t o s e c t i o n 1 @ h o t m ail.com

Igenx

S e p t e m b e r 8 th, 2001, 06:07 PM

Agreed. I was just trying to think of som ething really simple to mess with the assholes that were supposed to be protesting up here... Doesn't really matter now cause they didn't even show up http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/frown.gif W as originally thinkin g of using this as a delivery system for a chem ical agent of som e s o rt (filling the bottle half full of chlorine or som ething similar) but even that wo uldn't work particularly well.

ALENGOSVIG1

S e p t e m b e r 9 th, 2001, 02:40 AM

This doesnt really cross the line into being a real kewl p ost, but im feelin g ruthless. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Full auto bb gun Log in

View Full Version : Full auto bb gun PYRO500

September 10th, 2001, 10:20 PM

I have had the idea for a home made super rapid firing bb gun that has a vertical feed tube leading into the barrel some how with a compressed air sorce from a co2 tank led through a regulator and switched with a blowgun. any ideas on how to keep bb's from flowing all through the barrel in a device like this?

mongo blongo

September 10th, 2001, 10:42 PM

I tried something like this when i was a kid! I used a solenoid with a spring behind it (hooked up to the trigger). When the solenoid is activated it release the bbs and when you take your finger off the trigger the spring pushed it back into position stopping the flow of bbs. It worked quite well until my brother broke it! Bastard! I would also suggest (if you haven't already thought of it) having some kind of container on top of the tube so you can fire a decent amount. It may be worth finding out how this is achieved in paint ball guns.

PYRO500

September 10th, 2001, 11:23 PM

A paintball gun does this by having a recocking bolt that blocks the barrel witch is nit feasible to improvise with bb's at a reasonable cost

BoB-

September 11th, 2001, 03:27 AM

Magnetize a small pipe that will fit in the barell but a BB cant drop through. Glue/Weld this into place right behind the magazine, so as a BB falls into the barell, it does not roll backwards and the magnet keeps it from rolling forwards, acting as a plug until a burst of air releases it, and the next BB takes its place. [This message has been edited by BoB- (edited September 11, 2001).]

berg

September 11th, 2001, 03:44 AM

How do the small Mini-electric BB guns work? cold these be scaled up to be more powerfull? - Berg?

twinkle

September 11th, 2001, 04:34 AM

maybe this can be of some help there is another homepage to but I could not find it http://www.kutz.com/combat/bbgun.htm

twinkle

September 11th, 2001, 05:21 AM

here is that other homepage I had to search for it .Although I know it is RC stuff it works and maybe it can be made stronger to. http://www.mwci.org/members/rthibault/R_C_Warship_Construction.htm

Anthony

September 11th, 2001, 04:58 PM

The problem with just releasing a stream of gas fed with a hopper of BBs is that when a BB is fired, another will drop down behind it while it is still in the barrel, blocking the force to the BB in front so that it no longer accelerates. So effectively you have short barrel (the lenght of which is decided by how long it takes for another BB to drop from the mag/hopper). I think a bolt is the only way to gohttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/frown.gif Worth a note is that the Daisy 2003 CO2 pistol can easily be converted to fire full auto. It has a 35 round magazine (unusually high, especially for a pistol) and the slide blows back with each shot.

PYRO500

September 11th, 2001, 06:36 PM

I think an interupter disk might work easily, just have a feed tube larger than thew bb's but not enough to let them get side by side then have a disk with a hole twice the size of a bb run through it at a variable speed. if I have time I may draw a pic.

Anthony

September 11th, 2001, 07:21 PM

That's a good idea! Simple and effective - my favourite kind of solution. I guess if you didn't want to waste gas you could also use the interupter disk to open and close a solenoid valve to release a pulse of gas for each shot.

PYRO500

September 11th, 2001, 10:17 PM

That would be possible to do that However there would be a certain amount of precision required to time something like that effectively, also you would need a fast high pressure solenoid that could run off of low voltages witch I have yet to find even a solenoid valve that would work here, That's why I suggested the blow gun nozzle. If anyone knows where to get a valve to switch these kinds of high pressures and is portable please come forward. it would be nice not to have to use a regulator. also does anyone know how much pressure a standard shop blowgun would hold back and be able to switch?

PYRO500

September 11th, 2001, 11:43 PM

I just drew a pic of it (forgive the misspellings) as alway's you'll have to cut and paste it into a browser. http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/bbgun.jpg

BoB-

September 12th, 2001, 03:49 AM

If the motor in your pic were pnumatically driven it would mean less electronics.

Anthony

September 12th, 2001, 04:34 PM

The only issue I can see is gas escaping into the hopper which would reduce power, but if the hopper isn't very big and you release a big burst of gas it shouldn't be a problem. High pressure solenoid valves tend to be very pricey, cheaper hydraulic valves will work but they tend to be leaky when used with gas. The closest solution I can htink of would be to use a solenoid coil to activate a valve/blow gun. Personally I'd just go with the blowgun (or high pressure equivilent) for the simplicity. Who cares if the CO2 bottle doesn't last so long? With CO2 you might have trouble with expansion, i.e you drop the pressure in the bottle faster than the liquid CO2 can boil to replenish it. Resulting in a drop in bottle pressure and power the longer the gun is fired for. This might be curable with an expansion tank between the CO2 bottle and the gun.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

If this is a problem you could try gases like nitrogen or argon (latter easily available in dispossable bottles for MIG welders). The upside is that the bottle pressure is several times that of CO2, but due to it not being liquified you get less gas per bottle. I'd really try not to use a regulator as the area of a BB isn't much and to get a decent level of power you really need some nice high pressure behind it. Dunno about the max operating pressure of blowguns, but I's guess 150-200psi, that typically being the max pressure of garage compressors.

BoB-

September 13th, 2001, 02:59 AM

On the side of the blowgun in my garage: WARNING: This blowgun is meant to be used at a pressure no higher than 90psi! It also says something similar on all my airtools, but I run 120 through all of them, I oil them daily and havent had any problems.

skunkdude

September 27th, 2001, 12:16 PM

Anthony, how would one go about converting a daisy 2003 to full auto? -----------------"Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity"

Anthony

September 27th, 2001, 05:12 PM

http://armory.freeservers.com/html/daisy2003.html -----------------"Shit happens. Get a fucking helmet"

PYRO500

September 30th, 2001, 06:05 PM

I beleve that model has been pulled from the market hasn't it? -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]

Anthony

September 30th, 2001, 06:19 PM

First I've heard about it if it has... -----------------"Shit happens. Get a fucking helmet"

skunkdude

October 1st, 2001, 07:03 PM

i've searched the net, and i can't find any where which is selling these pistols, let alone in the uk. all the US companies i have asked say that "this model is unavailable" and i can't find a single uk site selling them. are there any other air pistols which work on the same basis as the daisy 2003? -----------------"Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity" vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> new generation of handguns Log in

View Full Version : new generation of handguns twinkle

S e p t e m b e r 2 0th, 2001, 10:09 AM

t h i s s e e m s to be the new generation o f handguns electronically firing mu ltiple bullets in a split second http://www.odwyer-sm artgun.com / m a i n . h t m l

SawedOff8gaugeman

S e p t e m b e r 2 0th, 2001, 01:47 PM

T h a t s e e m s to be crap. Just som e g e a rhead trying to steal your money with a complete piece of shit. http:// theforum.virtualave.n et/ubb/smilies/frown.gif T raditional guns offer the same fire power, probably m ore "stopping power" and work better. Additionally, they are m uch finer artifacts http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/sm ilies/cool.gif btw, I don't consider this as som ething which belongs in the "im provised weapons".

J

S e p t e m b e r 2 0th, 2001, 02:31 PM

I wouldn't bu y one until it's tried and tested for reliability. It m a y h a v e n o m o v i n g parts, but traditional autom atics have been tried and tested for m any decades, whereas this one hasn't. T h e i n c r e a s e d a m m o c a p a c i t y i s a g o o d f e a t u r e t h o u g h , a s s u m ing it's as powerful. Moving to m isc... J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com /bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/ &.src=bc&.view=l) P G P k e y a v a i l a b l e h e r e ( h t t p : / / p g p k e y s . m it.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792) vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Blank Firers Log in

View Full Version : Blank Firers Aggy

June 7th, 2001, 03:40 AM

I know this subject has come up many times before but its never been fully explained. Has anyone got any ideas on how to modify a blank firing gun to fire bullets (changing the barrel). By bullets I mean improvised ones, I know they'd probably blow up if you use live ammo. Not all of them are made from zinc either iv'e seen some steel ones about, also a fully automatic mac 10. I know modified ones exist because I went on the homeoffice website and they had a report about ten blank firing 8mm berettas being recovered after a raid, they had been converted to fire live 8mm rounds. Also had an article about brocock air cartridge revolvers being converted to fire live .22 rounds. The reason I ask about blank firers and not deactivated guns is that you basically have a full working gun opposed to the deactivated ones. I remember Maddoc posting a little while ago saying that he'd soon be getting plans about converting an 8mm glock blank firer.

Aggy

June 7th, 2001, 07:27 AM

I uploaded a few pics of the full auto mac10. Http://aggy.50megs.com

Anthony

June 7th, 2001, 03:25 PM

Hmm I still haven't got round to getting that cheap blank firer (9mm) from guns2u.com. I was thinking I'd start with sections of 9mm wooden dowel as a projectile and work up to steel rod, possibly with aluminium rod first. I could cast some lead slugs but I don't think they'd be too great, high chamber pressure and low muzzle velocity and also poor armour piercing unlike the steel slugs. Also, when I get this thing I'm going to mail order some blank rounds but I'm not quite sure which ones I need, do I want "9mm blanks" or "9mm blanks Auto"? I'm guessing the auto's are for blow backs like the gun I'm getting but I'm not sure. The auto's are cheaper BTW.

richl261

June 8th, 2001, 12:52 PM

guns2u.com....wow, i found a new favourite page http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif do they deliver stun guns to the uk, do you know?

jin

June 8th, 2001, 04:52 PM

has anybody ordered anything from guns2u.com they dont give out there address or even the country there in.i sent them a email asking for a address to send them a money order and they told me they only do credit card orders.

Donutty

June 8th, 2001, 08:20 PM

AK47, M16, FN-FAL...drool... I know the company that has those adverts to order them from (in Gun Mart) Yeah guns2u.com is cool - the guns they sell have no blocked barrel and fire the muzzle flash from the barrel. Yup, can only use a credit card. Thank god for Visa. (But then you've got to pay it off, remember! :] )

Donutty

June 8th, 2001, 08:23 PM

I read somewhere on their site that stun guns aren't available to the UK. They are based somewhere in Europe (probably France).

Anthony

June 8th, 2001, 08:32 PM

I think someone posted their full address in France a little while back. Any ideas on the blanks required guys? (looking at the Colt GT as it's the cheapest - going to mess with it after all!)

Aggy

June 9th, 2001, 11:39 AM

Ok, guns2u.com sell stun guns to the uk but the basic idea is that if they're confiscated by customs its your problem but they do get past. The blank firing guns are not simply 'not blocked'. The barrel is reduced, the hole at the end is approx 3mm which lets the gas escape which launches the flares. In the UK stun guns and these types of blank firing guns fall under section 5 which is banned firearms/weapons. Guns2u.com is the sister site of tecmagex.com which is a french site and it displays an address.

Anthony

June 9th, 2001, 02:30 PM

If the barrel is reduced to 3mm then they must be capable of taking quite a bit of pressure. Anyone got any idea what I could use this 9mm drill bit I got here for?http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/biggrin.gif

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Donutty

June 9th, 2001, 05:13 PM

To anybody who is thinking of ordering from them, please 'watch what you are doing'. Don't order 20 of the cheapo ones 'cos they are going to get suspicious. I have wanted to buy one for genuine reasons for a long time, so I'd appreciate it if nobody messed it up so I couldn't. Thanks

Anthony

June 9th, 2001, 09:05 PM

Don't worry I'll just be ordering the one. Without ammo to avoid it being shipped with hazordous paper work, customs are bound to take more notice of a box labeled as explosive...

Aggy

June 10th, 2001, 10:27 AM

You have to ask yourself would you ever import a real gun into the uk, I wouldn't especially to my home address and using my cc card. This is what they're classed as over here.

Donutty

June 13th, 2001, 04:15 PM

I have to say I've not seen any warnings telling people that they are classed as Section 5 and that they are illegal in the UK. There are notices saying to use them in a proper manner, but none about the legalities involved. I've ordered something from them, so I hope it doesn't get stopped by customs. If they do and I loose my money, I'll fight my case and say that it didn't state on the website. Today I got an e-mail from them asking for confirmation of my address (driving license etc.). I'll let you know how it goes.

Anthony

June 13th, 2001, 07:48 PM

It does say on their site that if stuff gets siezed by customs - tough shithttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/frown.gif I dunno about giving them your driving license or similar though...

Donutty

June 14th, 2001, 05:52 PM

Too,late - I've already sent them a scan of my license. It can't be tough shit if it gets siezed by customs. I ordered them with the knowledge that they were legal, and there was no reason that they should be siezed. If they refuse to refund me, I'm well within my rights. Anyway, stop being pessimistic; if everything goes well, they'll be here tomorrow.

Aggy

June 14th, 2001, 08:25 PM

I remember reading about a guy who was importing stunguns from the states he ordered about 40 over 6 months and when the police paid him a visit he was let off because the site stated that stunguns were legal in the UK!

Anthony

June 14th, 2001, 08:52 PM

"By confirming your order, you agree to accept our Terms & Conditions" Terms and conditions: "In the eventuality of the users goods being seized by any government body including customs, police and law enforcement authorities, the goods will be considered by guns2u.com's carriers to have been delivered and no refunds will be given unless the goods are returned in as new condition with original packaging by the government body. In this case the user will receive a refund for the goods order, but not the shipping costs" Anway, looking towards the bright side, being an unmarked box and no paperwork it's unlikely to get spottedhttp:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif What did you order?

richl261

June 15th, 2001, 04:44 PM

ooh, oooh, did it arrive yet? did it? http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif heh donutty, what'd ya order and did it arrive? i wanna order stuff from there!

Donutty

June 15th, 2001, 07:19 PM

I ordered 2x of the Beretta 92s (Black) and the black and chrome Colt 45. Came to around £115. My credit card has a £1000 limit so I might be tempted... nah! Pity they can't ship ammo that easily 'cos it's dirt cheap! Blank rounds are only about £5 for 50 9mm PA and 1000 .22LR are about £10. I might order some in a seperate order.

Donutty

June 15th, 2001, 07:21 PM

Oh yeah, I ordered them on Tuesday. They haven't come yet but I'm hoping they come tomorrow (3-5 working days). I'll let you know when they do and what they're like.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anthony

June 15th, 2001, 07:48 PM

Thnks for the info, I'd be interested in what the construction of the 45 is like. Tal Arms have a selection of blanks from £8-£10 plus VAT for 50 http://www5.airtime.co.uk/actinic/TAL_arms_Ltd/Online_Catalogue_Blank_Ammo_43.html What's the difference between 9mm parabellum and 9mm / .380? Does PA stand for parabellum? I can't see an .22s on guns2u but 1000 for £5 is damn cheap!

Heavy Recoil

June 15th, 2001, 10:11 PM

I know 9mm parabellem is by 19.15, the soviet 9mm by 18 is self explanatory, and I know 380auto is by 17.27. 38super is by 22.86 38s&W is by 19.69 and 38 special is by 29.34 all in mm the 375 serise uses longer brass but is the same caliber standared is 32.77 and the maximum is 40.77. This info is from a speer reloaders manual -----------------Know the enemy, know yourself;your victory will never be endangered. SUN TZU

Mr Cool

June 16th, 2001, 01:32 PM

Donutty: What's the news on that order? Has it arrived? And is anyone from the UK going to be brave enough to order some rounds from www.guns2u.com? (http://www.guns2u.com?) Edit: blank rounds obviously [This message has been edited by Mr Cool (edited June 16, 2001).]

Aggy

June 16th, 2001, 04:00 PM

Why get them from guns2u.com when you can get them here?

Mr Cool

June 16th, 2001, 04:47 PM

Oh yeah, TAL etc. I forgot about them!

Donutty

June 16th, 2001, 06:45 PM

Well, something has arrives from Guns2U.com, or more precisely, from tecMagex. I got an invoice and a catalogue, which is unfortunately all in french! I hope to be playing with my guns on monday. Quick Q - do customs check and/or x-ray every single item? I hope I haven't wasted my £100

Anthony

June 16th, 2001, 08:17 PM

It'll come over in a steel shipping conatiner with the rest of the post, the most checking they probably do is walk a sniffer dog past the container like they do with lorries. Dunno what the post office will do with the individual parcels once they're unloaded from the container. Although considering the shear bulk of mail and the limited time I doubt they'd x-ray them, they might xray a sample of mail but only like 2%. If they do happen to xray your parcel and open it, the box would say "Umarex balnk firing replica pistol, if they check the gun inside they'd see the muzzle is blocked (effectively) the gun would probably have "replica" stamped onto the slide or frame, so they'd probably tape the parcel up and send it on. - That's what I reckon anyway. I'll put an order in as soon as I've payed for this new air rifle...

Donutty

June 17th, 2001, 06:38 PM

Don't order anything 'till my stuff arives. Should come tomorrow, and if don't there's something wrong.

Mr Cool

June 19th, 2001, 02:00 PM

Donutty: it is now the day after tomorrow! Did it come???

Donutty

June 19th, 2001, 05:15 PM

Ta Da! Yes they came today (tuesday). The Berettas are very nice. The Colt is good too but is obviously a 'budget' version as it has limited features. So now I have: 2x 1x 1x 1x 1x

Beretta 92 Beretta 85 Colt 45 .22 'Snubby' Beretta 'Brigadier'

So go ahead and order Anthony, everything worked out fine.

Anthony

June 19th, 2001, 06:24 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Greathttp://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

J

June 20th, 2001, 12:03 PM

Donutty, did you get my email? J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/ &.src=bc&.view=l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Donutty

June 23rd, 2001, 05:33 PM

Yes I did J, cheers. Everyone: My e-mail address is now [email protected]

frostfire

June 25th, 2001, 09:25 PM

anyone has succesfullly do the conversion/modification....wonder if the barrel can be replaced with a WWII version colt, those things are sold at army surplus stores as (a non working) antiques... man, it cost a lot or a good replica...better buy the Elite scopes

HMTD Factory

June 28th, 2001, 06:41 PM

A conversion will need boring out the original bore and screw-in a new firearm barrel. The bolt face of the slide will need to be replaced by a quality material insert so the bolt face don't set back due to recoil. Stick with low pressure cartridges or the thing will be very dangerous. Look up a reloading manual for details. I too have a 8mm blank firing desert eagle. The most suitable cartridge for conversion I think is 32 auto since the cartridge will fit in the original magazine. Though I am more interested in a .22 mag shotshell conversion. If the gun is intended a single shot (that you don't care if the new cartridge will fit the magazine) then it can be converted to eat a lot of things from .22 to revolver rounds.

SawedOff8gaugeman

August 12th, 2001, 01:01 PM

So, you people who have ordered blank firers from guns2u.com, any experiences? Are there any models made of steel? Are there any specific models which could be easily(well, ...) converted for live rounds? Are the trigger/hammer mechanisms proper? Or is there some better places to go than the guns2u?

richl261

August 13th, 2001, 01:30 PM

I am very tempted to get a blank gun from guns2u.com, because its cheap! i dont have a credit card, so i cant order by that method, but i thought of a cheque from a bank will work... my friend has tried to order a stun gun from there, and it hopefully will come soon http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ smile.gif if anyone knows of another cheap place (im in UK, btw) can you post it please? ps, the blank firers are all exact replicas, so im led to believe http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

J

August 13th, 2001, 02:42 PM

I'll be interested to know if the stun gun gets through. The only place I know of off-hand in the UK that sells blank firing guns is Battle Orders, but I don't think they are particularly cheap. J -----------------Download the forum archive from my yahoo briefcase (http://uk.y42.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/thejuiceuk/lst?.dir=/ &.src=bc&.view=l) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

richl261

August 13th, 2001, 04:57 PM

yeah battle orders is expensive, but http://www.weaponsonline.co.uk/ isnt too bad, they sell a load of stuff including blank guns...

Mr Cool

August 14th, 2001, 03:51 PM

I'm not trying to modify a blank firer, but in the not too distant future I'll be making my .177 or maybe .22 calibre air-rifle pellet firing, blank round powered gun. It should be fun! I'll be using 8mm blanks, which when used with .177 pellets (the heaviest I can find) should give quite a bit of muzzle velocity! I'd just like to ask your opinion on something: how much of a problem do you think pellet stability will be at these speeds? Do

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

you think I'd be better off using a smooth bore and round projectiles? Because if it goes supersonic, then when it drops below the speed of sound the the sonic boom will hit it and this can cause it to tumble, so after a certain range accuracy will be shite, but round projectiles can't really tumble so they will be affected very little.

Predator

August 14th, 2001, 07:39 PM

When you fire blank rounds through a air rifle barrel it's going to foul it horrendously and the build up will affect the trajectory of the round..

Anthony

August 14th, 2001, 10:46 PM

Bottle-necking an 8mm blank to a 4.5mm barrel might make some pretty wacky chamber pressures... I agree with Predator, the after a coupling of shots the barrel will probably (with BP blanks) be so fouled that the rifling is useless. Also the pellet would almost definitely go super sonic so accuracy would probably be very bad. Is there anyway to bore out/unfix and replace the barrel with a larger one and use round balls?

Mr Cool

August 15th, 2001, 09:09 AM

Obviously I'd clean the barrel, which will make it last a bit longer but I know it'd foul up pretty quick. I am seriously thinking about using round projectiles in a smooth bore now. Those foam earplugs make great wadding behind the projectile, and I can get hold of hundreds of them at absolutely no cost at all. I think Atropine is planning to use .303 blanks and I think .177 pellets, but it might have been 0.22. Edit: I think I've heard of 14 grain .177's somewhere, so they'll be what I use if I use that calibre. If not I might use .25" ball bearings. Basically, if the trajectory is straight enough to get through the hole in my silencer then I'll be happy! [This message has been edited by Mr Cool (edited August 15, 2001).]

Predator

August 15th, 2001, 02:59 PM

Foam earplugs in a bore? Won't they melt and add to the fouling? [This message has been edited by Predator (edited August 15, 2001).]

Mr Cool

August 15th, 2001, 03:04 PM

I definately wouldn't use them in a rifled bore. But I think in a smooth bore the molten plastic would be very easy to remove, and you wouldn't get much from each shot because of the very short time that it'd be experiencing high temperatures. If I think it'll be a problem, I'll line the inside with copper tubing or something that can just be replaced when it gets too fouled up.

Anthony

August 15th, 2001, 06:50 PM

14gr .177s sound like Dae Sungs, I've not ever seen them in a gun shop but you might be able to get them mail order/real big shop. I also remember hearing that at much over 1000fps, in an airgun the pellet would not following the rifling and just heads stright for the muzzle without twisting. I pressume the rifling rips lumps out of the pellet as it passes. Smouthbore can be very accurate, especially with round projectiles as they don't need spin stabilisation.

Mr Cool

August 15th, 2001, 07:42 PM

Yes, I am having a smooth bore now. I'll fire round balls or little bits of metal rod. I was thinking about the idea of shaping the front end of the rod to spin it as it goes through the air, but decided it'd be too hard to get it to work well.

twinkle

August 19th, 2001, 10:25 AM

I posted a link of a German site who has information on a lot of types of derringers I know that these .38 type(and bigger) of Derringers were(are) converted to .22 LR by putting in a new barrel for instance by using a 5.5 mm airgun barrel (a .22 fits very nice it and you have rifling to ) the site was: http://www.derringer.de/index2.htm

Victim

August 27th, 2001, 03:26 PM

The flares on the blanks are pushed onto a small point on the front of the blank, and when fired the muzzle flash ignites the flare compound (any one know what this is?), I know this as I saw my friend shooting one off only the other night. So there is no barrle with a .3mm hole, unless there is another model I havent seen.

richl261

August 31st, 2001, 08:14 AM

i ordered a Beretta 92F Nickel from guns2u. should be here today!!

richl261 ta-da!!

August 31st, 2001, 12:49 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter it came! hooray!

i have to buy ammo now!, Donutty, where did u buy your ammo from? oh, and does anyone know what the "take down switch" does?, thanx http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif

Anthony

August 31st, 2001, 08:50 PM

Most likely allows the gun to be stripped (probably allows the slide to be slid off over the muzzle).

Victim

September 1st, 2001, 05:28 PM

the other day (the 31'st) I order'd, x2 Beretta 92F - over the 85 as the 92F has n 18round mag as opposed to the 85 which has a 8round mag x1 Glock 17 x1 Hatson Mod 40 richl261, did you get asked for ID as well? I sent them a scan of my passport. Donutty did you send them a scan of your Driving license and passport? well, im hoping they come soon.

richl261

September 2nd, 2001, 01:04 PM

Yeah they asked for ID, but thats fine, i sent a copy of my drivers licence (Im 16, it was my provisional, the french dont know http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif ) besides, they only want proof of address. They wont ask everytime, now im in their database.

Donutty

October 1st, 2001, 06:21 PM

I sent them a scan of just my driving license. I have ordered from them 3 times; they only asked for ID the first time. BTW Provisional licenses have a big red 'L' on them!! I'll take some pics of the guns field stripped and some shots of the barrel, which is only really plugged with a 2mm thick piece of metal running down the middle. You can even unscrew the small apperture which works like a blank firing adaptor on a real weapon, allowing enough pressure/gas to build up to blow the slide back (if your take this out, the slide doesn't move and the shell isn't ejected) -----------------...AAGH! It Burns!...

Donutty

October 1st, 2001, 06:24 PM

http://www.guns2u.com/products/blank_firers/reck_king_cobra.htm Looks tasty! And legal?? In the hard-copy catalogue (in French) they offer BP for sale. Could this be ordered without suspiscion, or am I better off sticking to making my own?? -----------------...AAGH! It Burns!...

Aggy

October 2nd, 2001, 08:11 AM

Legal in France wouldn't be in the UK. However you haven't had any trouble with the blank firers so it'll probably get through alright.

J

October 2nd, 2001, 02:32 PM

Just because something got through doesn't mean everything will. Customs are very unpredictable (if they weren't, there'd be no point in having them). J -----------------Download the forum archive (http://forumarchive.tripod.com) PGP key available here (http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Aggy

October 4th, 2001, 07:21 AM

I know not everything gets through but he has had a few orders through without them being siezed. So have a few others plus the gun will only look like another blankfirer.

omega1141

July 8th, 2002, 08:16 AM

Has anybody in Australia ordered from guns2u? and most importantly did u get it? Omega

Harry

July 8th, 2002, 01:04 PM

Has anyone in the US ordered from guns4u.com with success? Their prices are betterthan what I've seen here.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Eliteforum

July 8th, 2002, 01:25 PM

Harry, don't you mean Guns 2 U, and not guns4u.com ? As the only thing I see for sale on guns4u, is popup ridden web space.

frostfire

July 8th, 2002, 06:51 PM

gee, this rubber ball revolver seem very promising, too bad they don't send to US (at least, not mentioned in rates), anyone know the version of guns2U in US? edit: (found it)http://shop.store.yahoo.com/coolgadget1/blanfirgunre.html and many other also what is the law concerning these guns? I know EAG & other BB/CO2 gun have red paint on the caliber tip for a reason NV and taser in that site are jokes though, it's like paying 10 USD for a peanut <small>[ July 08, 2002, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: frostfire ]

Eliteforum

July 8th, 2002, 07:20 PM

frostfire, they say "A fool and his money are soon parted". What you have to ask yourself is: Are you foolish enough to pay those prices?

E7

July 13th, 2002, 06:08 AM

if you read the info page guns2u says they will ship anywhere in the world, allthough they probably charge more than the gun for shipping. as far as legality/orange tip goes, this touches on the subject http://www2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/fake_gun.reg.txt

Eliteforum

July 13th, 2002, 09:32 AM

In other words "You may have nothing but a lump of wood and if that's gun shaped, don't blame us if we happen to kill you thinking that it was real" .. :rolleyes:

duke of hazmat

September 3rd, 2002, 06:58 PM

Ok, in all honesty i have a dream-machine that allows me to take pic's of things in my dreams, and if someone was to forgive my newbie-ness and tell me how to post pics here then i will supply some dream pictures of my dream berretta 92f conversion (8mm into .177) once again, forgive my newbieness as i am aware how to do everything else but i dont know how to post pictures (via link or what) so plz dont flame me if you're annoyed. (newbies are fair game from what i see) :D I can supply full details of my dream conversion (required a drill press, hack-saw and some JB weld, (and some airgun barrel)

Anthony

September 3rd, 2002, 08:10 PM

Since I'm personally interested :D Go to http://www.geocities.com sign up for a website account. Upload your pictures and post the link to them in your post e.g. http://www.geocities.com/youraccount/arsepic1.jpg If you need more help, email me rather than take up space here. <small>[ September 03, 2002, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

duke of hazmat

September 4th, 2002, 02:10 PM

ok, now i have my mind put together. thanks go to the all powerful nbk for not kicking me, i wont be a noob anymore (well as far as asking about the easy stuff :p ) http://www.geocities.com/dukeofhazmat/ pic1.jpg http://www.geocities.com/dukeofhazmat/ pic2.jpg http://www.geocities.com/dukeofhazmat/ pic3.jpg SAVE THESE TO YOUR COMPUTER AND VIEW, I WILL FIX LINK NEXT TIME IM ONLINE. SORRY FOR INCONVIENIENCE CAUSED :( these are some pics, what i did to create this amazing piece of kit was to obtain a beretta 92f 8mm blank gun, barrel at the chamber block, this was hard due to the hardened steel insert. I then drilled the tip of the blank round. after doing this i machined a barrel from a piece of .177 barrel dimensions (to fit snugly in the afore mentioned chamber block) after alligning it i mixed jb weld and affixed the barrel and held it in compression for 2 days (in a vice). improvements/suggestions for the mark 2: I didnt clear the jb weld from the chamber, as a result i sustained a failiure in the frame,

i used a hacksaw to chop off the the hack-sawed edge to the depth of froma chinese air-rifle to the correct up some

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

resulting in the hardened steel "ring" that holds the round being pushed forward, the case of the blank (loaded with a rabbit magnum ultra heavy .177 round) was deformed so that it was unable to be chambered. after clearing the jb weld from the chamber i retried it and it fired and chambered the next round in the magazine, after tightening the screws on the frame (slight loosening was noted after fail) and a full mag was tried, no noticable cracks or loosening was observed after this test. interruption of sear to convert to full auto: i am researching into this. laser is a cheap and nasty one btw, but i still get ok accuracy. this is able to penetrate 2" of oak @ 10 feet, this is due to the small cross section of round (i tried to get a picture of down the barrel but my camera lense is not in line with peep sight, i will get another pic of down the barrel to show rifling which does aid at long range accuracy as i get head shots at about 30 yards double tap) if you have any questions plz ask !!! :D (btw the silencer is a master piece of engineering, as it is based on the helix supressor of the stirling with a cooling gell based on a captive mercury coolant jacket, my best friend designed and started the production of it, but i had to finish the construction so i am only so-so on the exact dimensions and works of this, i can email the machinists diagrams if needed) <small>[ September 04, 2002, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: duke of hazmat ]

a_bab

September 4th, 2002, 02:22 PM

You have to be full-filled with books otherwise we have here a so-called NBK2000 :D and he is very dangerous... Seriously, try this: http:/ /www.roguesci.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000032 ...And be more carefull before posting useless info (like I did here). But I did because of you.

leonvios

September 5th, 2002, 10:16 AM

In Coventry (England) there is a store very close to town called kitbag they sell some blank firers there and blanks no questions asked although I have not bought any they also sell hexamine tabs and all sorts of other stuff there though hope I don’t endanger the store by submitting this post.

Eliteforum

September 6th, 2002, 07:35 PM

duke of hazmat, could you get a picture of the ammo? I'm most intrested.

richl261

September 17th, 2002, 06:23 PM

a quick note - if you are buying from www.guns2u.com, try to buy blanks there at the same time, because the ones you can buy in england are not the right size, i had this trouble the other day.

Anthony

September 17th, 2002, 08:30 PM

Buy blanks from them and you'll pay *serious* hazardous shipping... Obviously, if you buy the 8mm blanks that are common here then they won't fit right (although the gun I have says it takes 8mm and 9mm), but I got some 9mm and they work fine.

mark151

May 24th, 2004, 12:28 AM

Hey guys sorry to resurect an old post like this but I had to know, can a blank gun reciever be used in place of a real guns reciever? It seems to me that it would, as its a 1:1 scale replica. Thanks

nbk2000

May 24th, 2004, 01:25 PM

No, not as is. Weak pot metal castings, deliberately weakened, etc. You'd have to reinforce it or, if it's an exact replica that real gun parts will fit in, make a duplicate using machined steel.

mark151

May 24th, 2004, 09:41 PM

So, say a walther p22 blank gun reciever couldnt take the abuse of a .22lr? I held a realy nice blank gun in germany meant for screwing on to an atatchment for launching flares. It was real sollid.

nbk2000

May 26th, 2004, 06:06 PM

.22LR might be possible, as it is a fairly weak round. I'd most definately NOT try this with any high-power rounds like .40S&W, .45, or such. A .32 would likely be the most you could safely handle in a modified blank-firer, and only have extensive testing to ensure the future union of your hand with your arm. :p

akinrog

June 5th, 2004, 05:37 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Sorry for bringing up an old topic. A few days ago SWIM purchased a 9 mm blank firer. SWIM is experimenting with this blank firer gun. Although SWIM can easily remove the slide mechanism (breech?), SWIM cannot remove the barrel which is fixed by means of a kind of pin. In addition, as NBK previously indicated the metal parts (other than barrel) is very soft (:(). SWIM can simply make dents on the metal parts by hitting with the handle of the power checker screwdriver. SWIM shall attach a photo of the partly disassembled gun (although poor quality), maybe some one may identify that pins and give a hint how to remove them.

THAT Dude

September 15th, 2004, 02:49 PM

http://www.modelguns.co.uk/index.htm sell blank firing(odd cap) guns. In the revolvers setion you can see down the barrel of the Smith & Wesson Schofield Cavalry, note that its only blocked by a thin bar. "replicas functions and fieldstrips exactly like the real thing." So if you were to change the cylinder with one from a parts gun you may get a real gun.

bjr

March 6th, 2005, 02:19 PM

my appoligies for dragging up an old post, did anyone actually convert a blank firer?

mike-hunt

December 28th, 2007, 09:14 AM

As an Australian and unable to legally buy firearms I have been very interested in homemade weapons have read Lutes 9 mm plans although not much use when 9 mm rounds are almost impossible to get your hands on here. was considering making .22 smg from Bill Holmes plans but had to abandon that to as barrel blanks and magazines are needed for this I have however come across a supplier of replica and blank firing pistols in Australia Http://www.wellingtonsurplus.com.au/ I purchased a colt python .45 replica and blank fierier have read that they were being banned as it is possible to convert them to live firing and decided to check this out .the blank fierier looks good and it would be easy enough to drill out the barrel and magazine chambers. It doesn't look to be built solid enough to use as a pistol although I am shore parts will come in handy for future projects . I was how ever able to make alterations to the replica. In theory it should fire ,I haven't the balls or spare ammo to test fire. the gun itself is constructed from a very solid steel I blunted several new drill bits .there are several features of the replica that prevent it firing live rounds here is how I overcome them. 1- the magazine chambers don't fit the ammo. these I drilled out with a hand drill. several mm also had to be ground from the rear of the magazine to although clearance when loaded this was done very carefully so to not damage the star shaped center that rotates the mag. 2 -the barrel. the barrel is only attached to the frame by being fitted over a spike molded onto the frame once the frame is drilled there is nothing to hold the barrel on the ideal fix is a genuine barrel available online but difficult to get through customs then the frame con be threaded to except the barrel . I however chose to attach the barrel with j-b weld an adhesive clamed to be as strong as a weld although I don't believe that and if the gun fails it will most likely be here .the barrel is not riffled although being a hand gun it shouldn't be an issue 3 firing pin - the firing pin is the blunt end removed from a drill bit . Part of a pen spring was glued in place and the frame drilled so the pin lines up with the primer. The hole in the frame is big enough to hold the spring but not let it slip through .test firing with brass dummy rounds marked the brass close enough to the center to lead me to believe live firing possible The gun was finished by removing the black paint and applying a shop bought bluing kit walnut grips were also added to replace the plastic ones. The result was a very real looking pistol . I don't think that it would be good for more than 2 or 3 shots and don't recommend any one fires . It is however ideal for what I want a scary looking gun that probably will never need to be used but in an emergency should fire at least one shot. I welcome any criticism. As to why this wont work and ideas for improvements as I hope to prefect this into something more reliable . I hope to build a single shot 12 gage pistol using the trigger and firing pin from the replica and Lutes plans for inspiration will post plans if it works out. links to photos of gun http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj205/fredflintstoned/Pic_1228_105.jpg http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj205/fredflintstoned/Pic_1228_104.jpg

shrub

February 16th, 2008, 09:43 PM

Would it be possible to convert the gun mentioned above to fire steel bbs (4.5mm) or .117 air rifle pellets using the blank rounds. Would this be safe to use for prolonged use?

iHME It has been successfully done. Construction of the pistol: http://youtube.com/watch?v=O3OVDSycsx8 Firing the pistol: http://youtube.com/watch?v=kbj4UPBrV64 I think that I have all ready posted this on a different thread.

February 18th, 2008, 07:47 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter shrub

February 19th, 2008, 06:59 AM

I was thinking more along the lines of putting bbs into each chamber of the cylinder. Of course you would need some way of holding them in place. Mike-Hunt did you ever get to test your creation? I also live near wellington surplus

Latindude_002

February 19th, 2008, 10:32 PM

Hello, new guy here. I'm also interested in using cartridges with extra kick in brococks, alongside the air ones. I'm the US, so no issues with the ban. When it comes to primers, I found a company that makes primer powered cartridges for use in centrefires. I will possibly have some made that use the 209 shotgun primer. If I'm not mistaken, another fellow who used these primers reported 10ft/lb on the revolver, which is about a 50% power increase. Osis creation is brilliant, however I have concerns about it. A .22 short is said to have a diameter of .223 (5.7mm), while airguns are actually .220 (5.5mm) if I am not mistaken. Isn't the wider bullet harming the barrel?

mike-hunt

March 1st, 2008, 11:22 AM

Re: replica pistol conversion I have not fired the replica due to the fact I could only get six 38 cal rounds . I would feel a lot safer firing 22's through the pistol and I am searching for an insert that allows a 22, to be fired through a 38 revolver this would be ideal as this caliber is easier to find in Australia for those of us who don't qualify for a shooters license. I have currently got on order a conversion for a flare gun which allows the firing of 38 cal round from a 25 mm flare pistol and are saving the 38 rounds for use in this . Flare gun inserts at http://www.captainforhire.com/products.htm I have a solid looking German made 25 mm flare gun I had no problem finding one online and they are legal to import into Australia . The inserts are properly illegal to import though I don't anticipate any trouble. As being aluminum and not resembling any gun part I know of it should slip through an x-ray unnoticed. I will post an update if they arrive safely.

mike-hunt

March 1st, 2008, 11:27 AM

Shrub To fire bb from a blank pistol I think a sabot would work a peace of dense foam like surf bord foam cut to fit the chamber and the bb's pushed into this. As to the effect on the pistol or safety I have no idea.

shrub

March 10th, 2008, 07:01 AM

What would be the best blank firer to buy from wellingtonsurplus.com to convert to .22 the colt python fires 9mm blanks would the .22 bullets fit in the magazine? Also what could be used for a replacement barrel?

shrub

March 27th, 2008, 05:45 AM

has anyone heard of (or ordered from) http://www.modelguns-worldwide.com/ they say there guns fire, field strip exactly like the real thing.

rifter

March 27th, 2008, 07:48 PM

What would be the best blank firer to buy from wellingtonsurplus.com to convert to .22 the colt python fires 9mm blanks would the .22 bullets fit in the magazine? Also what could be used for a replacement barrel? The revolvers would be easier to convert than the semi-automatics, I'd imagine. I've never tried it. You could insert a piece of 6mm ID, 9mm OD (1.5mm wall) pipe into the chambers to accomodate a .22 round, perhaps? You may have to drill into the chamber with a 9mm bit if 9mm blank chambers aren't straight wall.

Snake_Eyes

April 2nd, 2008, 11:10 PM

It's possible to do with a cap gun and a starter pistol. I got these pictures from the book "Zips, Pipes, and Pens" but sadly it doesn't show you how to make them. http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/6334/italyqn2.jpg (http://imageshack.us) http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/5528/starteroz8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

paul88

April 4th, 2008, 06:15 PM

How about drilling out the chambers of the revolvers and inserting .22 cal barrel liners? The strength from the chamber already there with the strong barrel liner should work fine I would imagine.

Snake_Eyes

April 4th, 2008, 10:13 PM

I was looking at this book I have, "Zips, Pipes, And Pens - Arsenal of Improvised Weapons" and i print screened these pictures for everyone to see. Looks like a cap gun did work in this case. http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/2089/starterqm3.jpg (http://imageshack.us) http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/2512/italyod7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Charles Owlen Picket

April 5th, 2008, 11:43 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter A word of warning on this. ANYONE who has hammered a metal of non-crystal aligned matrix will notice that after a time the metal starts to crack. While a softer metal will stand up to impact force for several blows, it begins micro structural cracks that lengthen & widen over time. While a cylinder or barrel will stand impact for one or several blows it should not be misconstrued to be impervious to repeated firings. That is the whole purpose of x-ray photography examination in firearm's firms R & D labs. It IS true that the shorter the barrel, the less the pressure built up within, the cylinder is a primary receptacle of pressure & every effort should be made to understand the nature of that pressure within. A blank gun was NEVER designed to withstand the pressures built up to propel a bullet. That cylinder was NOT designed through milling methods specific to strengthening the material from the inside out. It was merely cut to LOOK like a revolver cylinder.

paul88

April 5th, 2008, 01:10 PM

I would hope that the purpose of making something like this was to use for project purposes or simply to use it and throw it away. As you said Charles, they are not intended for bullets! I would MAYBE fire 12 rounds through it then toss it.

shrub

April 6th, 2008, 02:05 AM

would a replica gun ie non blank firing gun work the same way

Hirudinea

April 6th, 2008, 07:21 PM

It seems that any converted blank firer should be treated like the old "Liberator" pistol, used as a simple, expedient weapon to get a real gun from someone else.

paul88

April 7th, 2008, 03:25 AM

I agree Hirudinea, Also I dont think a replica gun would work either because they, like blank firers are made cheaply, nothing else..

paul88

April 10th, 2008, 02:44 PM

My friend sent me a pic of his .22 blank converted to fire live rounds. Im not sure what blank revolver he used but he said its an older model. The cylinder accepts .22 shorts but he uses .22lr's by trimming the tips of the .22lr's to fit in the chamber. Also he got rid of the shitty barrel that came with the gun and welded a .22 barrel blank in its place (rifled). He says he has indeed fired 100+ rounds through it but checks carefully after every few shots for cracks and damage. Link to the revolver (its the little black one) http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w135/ns_soldier/gunzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.jpg

spetsnaz08

April 10th, 2008, 04:58 PM

How did he weld it inside of it? Do you apply the weld around the barrel and then place it in? Do you put a smaller tube inside the barrel or dismount the one already in place then welt it to the inside of the gun? Sorry for the question havent got a clue about guns.

paul88

April 10th, 2008, 07:44 PM

Well the barrel liner is made to be put inside of a barrel to refurbish the gun, for like say the rifling is fucked up, they would put in a barrel liner. I believe that he welded the barrel in from the outside along with the inside end ( barrel end closest to the cylinder) The barrel does not have to be that thick because the cylinder doesnt take all the explosive pressure. The previous "barrel" was cut off and drilled out for the barrel liner to be accepted.

shrub

April 13th, 2008, 03:07 AM

Where does the pressure go in a real pistol from shooting a live round.. I would think it would be more than just changing the barrel

paul88

April 14th, 2008, 10:59 PM

do you mean a revolver or pistol? in a revolver some pressure escapes through the space between the cylinder but for the most part it all goes forward, thus you have a projectile. pistols work the same way but some pressure is used to blow the slide back and thus reloading the gun

shrub

May 3rd, 2008, 05:54 AM

I've heard that the older blank guns are easier to convert, would this be the same for cap guns I found a nice vintage one made out of cast iron.

paul88

May 4th, 2008, 06:48 PM

Ive thought of the same as well, for .22LR i think it would be suitable but I have not worked with it as of yet. Im thinking the cylinder would be just a bit too brittle unless it was steel and not that shitty kind. Do you happen to have one to mess with? If you do ill try to help

Aikidokaguy

May 10th, 2008, 03:01 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Some of the main issues with converting any of these blank guns is pressure related obviously. Pressure exerts in all directions, with the weak link being the bullet. Another issue with converting is in the action of these guns. They are all straight blowback pistols and as such energy is not being deferred in any way to other parts of the action like in a tilting barrel pistol. With a tilting barrel design, the slide brings back the barrel(which thusly adds some mass to counter the recoil) and then the barrel gets dragged downwards slightly so as to disengage with the locking lug on the slide. This type of tilting action delays the opening of the action just enough to allow pressures to subside before the breech is opened up. If the breech opens too early then a casing rupture will be the result due to high pressures. Recoil springs in tilting designs are also much stronger than these blank guns. Keep in mind too that some of the rearward recoil is taken up by the hammer in blank guns...which is the same with actual pistols as well. So to sum up, the issues you would have in a conversion to larger higher pressure cartridges would include stronger materials(seamless steel barrels, and potential steel inserts in the slide to defer energy without breaking the slide), stronger recoil springs, and energy deferral methods incorporated in the design of the action. If a straight blowback-only design was going to be used, then even with stronger materials added I still wouldn't use any cartridge stronger than 32 ACP(7.65mm Browning) or 380 ACP(9mm Browning)...and this would still require a proper steel barrel replacement, and heavier recoil spring. Also...one other option is possible...yet volatile. The Hilti blanks use a fast burning powder in them, which could be collected for use in slightly larger cartridges. When I say volatile though I mean it...faster burning powders increase pressures dramatically quicker than slower burning powders...and as such could lead to not just a casing rupture but also a catastrophic failure of a barrel wall or slide's breech face. Experiment safely...always

Latindude_002

May 15th, 2008, 11:44 AM

Hey guys, do any of you know how much of a replica the Brocock Para (the PPK) was? I've found that brocock revolvers like the Single action army are almost perfect copies of their real counterparts, so much so that you can swap some parts with authentic ones, exept for the barrel. I am semi auto illiterate, but is it plausible to swap the Brocock PPK's parts with authentic ones, thereby turning it into a proper shooter?

Aikidokaguy

May 16th, 2008, 07:46 AM

The problem will come down to the frame in many cases. The recoil energies are much greater in a pistol like the PPK in comparison to the the blank cartridges they are intended to fire in said blank guns. Without reinforcement something is going to break. Fingers beware

tomu

May 20th, 2008, 05:10 AM

As long as low powered cartridges like .22, .25 ACP, .32 ACP or te like are you used the zinc alloy frames will stand the stress. Anyway the frame will just crack and not blow up, so fingers are pretty save. Problems arise if the frame is also intentionally weakend by break points like in most german blank fire guns. These guns are almost impossible to convert to life firing. The connection of the barrel to the frame is so feably that the barrel will just break off the frame if someone tries to bore it out.

Setharier

May 20th, 2008, 03:56 PM

Last year I turned one of my blankers to fire live 9mmPB rounds. Model was an Umarex 1911. I drilled the old cast iron barrel nearly away, leaving only some 1-2mm of stuff on the sides and then fitted in a self made customed steel pipe with hammer. I have fired some 20 rounds through it and it works quite well; I bought an real 1911 spring to ensure zinc slide durability for a little longer. Still there is visible some crancks and I'm pretty sure slide will give up in couple of dozens of rounds. Magazine is a little more tricky one, and since I found no way to increase its length, I havent hand much interest about the whole gun; I've got a real, legal 9mm then. Nowadays the pistol is, I think, somewhere under the warehouse stuff.

Latindude_002

May 20th, 2008, 11:40 PM

Well my idea was more in the line of replacing barrel and slide assembly with that of an original gun, which can be bought online. But I am very uninformed on that topic, so there may be a ton of reasons why it wouldn't work.

paul88

May 25th, 2008, 03:35 PM

I think it may work Latindude im not quite sure. I suggest you just try it, let us know if it will work.

bene

June 4th, 2008, 04:01 AM

Hi folks,

this is now my first post:) A few days ago, I found an interessting link about blank gun conversion : http://www.europarl.europa.eu/hearings/20061004/

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter imco/savill_en.pdf

it's nearly an instruction how to turn a blank gun into a real gun. thanks to the police:D

Regards, Bene

paul88

June 8th, 2008, 03:30 PM

Great link Lots of good pictures. Thanks.

ex1ge

June 8th, 2008, 07:08 PM

Very nice PDF there. On the note of PFC guns (the ones from modelguncollector), these guns operate by the hammer pushing the cartridge forwards into the firing pin, which is located at the end of the breech, facing backwards. This would hence make them extremely difficult to convert, and a successful conversion that would allow it to chamber and operate live ammunition would likely result in an almighty explosion, as most are made from ABS plastic, and the "full metal" versions are made of pot metal unsuitable to withstand any sort of live ammunition. The strains set on the slide and frame are more akin to an airsoft gun then a real firearm.

bene

June 13th, 2008, 03:02 AM

instead of conversion of a blank gun and breaking existing laws (very very bad)...take a look at the following link http://rapidshare.com/files/122085117/GHETTOBLASTER.rar.html I guess the images will explain everything. pw=roguesci

paul88

June 17th, 2008, 06:42 PM

Do any of you happen to have one of those semi auto blank firers? If so would it be any trouble to send me the pictures of the slide taken off? I have an idea for converting them to fire WITHOUT blowing up. Thank you vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Improvised Grenades Log in

View Full Version : Improvised Grenades Viper4403

June 7th, 2001, 11:25 AM

I was tooling around the other day with some empty CO2 cylinders, and got to thinking about various ways to make grenades in the home workshop. Anybody have any experiences to share in this area? I have read the NBK2000 file on those nice pull-ring grenades, but I was looking for something smaller. Presently I plan to experiment with the CO2 shells. What might be the best way to attach some shrapnel pieces to the outer casing? Also, I've got a pretty good system of hollowing the tip out, but what are some common items I can stuff down into the tube with the blackpowder? I was thinking of BBs or perhaps even bits of tacks, but just want to make sure that it's the best option.

Viper4403 (Yes, I've read the archives) (You NEED to STOP with the hitting the return button at the end of every line. Just type normally, and hit the return ONLY at the END of a paragraph. There used to be another person here who did that too, and I deleted him. Unless you want to join him in the void, stop. Unless you WERE him....NBK2000)

[This message has been edited by nbk2000 (edited June 07, 2001).]

Agent Blak

June 7th, 2001, 03:29 PM

You could use something like Plaster and/ Marbles/3/8" ball barrings. I wouldn't advise mixing shapnel in with you explosive(Especially if LE). what do yo plan on using HE or LE? -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

Viper4403

June 7th, 2001, 04:42 PM

NBK2000 : Sorry, it was habit. I got used to some forums where you must side-scroll to see the text in its entirety. I will refrain from doing this in the future.

Viper4403

Viper4403

June 7th, 2001, 04:43 PM

I plan on using blackpowder as my explosive compound. If I can find any at the local gun store then I will use that, otherwise I might make my own. I am open to other suggestions. ---------Viper4403

kingspaz

June 7th, 2001, 06:05 PM

Do you realise how hard it is to make good homemade blackpowder? I made my own (in my dream http:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif) using homemade charcoal and KNO3 using the CIA method but using acetone instead of alcohol. It burns fast enough for fuses but not fast enough to explode any container such as a CO2 cartridge. If you do make, when its dry I recomend adding a little graphite powder as it protects the powder from moisture, helps stop caking and improves the burn rate.

Viper4403

June 7th, 2001, 06:21 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I'll probably be using commercial-grade blackpowder, the store will probably have it. I'll use the finest grain available so as to ensure a fast burn rate. I can get graphite at the local hardware store I suppose. Thanks. Viper4403

Foodos

June 7th, 2001, 06:22 PM

Shrapenel is going to work better on the outside, not the inside in any case. Adding the shit on the inside makes it so you have that much less power to thrust the shrapanel out. You could tape, or weld, or any number of ways to place stuff on the outside, but with a cO2 canister do you need more? The best way I can think of is Feticidal Fantasies little simple idea of getting a jar of shrapanel, and putting the charge in the center.

kingspaz

June 7th, 2001, 06:27 PM

i use the graphite pencils from art stores because you can choose the grade u get it in. eg. 2b, 5b, i think 8b is the best cos its soft as fuck.

EP

June 7th, 2001, 08:36 PM

Putting shrapnel inside the co2 cardridge would be stupid. Just a) tape ball bearings/short screws to the outside or b) use a thin cardboard tube larger than the cartridge, put the cartridge in the middle and fill around it.

skunkdude

June 7th, 2001, 08:53 PM

you could coat the CO2 canister in a strong glue and then leave it in a jar full of bb's over night. when you take it out in the morning you will (hopefuly) have a bb covered cartridge.

Viper4403

June 7th, 2001, 09:13 PM

That glue sounds like a good idea. It might be similar to a normal grenade with the fragmentation shell on the outer casing. Thanks, any more ideas? ------Viper4403

Mad Dog

June 8th, 2001, 12:10 AM

In my dream I used a CO2 container full of smokeless powder and used scotch tape to tape some nails outside the container. I also did the BBs and glue way, and if you are going to do it with BBs I sagest giving it a bit more glue over the BBs so thay will be more secure. You can combine the two methods nails and BBs fore most shrapnel and tray using something more powerful then BP. P.S. remember nails will remain deadly over a long distance 100-150m.

-----------------If you kill someone and it makes the world a better place, is it so wrong?

Viper4403

June 8th, 2001, 09:30 AM

I will be getting blackpowder for my new confederate .44 revolver anyways, is why I am considering the use of blackpowder. I am open to other specific suggestions however if someone has any. What I will probably end up doing is using a strong glue (perhaps epoxy resin) as a coating and then covering with BBs or small ball bearings, then painting over the whole thing in a dark color to hide the chrome. -------Viper4403

nbk2000

June 8th, 2001, 04:55 PM

I really have to wonder about the practicality of using COBs as a grenade. Firstly, the size is very small, holding maybe a half ounce of BP. A half ounce of High Explosive would be negliable, let alone a very Low Explosive like BP. Second, the fuse is exposed to water, bending, the light from igniting could be seen, etc. Third, the case breaks into several large pieces, not effectivly fragmenting. Gluing BBs to the outside won't help either since there isn't enough force from a BP explosion to break them loose and scatter them with sufficent force to penetrate. Only high explosives can do that. You could use high explosives inside, but then you'd need a detonator and that'd take up a lot of the little space there is for the explosive. Using a flame sensitive primary like AP would work, but then there's the risk of spontaneous explosion while you're carrying it. That's already happen to one member here in his pants pocket. So basically, anything less than 2 ounces of high explosive with a detonator to set it off isn't effective or safe.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter -----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF. Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.

Viper4403

June 8th, 2001, 05:52 PM

Hmmm... What about Acetone Peroxide (AP)? Would it set off with the proper force to throw afew chunks of shrapnel? Also, what primary (HE) compounds would be relatively easy to make, and work with sufficient quantities in a small amount such as that?

DarkAngel

June 9th, 2001, 12:50 PM

AP would certainly let the COB (COB=Co2BOMB)explode in very little and maybe a few larger pieces,But it's just to dangerous to use AP or another primary explosive such as HMTD You probably won't find something sufficient for it I know you wan't to make something out of the Co2 cartridges because you have them lie in your house,but for grenades really take something more use full just make a few crater makers and buy something as PVC pipe -----------------DarkAngel For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www.run.to/section1) [email protected]

Mr Cool

June 10th, 2001, 10:23 AM

Why not use a wide cardboard tube as the conatainer, and fill it with a castable HE such as TNP/DNT, or a plastique like ANNM/ NC, with loads of ball bearing in it (maybe 50% of the volume of the container could be ball bearings). Then set it off with a #8 or equivalent. I think that would work pretty well.

Heavy Recoil

June 10th, 2001, 01:08 PM

About shrapnal inside the explosive, shrapnal mixed with the charge wastes space. the whole of the explosive makes the power, b.b.s will, in the mix of explosives, have the explosives forces all around it, it wont go very far if at all, compared to shrapnal outside the charge, it waste space. Heres an experiment to try, if you are sill in doubt, fill a ballon with air and a bb, try to pop it while the bb is in the air not touching the side of the ballon. try it again but with the bb on the bottom of the inside of the ballon, the latter will go much farther. if you dont belive it, try it. -----------------Know the enemy, know yourself;your victory will never be endangered. SUN TZU

DarkAngel

June 10th, 2001, 08:14 PM

Heavy Recoil:That's a useless example if you ask me But your right that shrapnel inside the explosive can be a waste of space,certainly for small amounts of explosive -----------------DarkAngel For explosives and stuff go to Section1 http://www.section1.f2s.com And http://run.to/section1 (http://www.run.to/section1) [email protected]

BaDSeeD

June 11th, 2001, 03:37 AM

If possible, I'd like to change the direction of this post a little. Regardless of what method you use for containing your grenade. And however you create your shrapnel. Whether you have a partially fragmented case (eg. use and angle grinder to cut groves into a metal pipe), or you add shrapnel to the case (gluing BB's, nails, nuts, bolts, etc to the outside), the problem here is the explosive used inside. Understand that if anyone were to, forwhatever reason, be in need of a hand grenade (homeland invasion..lol), you would simply not have the time to make one and then use it. The only way to prepare for this need, is to make them, stockpile them, and store them, for whenever this need might arise. This requires two things. A homemade explosive, and a homemade detonator that won't degrade into an unstable, or ineffective substance. Whatever is used, would need a fairly long shelf life. Can we discuss what explosives can be manufactured with these properties, or ways to store them (eg. airtight storage, frozen, etc) to get this kind of longevity? I think this is the direction we should head, as this can not only be applied to hand grenades, but also mortars, rockets, land mines, etc etc. I don't think a question like this has ever been answered on the forum.... well for as long as i can remember anyhow.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter -----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

nbk2000

June 11th, 2001, 08:58 AM

It certainly shows forethought to plan for a long term storage of explosive weapons, aside from the inherent legal risk of storing them for years. But, in response to the question, RDX, PETN, nitroglycerin gelled with nitrocellulose and 1% of calcium carbonate, ANNM in binary storage, Picric Acid in glass or plastic, Mercury Fulminate, Nitrocellulose (wet), and that's probably about it for "homemade" type explosives. Storage conditions are important too. Constant cool temperature and humidity, no exposure to sunlight or air, all needed for long storage life. Plastic or glass bottles can be filled completely (to exclude air) and stored in a root cellar or buried in a deep, dry hole inside a sealed box to protect it from heat and light. It would be best to store the assembled weapons unloaded, with the explosive charges seperate from the detonators, all ready for assembly in a few minutes. Otherwise you're asking for an unexpected blast.

-----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF. Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 videos.

Mexican Pizza

June 11th, 2001, 11:19 AM

damn dude, do you have a death wish? messing with that kinda sh*t will get you seriously hurt. and why would you want to make gernades anyways? they are just too dangerous if you ask me....

BaDSeeD

June 11th, 2001, 05:09 PM

Thank you NBK, now that was helpful. And i understand the bit about the detonators and the explosive filler. Screwing on a detonator that is kept in a seperate cache would take a minimal amount of time, and increase the saftey of the storage substantially. As to the last response. A hand grenade is no more dangerous than the explosives we all discuss on this board. What is the point of having any kind of device at hand, if you don't have the explosive to make it functional? Thats about as handy as a rifle with no ammo. And one of my favorite sayings Do you know what a gun without ammo is? A club. The same applies to any other improvised weapon that requires an explosive charge.

-----------------BaDSeeD Knowledge is the true power, ignorance will bring your demise.

Anthony

June 11th, 2001, 07:23 PM

Will NM last 10 years in storage? I'd also heard it decomposes by itself, or is this just in the presence of light? What exactly stops storage of ANNM? Aside from seperation, why is it unsuitable? Double Base Smokeless Powder should last for ever in storage, it's apparently stable, powerful and cap sensitive. Would an ammo box be a good storage container? They're strong, water and air tight and available cheap from military surplus.

Mr Cool

June 12th, 2001, 02:41 PM

For a primary try DDNP. It's not too hard to make, and is worth the extra effort if you ask me. It'll store for a long time, and is powerful. Or just make up a batch of HMTD and fill the detonators when you need to (a few weeks or so before would be OK). EGDN is apparently better in storage than NG, and will also gel NC. You can then mix in HE's such as TNT, TeNN, RDX, PETN etc to form explosives with plastc properties, that will be very easy to load. Sealing the container will prevent evapouration of the EGDN. But if you're going to make lots and stockpile them, AN based HE's would be better due to their low cost and ease of preparation. Maybe something with AN (75%), Al (10%), a bit of wax (5%), and DNT (10%). That should work pretty well, be stable and easily detonatable. Or something like C-1. Easy to make, not extremely costly, stable, cap sensitive, and easy to handle and load. Or try gelling NM with NC, and adding lots of TNP. Someone here said that TNP was very soluble in NM, and it will make it cap sensitive. This should be an interesting explosive. I'd avoid powders, they're harder to load to high densities. Yes, when the shrapnel is in the explosive, the pressure is equal all around. But the pressure only equalises by going outwards, and they will go fast. If you don't believe me fill a pipe with TNP or other HE and loads of BB's, and detonate it. They'll fly. But yes, it would be

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

better to have them all on the outside from the point of view of range, it's just harder unless you weaken a metal case to make shrapnel.

EventHorizon

October 16th, 2001, 11:02 AM

Sorry to bring up an old post, but it hit on a few questions I had. I had an idea to fill a plastic container with ANNM, making a cap well and a hole in the container with a thin, ~1/32", polyethylene cover under the hole and completely seal it. This would be so that when you wanted to use it, just slit the poly, insert the cap and seal it with some kind of compound (window caulking, 2 part 5min epoxy putty, blue tack, etc.). I'm just wondering about the "shelf life" of ANNM. As far as I know, the only reason ANNM becomes weaker with storage is because of moisture. -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Sex at age 90 is like trying to shoot pool with a rope." George Burns PGP ID 0x147CEF54

BoB-

October 17th, 2001, 01:44 AM

For long storage life "grenades" that can be assembled in minutes, you cant go wrong with low explosives, the mix of doublebased smokeless powders, and black powders used by the unabomber killed 3 people, my memory sucks, but I think he was using lines of nails taped to the outside of the pipebombs.

-----------------Teamwork is essential. It lets you to blame someone else.

EventHorizon

October 17th, 2001, 10:33 AM

I'm more interested in the shelf life of ANNM when completely sealed from air/moisture. A 'friend' would like to assemble some charges so when they get the itch for a nice detonation they can grab a charge and go. 'They' have made and stored small film can size charges for several weeks but saw a noticable decrease in power from fresh ones. Does anyone know of someone who has made and stored ANNM in sealed PVC casings for an extended period of time, say several months? As far as grenades are concerned, if someone were to make one it would be best to use sling shot ammo aligned on tape and wrapped around a PVC charge of HE.

-----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54

nbk2000

October 17th, 2001, 12:24 PM

I'm seeing a PVC pipe with removable end caps sealed with wax. The AN is sealed inside a plastic bag, with the NM also in a seperate plastic bag within the AN bag. The detonator is in one end, inside of the AN, the other end holds the NM. To use, remove a cap, puncture the NM bag with an ice pick, replace the cap, and by the time one gets to the site, it'll have mixed into ANNM. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

10fingers

October 17th, 2001, 09:53 PM

How about Amatol, a mixture of TNT and AN. I would think that the TNT would seal the AN from moisture. It has been used in the military so it must have storage stability. Double base smokeless powder would also be good. Being in the form of a grained powder I don't think you could achieve good density. Also I read somewhere that graphite is added to smokeless powders to prevent detonation in the barrel of a gun. Supposedley the graphite reflects the infrared radiation.

EventHorizon

October 17th, 2001, 11:23 PM

What kind of power would DBSP acheive when initiated via cap when turned into a liquid and successively poured into a container (shrinks when drying) letting the acetone evaporate? Thanks all. -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54

nbk2000

October 18th, 2001, 01:03 AM

Equal to, or greater than, TNT. BTW, if you use camphor instead of acteone, you can make a plastic form of NC. The original

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

celluloid plastic used eakly nitrated NC, but I'm sure if you used highly nitrated NC, that you'd be able to form solid plastic charges that'd be highly explosive. Below is a quick OCR'd copy of the original US patent #105,338. ================================================== ============== Our invention consists, first, of so preparing pyroxyline that pigments and other substances in a powdered condition can be easily and thoroughly mixed therewith before the pyroxy line is subjected to the action of. a solvent; secondly, of mixing with the pyroxyline so prepared any desirable pigment, coloring matter, or other material, and also any substance in a powdered state which may be vaporized or liquefied and converted into a solvent of pyroxyline by the application of beat; and,. thirdly, of -subjecting the compound so made to heavy pressure w hile heated; so that the least practicable proportion of solvent may be used in the production of solid 'collodion and its compounds. The following is a description of our process: First, we prepare the pyroxyline by grinding it in water until it is reduced to a fine pulp by mcaus of. a machine similar to those employed in grinding paper-pulp. Second, any suitable white or coloring pigment or dyes, when desired, are then mixed and thoroughly ground with the pyroxyline. pulp, or any powdered or granulated material is incorporated that may be adapted, to the purpose of the manufacture. While the ground pulp is still wet we mix therewith finely-pulverized gum-camphor in about.the proportions of one part (by weight) of the camphor to two parts of the pyroxyliue when in a dry state. These proportions may -be somewhat varied with good results: The gum-camphor may be comminuted by grinding in water, by pounding, or rolling; or, if preferred, the camphor may be dissolved in alcohol or spirits of wine, and then precipitated by adding water, tho alcohol leaving the camphor and uniting with the water, when both the alcohol and the water may be drawn off, leaving the camphor in a very finelydivided state. After the powdered camphor is thoroughly mixed with the wet pyroxyline pulp and the other ingredients, we. expel the water as far sae possible by straining the mixture and subjecting it to an immense pressure in a perforated vessel. This leaves the mixture in a. comparatively solid and dry state, but containing sufficient moisture to prevent the pyroxyline from burning or exploding during the remaining process. Third, the mixture is then placed in a mold of any appropriate form, which is heated by steam or by any convenient method, to from 1500 to 3()00 Fahrenheit, to suit the proportion of camphor and the size of the mass, and is subjected to.a heavy pressure in a hydraulic or other press. The heat, according to the degree used, vaporizes or liquefies the camphor, and thus converts it into. a solvent of the pyroxyline. By introducing the solvent in the manner here described, and using heat to make the solventactive, and pressure to force it into intimate contact every particle of the pyroxy. line, we are able to use a less proportion of this or any solvent which depends upon heat for its activity-than has ever been known heretofore. After keeping the mixture under beat and pressure long enough to complete the soivent actioa throughout the rtiass it is cooled while still under pressure, and them taken out of. the mold. The product is a solid about the consistency of sole-leather, but which subsequently becomes as bard as horn or bone by the evaporation of the camphor. Before the camphor is evaporated the material is easily softened by. heat, and may be molded into any desirable form, which neither changes nor appreciably shrinks- in bardening. We are aware that camphor made into a solution with alcohol or other solvents of camphor lras been used in a liquid state as a solvent of xyloidiue. Such use of camphor as a solvent of pyroxgline we disclaim. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

SofaKing

October 18th, 2001, 12:00 PM

Nails would make good shrapnel, the finishing kind with small heads would be best. Small (equal to diameter) lenghs of rebar would be best, you could harden them too for added penetration or drill and fill with a poison (ricin) to be especially visous (sp). Couldn't you use RDX (if you can get it) straight and some from of high temp incendiary ignition system to forgo the use of primarys. That way no priming needed and ther're stored ready to use. What about firebombs ala the saxon video, maybe improved upon a bit. Use ether(nbk's idea) for the fuel and maybe a better low explosive (maybe not), and a grenade style ignition as opossed to the fuse. Another idea is HCN grenades (also saxon) they could easily have as much killing power and store nicely. They could be made to explode like a pressure bottle device, wich would create a instant cloud that disperses quickly (so you don't get dead) but the cynaide salt (Na or K) might not all be converted to gas. Some sort of delay is a must. You might even be able to make small bag type ones (familiar with bomb bags ?) just sqeeze the small inner bag and then be somewhere else. That's all I got for now. -----------------With Knowledge we find Truth - With Truth we find Freedom vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Shaped Charges Log in

View Full Version : Shaped Charges Demolition

February 28th, 2001, 04:38 AM

Lets just say that if I wanted to blow a door open could you place a High Explosive in a piece of thick angleline which then would be taped near the lock and set off.The thick angleline would direct the force of the explosion momentarily towards the lock and blow the door open.Could ANNM be used as the explosive?Has anyone ever tried this and if so what was the result.I am going to experiment with this just as soon as I get some Nitromethane. Demolition

[This message has been edited by Demolition (edited February 28, 2001).]

nbk2000

February 28th, 2001, 06:34 AM

What you've described isn't a shaped charge, rather a tamped charge. A shaped charge would be the explosive on the outside of the angle iron, directing the vaporized metal into the target. A tamped charge is were a mass of material temporarily resists the explosives force long enough for the majority of the force to be directed into the target. If you use an angle iron as tamper it will fly off fast as a bullet and be more of a hazard to you than to the door. Here's a US patent # for an easy to make tamper that disintegrates into nothing while effectively directing the explosive force. 4,628,819 Disintegrating tamper mass Go to http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/search-bool.html and enter the above number with no commas, setting field for "patent numbers" and date to "all years". -----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF.

Demolition

February 28th, 2001, 06:54 AM

Thanks nbk, http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smile.gif Demolition

blackadder

February 28th, 2001, 01:39 PM

I think that ANNM would be better used in large quantities, to blow the door down. If you wanted to take out the hinges, couldn't you use AP?

Agent Blak

February 28th, 2001, 04:09 PM

If you were trying to go through a "Dead Bolt" could you not just "Cheese some Cordite(Det-Cord)" around thelock with the asistance of some duct tape. you could use det cord to cut the hinges off the door. Just and Idea. -----------------A wise man once said: "...I Am Not Much of a Dancer But, Just Wait Till The Fucking Begins" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

Demolition

March 3rd, 2001, 03:05 AM

I was just wondering if 'Plaster of Paris' could be used as the material surrounding the high explosive in tamped charges? When set off would it turn to dust but still momentarily direct the blast to open the door?All help is greatly appreciated. Demolition

nbk2000

March 3rd, 2001, 01:58 PM

You could use just Plaster, but the patent uses the plaster just as a binder for the steel media which provides the mass needed to resist the explosion. Plaster by itself is very light so it may not provide enough mass to adequately direct the explosives force. If you can, buy a sack of lead shot of the smallest size, something like sand. That would be perfect for using in the disintegrating tamper. -----------------"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them" Go here (http://members.nbci.com/angelo_444/dload.html) to download the NBK2000 website PDF.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Foxtrot83

March 4th, 2001, 04:37 AM

Sounds like your trying to plan an armoured truck heist (put the ANNM on the door we got 3 secs., Boooom. Were in, were in, go, go, go...), but aren't we all. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smile.gif -----------------~Semper Fi~ Foxtrot83

Foodos

March 5th, 2001, 02:31 AM

Heat had a nice tactic for taking an armoured car, ramming it with a diself truck...muahahah that was a good movie btw

SofaKing

March 5th, 2001, 04:16 PM

What about sandbags ? Sure are easy enough.

Foxtrot83

March 5th, 2001, 05:11 PM

Sandbags makes an excellent tamp but not for a door (depending on position). He'd have to hold it up with his hands or something similiar which would take too much time to set up. -----------------~Semper Fi~ Foxtrot83

blackadder

March 6th, 2001, 05:24 PM

If you think about it, it could be done pretty fast, if he wanted to break in to somewhere quickly. He would have previously made the charge with duct tape stuck to it in a fashion that all he had to to was put the charge against the door. He would go up to the door and put the charge to the bottom hinge of it, put a sandbag over it, and then light fuse, get back. I don't think that he would have to hold the sandbag in place, that could be dangerous anyway. Oh yeah, and there's always another way in to a place. You could always pick the door's lock, or kick the door down, or go through a window, smash a window, etc. As someone once said, you don't have to do everything with explosives (wiping you're arse with AP). [This message has been edited by blackadder (edited March 06, 2001).]

SATANIC

March 9th, 2001, 12:02 AM

check the condition of the door. most residential and many commecial premises have wooden framed doors. the easiest way in here would be a sledge hammer. otherwise a window would definately be easy.

sadsakjoel

March 10th, 2001, 11:36 PM

OK demolition, what the fucks happening? The weir?

Demolition

March 11th, 2001, 05:14 AM

I'm thinking maybe the toilet block.The weir sounds good,but knowing my luck some homeless guy would probably get washed away down stream and drown. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif Demolition

Ctrl_C

March 11th, 2001, 04:20 PM

must we use high expolsives for everything? (err...dont answer that) just get an oxy-acetylene torch and cut the hinges off. safe, proven, effective...

blackadder

March 11th, 2001, 06:48 PM

or pick the lock

SMAG 12B/E5

March 17th, 2001, 12:01 AM

If you still want to try a liniar shaped charge, DuPont sells a product once called Data Sheet, PETN with an elastoplastic binder in 1/4 by 4 inch configueration. Strips can be cut and laminated over lengths of copper tubing creating a shaped charge effect. The ends of the tubing can be capped, the tube pressurized, creating a unit suitable for underwater work. I am certain that a suitable improvised version of this system is well within the capabilities of members of this group. Note: I have used 60 grain/ft detonating cord for various activities. Don't overestimate it's strength. There are too myths about det cord floating around.

SMAG 12B/E5

March 17th, 2001, 01:50 PM

Your question is too general. There are too many variables...Steel alloy...thickness...configueration and...tamping...detonating cord strength...number of lays or wraps. In breaching doors, I always "sweeten" the reinforced areas with C-4.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter shady mutha

April 3rd, 2001, 05:54 AM

Shaped charges can be subdivided into three classifications:conical shaped charges;linear shaped charges;flexible linear shaped charges.The subdivisions have evolved as a result of their particular applications.They were first analyzed and tested in 1888 by Charles E Monroe. The housing or sheath and the cavity liner may be of one homogeneous material.Cavity liners are most often made of copper,lead,silver,and alumium.Thier primary purpose is to supply a source of heavy molecules that can be accelerated toward the target by the high pressure and shock waves generated by the high or secondary explosive core.RDX PETN HNS,and DIPAM are the most often used core explosives.upon impact with the target,these high-velocity molecules transfer tremendous amounts of kinetic energy to the target,causing it to deform.Comparative tests have shown that when all other parameters are equal,the performance of a shaped charge can be increased or decreased by increasing or decreasing the density of the liner material.The angle of the cavity liner varies between 45 and 90 degrees and it too is dependent upon the shaped-charge application.The interaction of the cavity liner's wall thickness,wall taper,and radius of the apex all affect performance.

shady mutha

April 3rd, 2001, 07:54 PM

The explosive phenomenon is generally described as the interaction the detonation products and cavity liner material emanating at high velocity from a shaped charge as the explosive detonates.The detonation releases large quantities of gas almost instantaneously under extreme pressure-as much as several millions of pounds per square inch.The shock waves emanating from the lower portion of a shaped charge converge at a point on the charge centerline and cause an extreme concentration of pressure along the axis of convergence.These directed shock waves,together with the products of explosive decomposition and the metal molecules from the cavity liner,form the primary cutting action-the jet. Deformation of the target material begins within 1 microsecond after the passage of the detonation front.The shock waves produced by the expanding gases and the cavity liner material emanating from the lower portion of the shaped charge are converging,a jet of high velocity cavity liner molecules is forming and penetration of the target is beginning.When a shaped charge is detonated on a metal target,the jet excerts an extremely concentrated force over a very small area.This force causes the metal to be pushed out of the way of the advancing jet by plastic flow.

Jumala

April 3rd, 2001, 08:49 PM

At this site are some interesting pics of chaped charges (tank-fist warheads). http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust1.htm

simply RED

October 7th, 2001, 04:34 PM

I tried a shaped charge with nitroglycerine gelled with nitrocellulose. The diamter of the cone was 26mm. The cone angle was 45degrees. The cone was made from steel sheet 0,5mm thick. The whole charge wasn't full of nitrogelly. It covered the cone and maybe 3-4mm above it. The remaining place in the charge was full of ap putty. I detonated it from the top with homemade N8 equivalent. I tried it on 6-7mm steel and it didn't penetrated it.(it only punctured it not very good) (the outstand was about 1, 1/2 diameters of the cone). My question is, have someone succesufully made a shaped charge which penetrated 2-3 cm steel without beeing more than 100mm in diameter? I will appreciate if you tell me a real construction which works and i can easily copy.(is it necessary to use RDX,PETN of octogen or the nitroglycerine can also work)? -----------------LIFE SUCKS... DON'T LET IT BITE!!!

Mick

October 9th, 2001, 10:20 AM

the best backing "shield" for a tamped charge would be a bag of water (like a plastic shopping bag)

SafetyLast

October 9th, 2001, 04:35 PM

Yeah Mick I have read about using the bag of water in a tamp charge in the Tom Clancy book "Marine",it was a saline i.v. bag secured inside of a coffee can and a couple ounces of C-4 behind it. This type of tamped charge would be easier and less time consuming to construct, however I think what you mean is to have an explosive filled cavity in a bowl shaped bag filled with water, this way upon detonation the explosive force is directed at the target and the bag of water disintegrates with no dangerous fragments. Only problem with that is that less force is transferred to the target than in the case of using a stronger charge body such as thin aluminum or copper. main way to avoid getting hit by fragments is to stay down out of the fragmentation area (or "cone" as I call it), to not be in line of sight with it, and have a long enough fuse (I never reccomend remote detonation unless your dealing with very large ammounts of HE) <-- too expensive for what we are dealing with here.

SATANIC

October 10th, 2001, 09:24 PM

i think the water would absorb too much of the explosives power, the navy might soon be using water to pack explosives in, as it absorbs so much heat, and because when detonated, the force is absorbed by the water which travels very fast but still does no damage. i have an article from new scientist about it, that i might scan later.

Mick

October 11th, 2001, 01:13 AM

the explosive goes in all directions the water doesn't absorb it, it merely acts a deflection shield. a piece of angle iron would work just as well as water IF you could secure it properly to the door - however you can't do this with out alot of screwing around. if you put a charge under water, you get a real nice shock wave because the water doesn't absorb the presure coming from the explosive(because it can't, you can't compress water) so what you end up with is more confinment. example, put 50g charge of AP in a bucket of water and detonate it. what happens? the bucket gets blowen to shit. put 50g charge of AP in a bucket of sand and detonate it. what happens? sand blows up out of the bucket, and the bucket may split - but thats it.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

reason being is sand will compress and absorb most of the shockwave because of all the air trapped between the particles of sand. therefore, water is better then sand because the force from the charge will bounce off the water back into the door.

xtreme

July 14th, 2002, 01:28 PM

Hi all I dont want to start a new topic because I'am "to young" on this webforum. I found some topics about Shaped Charges, but the best place for this I think was allready locked :confused: I going to test a small Linear Shaped Charge tomorrow. I want use AP als the charge-explosive because I haven't stuff like RDX or TNT. The goal is not to cut a thick plate of steel....but just a thin one (1....1.5 mm) The goal for my test is to make a straight cut in the plate. Just watching of this is possible with te stuff I have. For more information/foto's: http://www.geocities.com/mail2xtreme/ ShapedCharges/ (copy and paste URL in browser) First I planned to detonated the charge today......but my cell for the photocamera goes empty :( Tommorow I buy a new cell for my photocamera. I want to film the explosion and make pictures of the results. I hope I come with some positive results... commands are welcome..... sorry for my bad english :rolleyes:

Tyler_Durden

July 14th, 2002, 01:46 PM

looks good. if possible, can you get pics of what you are cutting, before and after? also, how did you make/get the copper liner and that square tube??

xtreme

July 14th, 2002, 02:46 PM

I get all the materials straight from the shop. I have only to cut-out the opening under the liner. Before detonation I make pictures of every object and the "Ready to Go" setup. And I alway's make pictures of the peaces (fragments) I can find after detonation. The movie of the explosion will pure of quality because this is an extra option on my PHOTOcamera. This will be a simple quicktime movie.

E7

July 15th, 2002, 12:18 AM

i'm just thinking out loud, but wouldn't you be able to replace the square tube with the disentigrating tamper mass described above thus compounding the benefits of the tamped charge and the shaped charge? I think i need to do some testing.

Anthony

July 15th, 2002, 04:51 PM

I must admit, that cut ally box section and brass angle does make for a very presentable finished product. I do wonder if the 90* angle of the brass will be effective though. Also, don't forget your standoff!

xtreme

July 15th, 2002, 05:55 PM

Ok.....Linear Shaped Charge test done Results......hmmmmmmm, not as expected....but nice (some interesting results) for first time, I think :) http://www.geocities.com/mail2xtreme/ShapedCharges/ * There is a quicktime movie of detonation (pure quality...used just the extra option of PHOTOcamera to record quicktime movie) The charge wash filled with 20 gram AP (little pressed....not realy much because....we all no why ) Plate to be cut: 3 plates metal 0.8mm (2.4 mm total) De explosion sounds differend compared with my "normal" AP detonations. It sounds more like APAN but more powerfull. The plates.....just welded. Only on the upper plate I think the liner hits it when I look the traces on it. The book under plate.....nice interesting 3 (?!?!) cuts. The stone (hard beton, not easy to brake) under book......destroyed ! It looks that the power of the blow wash not directed on the plate but much lower. Ok.....next time.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I think that I use real cupper inplace of brass what is much harder. I thing I make the corner of V-Shape smaller then the 90 degrades I used now. (must pictures I see of LSC used a 90 deg. corner :confused: ) So....If you have some tips, command, experience.....please, shared it with us

nbk2000

July 16th, 2002, 09:07 AM

I couldn't download the movie, but did get all the pictures. Some comments, in no particular order: Brass is a poor material for a liner. You want materials that are soft and malleable. Aluminium (soda can), lead, or unannealed (soft) copper. Brass and steel are unsuitable, being too "hard". The liner was too thick. It seems it's projecting as a solid slug, rather than liquifying into a cutting jet. THIN is the key. A millimeter (under 0.01") is good. You can only use thick liners if you have enough explosive behind them to overcome the resistance. I don't see anything wrong with the liner angle, just the material and thickness of it. AP is a poor choice for any kind of cutting charge. It just doesn't have the VOD needed. Anything below 7,000 m/s is too slow. And AP is only around 5,500 m/s. Picric acid or TNT is the minimum I'd use. I don't think even ANNM would be suitable for an LSC. The target (metal plates) was only dented, and not cut, probably because it was sitting on a flexible material that absorbed the impact. The book absorbed the majority of the shock, allowing the plates to remain intact, while transferring that shock to the inflexible stone which shattered. Try the next test with the target sitting directly on the stone. Then the plates should be torn, if not cut. Did you plasticize the AP? Because it's obviously not a simple compressed powder sitting with the ends open. Uniformity of explosive density is VERY important! Any voids, gaps, or variations causes changes in the shock front, which (in turn) causes changes in the jet formation which results in failure. Look in the topic "NEW LSC DESIGN" (God, I hate ALL CAPS! :mad: ) where I link to a precision LSC design manual written by the experts at the US governments weapons labs. They go into great detail about all the variations of LSC design. Read it and learn from the masters. If the link's dead, download the '99 High Explosives archive PDF from the Forum FTP. I included it in there. I noticed that one plate (presumably the top one) was partially cut for half it's length. LSC's have a "start up" distance, which is at least 3-5cm, during which the shock front transitions from a radial to planular form. Until it does this, there's no real jet formation, so you need to account for this by making your charges a bit longer than the intended cut. Obviously yours was, but it's using a lower velocity explosive, so the start up distance is increased. Pick a solid target next time. Multiple plates is equivalent to attacking laminated armor. Same thing with spaced plates. To test an LSC, you need a homogenous target. And make it easier on yourself when you first start out. Use soft aluminum. You'll be more encouraged to keep experimenting by a deep gouge in a soft target, then a thin scratch in a tough one. :D I like the angle in box pictures. Saves me from having to make them. Keep blasting.

xtreme

July 16th, 2002, 01:10 PM

Thanks nbk2000, That's a lot of usefull information ! :) I don't have all the chemicals to make HE with VOD's over 7000 m/s (jet :) ) :( I think of trying making HDN (HexamineDiNitrate). Is HDN better for LSC than AP ? And after making HDN I can give a try to make RDX with distilled HNO3 (have 65% and want to concentrate this to ....99%, I hope ) I did not plasticize AP jet. I am buzzy top make the binder from blu-tak but it takes some time to vaporate the gasoline. The caps of the LSC where closed with a 2 component stuff what becomes very hard in a short time (10 minutes) and the AP self a little pressed (scarry to press the AP to much) Next time.....thin cupper liner, target of one aluminum plate, target resting directly on stone (hard surface) and......perhaps a better charge than AP many thanks ! To be continued.....

Mr Cool

July 16th, 2002, 03:41 PM

I couldn't download the movie either, apparently I don't have a suitable decompressor or something. So my fault, not yours I think. It does look very nice, although I am also a bit worried about the angle. It should work, but smaller would be better. I'd use about 50*, but then it wouldn't fit in the other thing and make that nice looking finished product.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I'm sure the main problem would be the lightly compressed CTAP, I doubt it had more than 3.5-4 km/sec VoD. HDN might work, but it's not very easy to detonate. ANNM would be best for those with limited chems., it can get up to around 6.5 km/sec and is easy to press into a uniform charge. Easy to detonate too. It'd certainly be better than anything you can do with CTAP, and the ingredients can normally be found with a bit of looking. RDX would be great if you can make it, or NG or almost any nitrate ester. But the explosive is definitely your main problem.

xtreme

July 16th, 2002, 04:17 PM

Mr Cool Thanks for info Yes, a smaller shape will not fit into the material I used now. And most pictures I see of LINEAR Shaped Charges are something like 90% Only for Round Shaped Charges I read much of the 42% angle This week I go to try to make HDN and/or RDX and searching for cupperplate for the liner I made an AVI-file of the (quicktime) movie. It's much bigger compared with the quicktime and I have not much space by geocities. I have plenty space on my own servers.....but that makes it a little to easy to find my location :) The AVI-Movie (sorry....pure quality) :http://www.geocities.com/mail2xtreme/ShapedCharges/LSC_20gramAP.avi

AfterRain

July 24th, 2002, 11:09 PM

I've found a nice lil .gif movie of how the SC works when its exploded http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/ animation/explode/shaped.html <small>[ July 25, 2002, 02:47 AM: Message edited by: AfterRain ]

Chris Shiherlis

July 27th, 2002, 11:54 AM

Xtreme compliments on your LSC, it´s fuckin´ pretty. If you had used a secondary high explosive you probably had made a very effective LSC. Even with that brass liner, which is not such a bad choice after all. There are even LSC´s made with iron liners (go to the topic "Busting my safe"; this guy McCoy which is apparently such a pain in the ass he was banned by NBK :) gave a link to a few usefull sites e.g. a site which show a LSC called Resaflex, made from a iron liner and DBSP :) ). Of course lead, copper or aluminium liners are better, that is, they need less powerfull explosives to produce a jet. I would recommend a aluminium liner about 1mm thick, 90 degree angle: easy to find, cheap and easily formed jet. I use it too, it penetrates at least 4mm construction steel using a NM explosive, about 250 gram/meter (and thicker aluminium decreases the penetration greatly just as a 1mm brass liner) But using AP with a ´low´ VoD and power is useless. It won´t produce a jet out of ANY liner (not even out of aluminium foil). So the effects produced by your first LSC are just.......caused by the Monroe effect. And maybe some piercing by fragments. I´m sorry to say. But no jet or slug is formed at all, just fragments and the Monroe effect (And the Monroe effect is even weakened by the liner: should you have used a plastic liner just to get the V-shape the effects on the metal plates would have been greater). And the strange effects on the book are caused also just like the Monroe effect by colliding shockwaves, reenforcing each other at some points (getting concentrated at some points). And subsequently fracturing/shearing (not cutting) the target at specific points. Apparently your set up creates 3 points at which the shockwaves get concentrated (just like with shockwave refraction tape SRT or fracture tape). And the explosives suitable: any secondary high explosive: TNT, RDX, DBSP and ALSO ANNM. The NM explosives all have a high VoD and great power. Many exceed the power and VoD of TNT. The only drawback of using ANNM is that the AN crystals produce maybe some voids/airgaps in the explosive composition, which should be avoided if possible, but are not much of a problem anyhow. So..... And the "start up" problem of LSC´s NBK mentions, got nothing to do with the AP. AP produces no jet what so ever so there is no start up distance. The start up distance is the distance at which the jet reaches it´s maximum penetration. And this is about after 10 cm. The first 10cm when a jet IS produced (with a real LSC) and the penetration into the steel target slowly increases to 100 %. It got something to do with the shockwave angle of the explosive hitting the liner, and subsequently the angle and speed of the jet produced. No jet, no cutting effect, no start up effect (as with AP). And just some questions: why use a blasting cap if you use AP? And the two component stuff you use to cap your LSC with, doesn´t it get hot when it hardens? (with the danger of setting the AP off). And why not use a plastic container instead of aluminium? Saves a lot of shrapnel coming your way :) . Anyway, I really am looking forward to your next experiment. Use a real explosive and you will enjoy it. (Watch it with the innuendo's there Chris. Bottle washers are anything but irreplaceable here. NBK) <small>[ July 27, 2002, 11:34 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

xtreme My second LSC is underway (almost ready) I have a much better liner, very thin soft copper (36 Gauge/ .005) I put this on a 90 deg. plastic corner (1.5 x 1.5) because the copper alone is to easy to bend.

July 27th, 2002, 02:33 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The secundairy charge will be much better too: ANNM I have only to make some primary (booster): AP to detonate the ANNM I have to little AP at the moment :) oh yea, your questions. No, the 2 component stuff I use (expensive, but good) doesn't get warm as most 2 component stuf works. The reason I use a blastingcap is that detonated AP by a cap have more power than ignited by flame. Cap is filled with MF (Mercury Fulminate) what is stronger than AP so....to be continued, pictures will be on my site and let you people know when detonated/uploaded <small>[ July 27, 2002, 01:41 PM: Message edited by: xtreme ]

Boob Raider

August 26th, 2002, 12:45 AM

I had fired a conical shaped charge by the river bank in India. One of the most impressive things I have seen (other than my neighbours wife) :D . Anyways my core explosive was 100 g Lydite (87% Picric Acid + 8% Di NitroBenzene + 3% vasline, with about 2% Al powder replacing some of the DNB). Its quite insensitive so I used a 10 g secondary booster charge of C-1. The cone had an angle of 70* and was made up of about 26 gauge Cu sheet. The cast iron tube which contained the was 5" long and 3" in Dia and 0.2" thick. The shaped charge was placed 3" away from the target(1" thick Fe plate) with the help of 3 rods taped to the side of the tube (tripod). The charge was detonated with a homemade detonator containing 3 g of RDX and about a g of DDNP. Since I had a cast Fe tube I had to build a wall of loose wet bricks around it. It was set off electrically from 30 mts away behind a big rock. I felt goose bumps all over .... it sounded so damn impressive :D . Bricks spread all around with a clean hole in the plate also leading into the ground till about 6". That was it. No shrapnel could be found, only marks of it in the bricks. :confused: I was also thinking if one could mix a large amount of Pb powder (to provide the mass) from a Pb accumulator plates with "plaster of paris" (to provide the binding) to make a tamper (NBK ... Did u mention it ....?)

Chris Shiherlis

October 6th, 2002, 07:23 AM

Xtreme any progress? I'm very curious. Since your first LSC was already such a pretty one I think the new one will be very impressive. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Flame Tra p Log in

View Full Version : Flame Trap Hvoroba

May 22nd, 2002, 11:13 AM

I'm attempting to construct a butane based flam ethrower using a plastic butane tank for refilling gas lighters, and a simple m e c h a n i s m . W h a t I ' m trying to figure out is how to m a k e t h e f l a m e t r a p s o t h e f l a m es wo u l d n o t g e t i n t o t h e n o z z l e a n d b a c k into the tank . I've m a d e s o m e research and found out that the flam e t r a p s u s e d o n s h i p s t o k e e p t h e f l a m e s o n b o a r d f r o m entering the fuel tank (luckily I'm in a nautical military school, so I have teachers to explain such things) is m a d e o f a thin c o p p e r n e t a n d a m etal casing with holes. The copper m etal has a very h igh heat reception rate, so it recieves the flame's h e a t . S o , d o e s a n y o n e here has any idea on how to construct one? Thanks.

CyclonitePyro

May 22nd, 2002, 11:49 AM

As long as there is no oxygen in the butane tank you have nothing to worry about. A flame trap is not nessessary. There is only liquid butane and gaseous butane in the tank.

Anthony

May 22nd, 2002, 01:07 PM

I'm of the same opinion of cyclonitepyro. However, yes passing the gas through a m etal mesh will stop the flam e from p a s s i n g through, just like in the Davey safety mining lam p. Also , bubbling the ga s through a liquid like water would also work.

BrAiNFeVeR

May 22nd, 2002, 02:31 PM

Y o u c o u l d a l s o u s e s o m e t h i n g like this: m aybe in com bination with the Cu net ... The trouble of using water in a contrap tion, is making sure it sta ys where it's supposed to be. And if pressu re is too high, it will blow the water out !!! This effect m ay lessen if you use a heavier liquid, lets say Hg :D

Zambosan

May 22nd, 2002, 03:22 PM

I'm pretty su re a butane flame would m elt right through a plastic fermenting airlo ck. :D

Hvoroba

May 23rd, 2002, 11:19 AM

Brainfever, how am I s u p p o s e d t o u s e t h e s e ? P l e a s e e x p l a i n . Z a m bosan, yes, it will, this is why I'm trying to build a flame trap :)

Pu239 Stuchtiger

May 23rd, 2002, 05:59 PM

There is always the possibility of the heat from the flam e reaching the butane tank causin g it to burst...

BrAiNFeVeR

May 23rd, 2002, 05:59 PM

LOL, I'm not sugg esting that the flam e fron t moves up that close to the plastic thingy's, just build it in as a failsafe, should the C u net burn through or m elt from the intense heat. Though it will probable not work, because of high pressure of the gas ...

randomquestion

May 23rd, 2002, 07:10 PM

T h e o t h e r d a y I was fooling around with some Right Guard Deodorant. Ju st shooting it through a candle. Then it burned back towards the can, after just a second of sparying, luckily I stop pushing on the top in time, and all it did was m elt the hole in the cap closed. Anyways, the point is that if you are going to build a butane flam e thrower like that, you deffinately need to h a v e s o m ething to stop the flam e f r o m g o i n g b a c k i n t o t h e t a n k . S o u n d s l i k e y o u n e e d s o m e type of high pressure regulator.

EP

May 23rd, 2002, 07:35 PM

W hat size of butane tank are you plan ning on using? The ones I've seen for lighters, such as this one: (cop y a n d p a s t e ) http://www.geocities.com /extrem epyro2/ 3 8 6 b o m b1.jpg d o n ' t s e e m t o h a v e m uch pressure. I only got them to shoot flam e a b o u t a f o o t . I h a v e s e e n s o m e impressive pictures from the Burning Man Festival of a flam ethrower built with a metal propane tank as the fuel source, if you wanted a decent flam ethrower, that seem s to be the wa y to go. <sm all>[ May 23, 2002, 06:35 PM: Message edited by: EP ]

Anthony

May 23rd, 2002, 08:45 PM

randomquestion, the flame will not "go back inside the can". You were in no danger besides flamable liquid having dripped from the nozzle set fire to the top of the can (does happen), in which case the plastic parts *could* burn through and rapidly vent the contents of the can which would be burnt. I.e your flam e thrower would go out of control. You don't need any kind of

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

flam e t r a p a s l o n g a s y o u r p r o p e l l a n t d o e s n ' t c o n t a i n a n o x i d i s e r a n d t h e f l a m e s f r o m the nozzle won't over heat the fuel container. I agree on those butane refil cans, 12-18" flam e m a x - I m ade a concealed mini flame thrower be fore with one.

randomquestion

May 23rd, 2002, 10:12 PM

So that you should know it CAN go back inside the can if you spray it for a while (20 sec+) and yes they have blown up on people.

CyclonitePyro

May 24th, 2002, 12:30 AM

There is nothing but liquid coming up from the bottom of the can, up through the straw and out the nozzle, there is no oxyg e n at at in those cans. It is impossible for the flam e to "eat" back through the liquid into a can with no oxygen and exlplode. If there was oxygen in the can a nd it was towards the end of the flam mible liquid so that it is sputtering up liquid m ixed with oxygen, then there is a risk. But you won't find any com m e rcial sprays with oxygen in the can.

SATA NIC

May 24th, 2002, 02:16 AM

I have definately read stories about th at happening. (reliable newwpapers) The flam e can travel back down the can, and apparently can explode. I don't know how, in theory i believe it should'n t, though i suppo s e t h e r e i s a r e a s o n b e h i n d i t . O n c e t h e f l a m e g e t s b a c k t o the can, i drop / throw them ....

Anthony

May 24th, 2002, 11:01 AM

W hen was the last tim e we tru s t e d t h e e x p l o s i v e k n o w l e d g e o f a newspaper? :) It *is* im possible for the flam e t o g o b a c k inside the can. Yes, the one with tazer ignition.

BoB-

May 26th, 2002, 04:20 AM

I f y o u f e e l l i k e p u k i n g u p $ 5 b u c k s , y o u c o u l d j u s t u s e t h e n o z z l e a s s e m bly (m odified for full flow of course) from a p r o p a n e torch, which already h ave flash-back arrestors built in. I'm with Anthony on this one, aeresol cans cant just explode, they have to heated beyond the safe pressure levels of the can, or penetrated. Usually some kid chucks one in a fire to watch it explode, and then accidently gets m o s t o f t h e e x p l o s i o n him self, then m a k e s u p s o m e bullshit story for his mom and his doctors.

xyz

May 26th, 2002, 04:59 AM

There would have to be some air in the tank before they started to pressurize it with hydrocarbon, butane, propane whatever.

Hvoroba

May 27th, 2002, 01:11 PM

T h e t a n k i s a b o u t 1 0 c m at height, 3-4 cm in diameter, made of plastic. It costs about 5 NIS, which is about 1.25 US dollars, so it really pays off. From reading the above posts, I decided to use a double copper trap and also a water trap with appropriate sizes so it will resist the gas pressure. My question now is, should I locate the copper trap before or after the nozzle? If it is located before the nozzle it will not bother the burning gas stream , so the gas will go straigh t forward , however there is a disadvantage, since t h e s p r a y i n g n o z z l e m i g h t e x p a n d f r o m t h e i m m ense heat and not function properly. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> g u n q u e s t i o n s a n d stuff Log in

View Full Version : gun questions and stuff A-BOMB

May 23rd, 2002, 10:38 AM

I h a v e a q u e stion, does anyone here know how m uch weight it takes to fire a #209 shotshell or #11 m usket prim er? And I found this site here that sells all kinds of .50 BMG bullets(AP,API,APIT) www.okiebigbores.com . And there was some other things I wanted to say bu t can't remem ber so I'll put them in later. Well I remem ber what I wanted to say no w. First Anthony, I wanted to know the foot/pounds or inch/pounds of power I would need to fire a those prim ers so I wouldn't have to waste tim e and money trying out different springs to find one that will work in some g r e n a d e f u s e s I ' m m a k i n g . <sm all>[ May 23, 2002, 02:58 PM: Message edited by: A-BOMB ]

Anthony

May 23rd, 2002, 12:53 PM

Do you m ean like a static load on the prim er, or an im pact? The first would be to put a firing pin against the prim er and slowly and gradual increase the weight on it until the prim er fired, I'm willing to bet it wo uld be rather inconsistant. The second would be better rated as a unit of energy, e.g 0.5J fires the prim er reliably. W ithout knowing what you want to do with it it's not quite clear what you m e a n ?

00Buckshot

June 14th, 2002, 01:03 AM

I h a v e a g u n question, for you hunters out there. I'm t h i n k i n g a b o u t b u y i n g a g u n . I live in Canada and gun control is strict. And I want to legally own the gun, which limits me to hunting rifles, and sh o t g u n s . W hat I want to know is which hunting rifle would best fit the purp o s e o f a n " i m provised" sniper rifle? Of course I wou ld buy a real expensive scope to put on the rifle. W hich hunting rifle shoots the farthest and the straightest? I would love to own a .50 sniper rifle.

Energy84

June 14th, 2002, 01:23 AM

Personally, I'd choose a high quality .303 British. My grandfather had one and now m y dad has two of them . They a re my rifle of choice. They are extrem ely accurate , with the right amm o of course. O ne of the rifles that my dad has had the barrel cut a few inches shorter and has som e weird s t a m p i n g s o n i t . T h e s t a m ps on the receiver, barrel and trigger guard all have different d a t e s ( o l d e s t b e i n g 1 917, and newest being 1941 I think). It's a nice rifle though , with the original long range open sights (I forget what they're ca lled, but you always see them on old vintage guns), my uncle m a n a g e d t o s c o r e a h e a d s h o t o n a y o u n g elk at over 350yrds with it!

Aaron-V2.0

June 14th, 2002, 02:02 AM

One I've had experience with is 8m m . 0 6 ( 3 0 . 0 6 C a s i n g n e c k e d o u t t o f i t a n 8 m m Mauser bullet) it's a wildcat in my area but I've read about it in a few sm alltim e m agazines. The flight path is very flat and the rifle I owned didnt get any major dropping until 500 yards or mo re. The only downside is if your not set up for reloading your am mo the price of $1.00 a round is outrageous.

Zyklon_B

June 14th, 2002, 02:38 AM

00Buckshot, you can get a restricted firearm s l i c e n s e a n d b u y A R 1 5 ' s a n d h a n d g u n s t o o , i t s n o t t h a t h a r d .

zaibatsu

June 14th, 2002, 04:47 PM

Thats strange, m a y b e m y e y e s are fucked up, but I tho ught that this was the *IMPROVISED WEAPO NS* section. There are plen tly of gunBBs out there, ask at one of them , t h e r e s b o u n d t o b e a C a n a d i a n o n e o u t t h e r e . T o p i c C LO SED! vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Air Guns

View Full Version : Air Guns Sako

Log in

September 20th, 2001, 11:59 PM

Hello everyone Ive been planning to build an air gun for some time now, and I have access to a machine shop once again. I was wondering what is best, a spring-piston gun or a pre-charged pneumatic? Spring-piston air guns look to have fewer parts and less accurate parts than a pre charged gun, making it easier to build. Does pcps have any advantages besides multiple shots? Multiple shots would be nice but Im planning on using 250 psi. so I dont think I would get very many shots off that. If I was to go with a spring-piston gun, how powerful should the main spring be? Thank you for any help

[This message has been edited by Sako (edited September 20, 2001).]

Agent Blak

September 21st, 2001, 10:52 AM

PCP is good for the Superman like high, almost nothing can put you down. it is the who;e reason for the invention of "non-lethal weapons." -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

zaibatsu

September 21st, 2001, 04:18 PM

You've forgotten whats the easiest (imo) type of airgun to make - the pump-up pneumatic. I'd post more on this, but don't have the time at the moment, I'll post more later if you want. 250psi isn't going to do a lot, I'd say use a pressure of around 500psi, in .22 calibre, with a 20" barrel, that should give you around 12ftlb, more if you used a heavier pellet. I'd say is you could make something that could stand these pressures, then a resevoir capacity of 1"^3 with a pressure of 1000psi would be best, as it would give a high power of 26ftlb. Pump-Up Pneumatics are pretty easy to make I think, I've finalised my design for one, and it doesn't look to have a lot of different parts, and those that it does have are easy to machine. -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

Sako

September 21st, 2001, 07:42 PM

The only problem I can see with using 500 psi. is how can I get such pressure? Ive seen small compressors that will pump up to 250 psi. and thats the highest Ive seen. May be I will use a paintball gun tank as a reservoir. Zaibatsu- can you please post your information? Pump-Up Pneumatics, how much pressure does the pump produce?

zaibatsu

September 21st, 2001, 08:06 PM

Right, pressure of the pump... Here is the formula you use - P1V1=P2V2. So, if we want to fill a reservoir with volume 1"^3 with 1000psi, then we already have P2(1000psi) and V2 (1"^3) We also know P1, as its just air at standard pressure, which is around 14.4psi. so we also now have P1, so to find the volume of air we need to compress to fill a reservoir of 1"^3 with 1000psi of air = 1000/14.4 =69.44444444444 So, we need to compress 69"^3 (to 2sf) of air. We could either have a small diameter pump-cylinder thingy combined with a long stroke length, or a large pump-cylinder combined with a short stroke. However, this 69"^3 can be done in many short strokes, or a few very heavy strokes. So basically just mess around with the amount of strokes you'd like, pump-cylinder diameter, and stroke length till you get the ratio you want. Bear in mind it'd be better to start off at a small pressure like 500psi, although that'd only give around 16ftlb in .22 cal with a 21gr pellet in a 20" barrel. Its late, this is probably full of mistakes, anyone feel free to correct me, I need sleep. -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

Sako

September 21st, 2001, 08:36 PM

Thank you for the information

BoB-

September 22nd, 2001, 04:51 AM

I had this weird dream, in it, I got lethal (a very large rabbit) results using a .22 barell, using only 70psi. The difference was my chamber volume, I used a 12" long 3/4" diameter galvanized steel chamber, using a small handpump bought at walmart, I could get 80psi in 20 pumps. -----------------Teamwork is essential.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter It lets you to blame someone else.

BoB-

September 22nd, 2001, 10:07 AM

You mentioned spring pistons, can anyone tell me how they work? I would be very grateful. -----------------Teamwork is essential. It lets you to blame someone else.

zaibatsu

September 22nd, 2001, 12:36 PM

BoB- you will know what a spring piston airgun is, although the name might not ring a bell. Spring piston airguns usually have three methods for cocking (break-barrel, underleaver and sideleaver) and they compress a spring. The piston is in front of the spring, and when the spring is compressed, it is held back by the trigger mech. When the trigger is pulled, the piston is released, letting the compressed spring force the piston forwards, compressing the air and pushing it through the air port. Also, there is a process called dieseling going on, this goes on in most airguns, and is not really a negative thing, but over dieseling is. Basically the lubricants ignite due to the high pressures and temperatures, and this gives the gun more power. They're pretty simple guns to keep working, less fiddly than a PCP or Pump-Up pneumatic, and are cheaper to buy (usually). -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

Anthony

September 23rd, 2001, 08:00 PM

The peak chamber pressure produced by a spring/piston gun with 12ft/lb muzzle energy is about 1000psi. It's funny you say that BoB-, I had pretty bad results using a 36" barrel, 36" 3/4 air chamber and .22 pellet at 100psi. Power was considerably less than 12ft/lb air rifle. But with a 0.50" barrel and 350gr slug it'd do about 90ft/lb -----------------"Shit happens. Get a fucking helmet"

Scientist

September 5th, 2004, 11:52 AM

You've forgotten whats the easiest (imo) type of airgun to make - the pump-up pneumatic. I'd post more on this, but don't have the time at the moment, I'll post more later if you want. Please post it. Thanks.

MMIV

September 5th, 2004, 09:19 PM

there are good looking air gun designs in the makeshift arsenal (aussie owned!!) one air gun has a air camber behind the barrel which is charged with a bike pump and a air tap valve is used to discharge the round. the other design was that a aerosol can was attached to rear to discharge to projectile but i was thinking of replacing with co2 canister used to pump bike tires. what are your comments about this idea, anyone??

A2675770

September 20th, 2004, 03:35 PM

From my own exprience, I took a 1976 crackbarrel 1 hand pellet gun and turned it into a high pressurized dart gun. The similarities (from a basic semi-auto paintball gun, Where I got the idea) after removing the spring, is pure insanity. I simply bored out the barrel to fit the proper darts (not exactly sure of the total diamiter off the top of my head) Drilled and tapped the back of the barrel 3/4, and socketed in the tank attachment. With a nice 20oz tank, it had surprising acuracy, up to 150-200 yards, Only problem was the single load darts, I wish I could have thought of a way to custom some kind of rigged up clip :\ . -A26

Macgyver

October 2nd, 2004, 01:08 AM

Wouldn't this be something more fun to build? http://www.burntlatke.com/bb.html A BB machinegun..... At least some pieces of the design found on that link can be used, but I'd prefer to use a portable pressurized gas container rather than having a hose connected to an air compressor. Perhaps a paintball CO2 tank or something similar?

xperk

October 2nd, 2004, 01:13 PM

Sako, I would certainly go for a pcp design as this would give you max power in a controllable envelope. Spring powered airguns are hard to control once they get beyond a certain power limit while pcp's are surrealistically sweet. People go bear hunting with pcp's. .50 can be done with a pcp. For inspiration take a look at: http://www.barnespneumatic.com/ Most pcp shooters invest in a divers tank to fill their guns - refill of the tank is relatively cheap.

FragmentedSanity

October 15th, 2004, 12:17 PM

Im quite intersted in pump up penumatic air guns. Ive long believed them to be entierly underated. The ability to charge the air chamber any where - without bulky equipment - as many time as you want has some definite advantages. Sure the time between shots is much longer, but that just teachs you to shoot straight the first time! Id be intereted in any info or pics anyone has. There is a simple pistol version in the PMJB Vol 3 - page 52. Ive wanted to make something along those lines for a while now. Any comments or suggestions would be welcomed.

Spoz

October 16th, 2004, 09:49 AM

In regards to how you are to get a pressure of 500psi, I suggest CO2. Carbon dioxide is cheap and readily available in canisters for paintball or even soda stream chargers. at 25C it will have a pressure of around 830psi from memory, and will go up to 1000psi or so on a hot day. This would kick ass in a small caliber rifle, I designed a .177 caliber rifle that would be semi automatic and should be reliable, I just do not have a lathe to make the parts :(

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

If you want to stick with low pressure simply increase the barrel diameter, it means less force per square inch is needed but you need a higher volume to compensate, hence making them larger. I have a cannon that achieves 100m/s at 80psi, the barrel size is 1". Its quite bulky, but will shoot a 700 gram steel slug through several inches of hardwood, with a recoil to match a .30-06 at higher pressures. Great for backyard fun.

xperk

October 17th, 2004, 04:05 PM

FragmentedSanity, Some url's you may find interesting: Commercially available model: http://www.straightshooters.com/ourtake/otr9mm.html History of pneumatic guns: http://air.guns.20megsfree.com/ (note the black powder conversion in the vintage section)

FragmentedSanity

October 19th, 2004, 03:22 PM

Thtas the kind of thing im talking about... and if I could buy one I would. but im reduced to trying to make do with what I can make. but one would think that if they could be made in the 1600s we should be able to do it know without too much hassle... quoted from sites linked above. There was even a Elite Unit in a Austraian Army that carried .36 cal. and .51 cal. Air Rifles that shot up to 20 rounds with one charge, at speeds up to 1,000 fps .... A Austrian Miltary Air Rifle designed by Grandoni in 1779 shot 20 rounds of .51 cal. bullets at speeds as high as 1,000 fps on one charge.

thats fairly impressive. Me _ I just want something simple - I dont care if I have to charge it every shot - just a nice powerful big bore air rifle., and a pistol for plinking. thanks for the links anyway.

Third_Rail

November 6th, 2004, 03:20 PM

I've been using a CO2 setup, myself. Using dead-soft .36 caliber lead roundball, I get 600-700 fps. I'm pretty happy with it, overall, but the trigger mechanism has to be improved. Currently I'm just using a modified trigger out of a Crosman pellet rifle, which I'm not happy with. Does anyone know a better trigger mechanism, or plans for one? I've been having fun with a machining course, and I'd love to make a new trigger mechanism, but I have no plans. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> PYRO500's new "toys" Log in

View Full Version : PYRO500's new "toys" PYRO500

May 23rd, 2002, 11:35 PM

I have been collecting simple street weapons used around here (most of the people that call themselves part of a gang here can't afford guns! or find someone that can afford one to steal from!!) in the pictures you can see a chrome knuckle duster, a 96 link bicycle chain with a keyring on the end, a #40 36 link sprocket drive chain, and a two piece throwing knife set. of these things I got the drive chain (my favorate) for $5.00 (bought it from someone at school beacuse I didn't want to buy 20 feet minimum) it is 277G for just 36 links and is very heavy and would pretty much crack bone on impact with a skull. The bicycle chain in comparison is 96 links and weighs only 300G for it's length, you can use the keyring on the end and make a hand loopand the chain is too small for someone to try to yank it from your hands and needs to be doubled up to be a good blunt impact weapon but it is very compact. The knuckle duster is 4.5 Oz witch is about half of their brass counterpart, I found I don't really need extra weight and it actually can hemper a good well aimed strong punch and won't stain your hands like brass, I believe this is a steel piece coated with chrome. the two piece throwing knife set is in a little leather pouch and they are pretty well balanced. I got these for $5.00 from someone who couldn't figure out how to throw them, I have gotten really good with them close range. as a matter of fact I got everything here except the bike chain from people at school. here are the pictures of them and my case I keep them in. http://www.boomspeed.com/kg4boj/dsc_001.jpg http://www.boomspeed.com/kg4boj/dsc_003.jpg http://www.boomspeed.com/kg4boj/dsc_005.jpg

randomquestion

May 23rd, 2002, 11:43 PM

Nice...I like the bike chain Idea...But just wondering how often do you use these "weapons" on people -- and who...??? Hey I'm also from FL... <small>[ May 23, 2002, 10:44 PM: Message edited by: randomquestion ]

Madog555

May 23rd, 2002, 11:49 PM

i have a 1-2foot length of heavy chain and a nice hardwood billy club thats all dented up. i inherited them from my great uncle. the club looks like it got quite a bit of use

TariqMujahid

May 24th, 2002, 12:04 AM

I bought a machette from K-Mart for $8. I think it's 16" long blade, but I don't remember or feel like looking at it right now. It came with a green sheath that can be hooked to a belt. Of course, they sold it to me with the blade duller than a butterknife's, so I had to sharpen it a bit. Now that it's sharpen, it makes quite a nice weapon. I keep it under my bed, just in case. They also sell nice Hatchets at K-Mart. Steel Blade, and quite sharp! These are $12. I don't know which would be more fun to use, a machette or a hatchet.

Mick

May 24th, 2002, 12:22 AM

i would love a set of knuckle dusters...but unfortunatly they a remarkably had to get in australia bicycle chain is for pussies, get some motorbike chain, or bobcat chain.(either that or just go buy some normal 20mm chain.)

SATANIC

May 24th, 2002, 02:25 AM

In aus, you basically have to make your own. I know people who made their own knuckle dusters in metal work, from thick aluminium plate. quite light, and with tapered edges above the knuckles. Apparently, knuckle dusters are illegal here in aus, so watch out.... There has been a discussion about the usefullness of throwing knives, but they're fun to play with anyway :) The bike chain could be kept under the guise of a key chain, so you could completely deny it as a weapon when pulled up by cops. (as seems to happen to all kids these days) carrying a knuckle duster or throwing knives is going to get you in deeper shit than they're worth. maybe it's different where you live, but a simple folding knife is enough for me. I have a large cold steel voyager, with the tanto blade. sweet!

Microtek

May 24th, 2002, 06:12 AM

If you want a good weapon for self defence but is worried about being caught with it take a strong, lightweight umbrella with a sharp point and a narrow profile. If you're a reasonably good fencer, no hand to hand weapon will beat fencing weapons. Of course, really close quarters are unsuitable for improvised rapiers, but nevertheless...

Microtek

May 24th, 2002, 01:58 PM

Why is hand-to-hand combat a problem? It's certainly not as lethal as shoot-outs, and not as random. I'm not quoting starwars here; you can train in armed or unarmed fighting to become good at defending yourself to the point that even three or four opponents are manageable but in a shoot-out, luck is the main factor.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter A-BOMB

May 24th, 2002, 02:06 PM

Spyder Co civilain is the way to go or a nice looking killing glove.

PYRO500

May 24th, 2002, 04:24 PM

I'd get a pair of loaded gloves but here in florida there's no excuse to wear them and they aren't easy to slip on and off in your pocket. I personally prefer teh larger #40 chain to any of the others, it is heavy, a good flail like weapon, strong enough to take anything I can put at it and is compactables, the knuckle dusters look very suspicious but I can call the big chaina key chain (a very long one) beacuse it has a triangular metal piece one end for attaching stuff. this is the biggest chain that I think would be fast enough to be defensive and offensive against a fast target and powerful enough to crack a skull/knock out teeth/break an eye socket (a nasty wound that leaves a person's eye hanging out) I am thionking about cutting the bike chain as it is a bit too long, but I still think it's too light to do anything except hurt like hell. the little belt pouch on the throwing knives is convienient, although I'd only use it as an intimidation weapon beacuse it's so small, like I throw one at a wall and stick it into a bulliten board, then pull the other one out and say, I can do that again, then be prepaired to grab a heavyer weapon although at clost range (6-12 feet) I can throw this thing so it flips broad side through the air I can repedidly stick it through drywall. I think that a person's abdomen would be no challenge. but with the small blade i'd have to be prepared to follow up with an elbow to the face or something.

EP

May 24th, 2002, 07:09 PM

TariqMujahid - I also have a machete next to my bed! Seemed like a good place to put it. Where I live and go to school there is no point in carrying any kind of weapon, so I don't have to worry about it. :) edit: I don't think it would be too difficult to make "knuckle dusters" from wood either, and if you were feeling evil, drill holes and stick nails in them so it has spikes. That would make it a bit difficult to conceal however... <small>[ May 24, 2002, 06:11 PM: Message edited by: EP ]

Spudgunner

May 26th, 2002, 01:13 PM

Has anybody thought about using the chain off of a chainsaw instead of bike chain? I know it wouldn't have the brute force of a drive chain off of a motorcycle or anything, but it would hurt as much as a bike chain, and it would (probably) shred skin because of the projections that are on it. I don't think it weighs that much though, so it may not be that great of a substitute, but I think an experiment with under-ripe watermelons would be in order. Now, if only it would stop raining long enough to plant a garden, I would be able to try that method later this summer. Just a suggestion. Spud

Demolition

May 27th, 2002, 08:51 AM

I remember a story my friend told me about some kid who got caught with a knuckle duster,they kicked up a huge fuss and I *think he got charged in the end,stupid really. :rolleyes: I know if I was about to get rolled I wouldnt think twice about using it,and then if things turned out my way id steal there wallet,you might as well take the opportunity when its there. Ive made a knuckle duster before and carried it around with me,Ive even taken it to school and almost got caught with it. :o (I had not intent on using it,just to show me mates) Ive got to get around to making another. :) I like the idea about the motobike chain.Ive gone and got myself a length already,its soaking now in some kero to dissolve all of the grease.Ill add 2 keyrings either end and then use to to make sure noone steals my wallet. :D Next to my bed ive got a large Mag-lite (takes 6 D batterys) and a smallish type steel pipe.Its about 40cm long and 20mm in diameter with the thinkness of the walls being 3-4mm.This thing hurts like anything,I was swinging it around one day and on my downswing (coming from over my shoulder) the pipe kept going and I accidently hit myself in the kneecap. :o I fell to the ground instantly in agony. :( I say that the % power I hit myself with would of been about 5-10% of my maxium swinging power if that makes sense.

nbk2000

May 27th, 2002, 09:13 AM

Get ten, 1 yard lengths of razor tape or barbed wire. Tie one end together into a bundle with wire, then wrap well with duct tape to form a handle. Voila! A flail that'll rip flesh off bone with one swipe. Perhaps you could conceal it inside a cardboard tube disguised as a package or such to carry it in public. For chain, weld short bits of nail cut down (pointy end, 'natch )and passed through the sprocket holes for a few inches at the ends. Now it'll pierce the flesh and rip it apart when yanked out.

BoB-

May 28th, 2002, 04:32 AM

I've always been partial to the boxcutter myself, they cost about a dollar a peice, there blade extends in less than a second, and they are (duh) razor sharp. A carotid/jugular attack would be extremly effective with one of these weapons, and even a blinded-by-adrenaline swipe would cause extreme pain and blood loss.

green beret

May 30th, 2002, 02:11 AM

I like all these ideas, I will get myself a length of chain soon, I would also like to get some knuckle dusters, Demolition do you have a bought pair or are they home made?

Spudgunner

May 30th, 2002, 02:11 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

NBK, I was up at our farm the past few days and got a hold of our barbed wire. Now, I didn't actually try MAKING the flail, but I did test the wire, and it was VERY stiff. I do not know if they make different thicknesses of the wire, but ours was VERY stiff and wasn't really flexible, so I don't know how good of an actual flail it would make, though it would still hurt like ****. It might even hurt more if it wasn't very flexible, but it would take some work to make it work. Because the stuff is spooled up, when you take it off the stuff is all curled, and it takes some work to get it straight. So, this flail idea of yours would be painful, but you couldn't really hide it. The stiffness of the wire would prevent you from just rolling it up like a whip or something. I've never encountered razor tape, so I have no idea if that would work, but the barbed wire won't (at least, the stuff we have). As for original ideas for weapons, I seem to be screwed lately. I used to be able to come up with pretty good stuff, but lately I cannot think of anything really. But, I will be sure to post it if I do. Spud

Demolition

May 30th, 2002, 05:19 AM

green beret - I made my own from about 1/4 Inch steel.It wasnt the best design but its still good. :) For my next one instead of having individual holes for each finger it will be just a long hole and made from about 1/2 inch steel.

Zach

May 31st, 2002, 12:27 AM

back when i had access to the FTP, i downloaded that knife making pdf. the guy who authored that drilled holes along the outside shape of his knifeblade so he could just saw between the holes. that makes cutting a hole out of steel or whatever very much easier. when i made my knuckle dusters, i used a bigger drill bit ( bigger than the hacksaw blade ) in one spot and used a smaller drillbit on the rest of the profile. filing all that steel is a bitch though...

PYRO500

May 31st, 2002, 02:08 AM

I would recomend that when you make your knuckle dusters that you do make it so that all the fingers are seprate, there is varing designs in knuckle dusters but the ones that hurt the other person the most and you the least are the ones that don't spread your fingers much, also if you make a pair be aware that your palm is going to take the impact more than your fingers meaning that if you do not invent some new way of bracing your homemade dusters you will end up having a hard time getting it to line up with your palm and wrist and since you are gripping this thing you could end up fucking up a finger or two, I tried to explain that the best I can but in case i'm not clear let me explain a little more. First example, a pair of storebought knuckle dusters, they have holes you put your fingers through them and when you clench your fist your fingers end up like your holding something in your hand, your fingers cannot travel any furter back beacuse the duster is braced against your palm and lines up perfectly across the tops of the second knuckles every time you make a fist. Now you have a home made pair. You have one long slot for the finger holes. The duster is cut from a rectaqngular piece of steel and when you slip it on there is a bit of wiggleing around, the dusters do not line up with your knuckles every time beacuse the individual fingers do not line up with the holes and the duster ends up above (bad) or below (worse) your second knuckles. Now this may be worst case scenario but in a hurry you'll be thankful that the holes are there trust me. Also, do not ever get in the habit of putting them on any other way than just fingers through the holes in the top and making a fist, any other way will end up hurting your hand/breaking fingers.

nbk2000

May 31st, 2002, 04:40 AM

Get a grinding wheel for your drill and use that instead of a file. Old barbed wire is better since it's more flexible, plus it's rusty. If you stick a couple of onces of weight on the end of the strands, it greatly increases the "flail" action. Razor tape can be pretty flexible too in smaller sizes.

A-BOMB

May 31st, 2002, 09:11 AM

I'm going to decribe my "killing glove" as I call it because I can't seem to find it for a picture. First I took a semi-fingerless paintball glove and cut into the leather in the palm and remove the padding and replaced it with a 2mm thick steel plate with a hole in the center to which I attached the swivel/ball joint from a TV antena. Then I cut the antena tube off a 1" from the ball joint and epoxied a metal spike into the tube. Now I can swivel the spike and which way strait out the bottom of my fist to slam it down in a stabbing attack, or strait forward for a punching attack. And then when I don't need the spike I just unscrew the metal plate in the glove. I'll see if I can make a drawing of it if I cant find it for a picture.

inferno

June 1st, 2002, 11:14 AM

Trolley pools make good "gang" style weapons, god knows a lot of kids get whacked up with them in Aus in gang wars. Theyre made out of aluminium tubing, its lightweight but hard, but the weight/size ratio is EXCELLENT for a weapon, theyre light enough to handle very easily, yet heavy enough to inflict some major pain in a fight. I got mine from an abandoned trolley, just cut off the pole from the trolley with a knife, so it has a handle on each end with grip too. I did have one i gave to a friend with a biog money box on it, weight about 500g (just the money box) and was closer to one end than the other, excellent solid metal heavy "bommy knocker". And as for knuckle dusters, lol satanic i thought youd know theyre illegal here! everything is illegal here. Did u know by law taxis are meant to hold a bail of hay in the boot? Old law from horse and cart days i guess, but the police could still arrest a taxi driver for it! A weapon kids make in woodwork (shop for u americans) is just a piece of thick (1 1/2 inch+) dowel, about a foot long with bent nails bashed in a pretty random order in one end. Knuckledusters would have to be made i think, you wont find them easily lying around. Knives are the best weapon though. As that GET TOUGH! book in another post says, even an opponent seeing the flash off a blade of a knife strikes fear into their heart and can make them surrender, and that someone well educated and trained in the use of a knife is virtually unbeatable if they wield a knife in hand to hand combat. A good alternative to a knife, which will do the same but inflict even more pain probably, is a nail punch. Theyre very hard, yet sharp enough to just pierce skin, and will deliver a blow like bringing down the back of a machete on someone hard.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

There are better alternatives to use than a machete, theyre a bit too heavy to control quickly, but if you did hit someone itll really f*** them up bed. But in civilian fights, gang wars and the like, its really more important to disable them with the least amount of injury or permanent damage, as even in self defence you can get put in jail. I know a family who had a burglar try to break in through their skylight, he fell in and broke his leg, sued them and won $40,000 AU. Go figure.

xoo1246

June 2nd, 2002, 01:52 PM

quote:

---

I know a family who had a burglar try to break in through their skylight, he fell in and broke his leg, sued them and won $40,000 AU. Go figure.

---

Urban myth.

Microtek

June 2nd, 2002, 02:14 PM

A knife is an excellent weapon if your opponent is unarmed - otherwise it won't do you much good as it has no defensive capabilities and very little reach. A simple hardwood dowel 25-30 mm in diameter and about 50 cm in length ( or a pair of these ) are much much better.

Nico

June 4th, 2002, 05:49 AM

Just as a counterpoint to the opinion of finger-holes in knuckle dusters, many folks over at BladeForums and KnifeForums (Snickersee, Don Rearic, Ken Cox, etc.) seem to favor the NON-finger-hole design, FWIW. I guess the important thing is just to try the darn things on your hand, hit a few walls, and see what works best for you personally. Here's a few related links ... The ComTech Stinger: http:// www.jamesakeating.com/catalog1.html Don Rearic's Commentary: http://www.drearic.com/ brassknuckles.html (explore the rest of the site too) Custom Knuckle Dusters: http://www.mrknuckles.com/ index3.htm The Impact Kerambit: http:// www.shomertec.com/item.cfm?variable=108 (this item has gotten mixed reviews) The Keepsafe: http://chasclements.tripod.com/ keepsafe.htm Lead-filled gloves: http:// www.omegamanenterprises.com/hatchgloves.htm <small>[ June 04, 2002, 05:07 AM: Message edited by: Nico ]

ShotgunsAreFun

June 5th, 2002, 09:01 AM

On the subject of concealing bike chain as a keychain, I prefer just to buy some of that really thick keychain and have a bunch of keys on the end. Totally deniable(cops still rough you up like hell if you carry anything like a weapon even if they have no proof, I know this from personal experience and I heard some guy was arrested for carrying a sock in his pocket to be used as a break and enter tool. Don't know if it was true though) and if you have some old padlock keys or whatever, you can sharpen them and they will inflict extra damage. I carry my chain wherever I go, and have only ever had to use it for intimidation. Most people just leave you alone if you unclip it from your belt and swing it at them. A trolley pole is also very useful as a handle for a flail. They can be removed from the trolley just by turning it on it's side and having one person jump on the main body of the trolley and another pull the pole out. Drill a hole in one end, but a metre or two of heavy chain and another metre of light chain on the end. You could add a chunky key ring to the end to give it some extra weight, but I haven't. That can easily break bone once it has some momentum! Just some ideas.

life and death mc

June 5th, 2002, 01:22 PM

G'day fellas, just thought i'd throw my two bobs worth in on a simple knuckle duster design.All you need is three pieces of 25x25rhs[square hollow tube] about 12mm wide and a bit of 10mm round bar,lay the 3 bits of rhs so that the one in the middle sits higher than the other two then lay the round bar along the bottom and weld it together.

mark

June 10th, 2002, 05:33 PM

Does anyone know if it is illegal to cary small throwing knives on your person, like in your wallet? Also, is there any good websight that have throwing tutrials? I just hate the sound of the knifes clatttering to the floor when I throw.

Fl4PP4W0k

June 13th, 2002, 10:01 AM

Hey, IMHO, Fuck the small throwing knives. They suck some MAJOR cock. Big, weighted ones are pretty cool - but the l'il ones just dont have the heft and are therefore pretty hard to throw and hit somethin. A good compromise are those small Carbon Steel "ninja" stars. They are pretty small, and whatever (within reason) way you throw 'em, they stick in.

sinstar

June 13th, 2002, 12:39 PM

I'am pretty sure spytech sell ninja throwing stars, and there based in the Uk.

Xtramad

June 14th, 2002, 03:36 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Has anyone ever been killed by a trowing star or even seriously wounded? I've played around with these things for years and the only ones that I think would cause any sort of serious damage are the one with three points. Hitting someones head would be the only option for disabling them if they stood absolutly still, who wouldn't duck if someone threw something at their face? And if someone hit me in the chest or face with one of those things I probaly wouldn't even bother to remove it before beating the shit out of the bloody punk. Sorry to burst your Kung Fu dreams, but throwing stars suck.

xyz

June 14th, 2002, 06:21 AM

I think that some throwing stars have holes/indentations/grooves in the side which are deigned to hold a poison of some sort (if disabling your opponent is your aim then I think you could substitute the poison for a diluted acid or even use a concentrated one if you can protect the star from being dissolved) I have a throwing star that I made in Metalwork at school when the teacher wasn't looking :) , it is made from galvanized steel sheet (about 1mil thick) and is very sharp, it is reasonably accurate if thrown right and will stick about 2-3cm into a tree. On the topic of knuckledusters, a popular material to make them from here in Australia is those thick (1.5-2cm) plastic chopping boards that are made from a very strong and solid plastic, they are much easier to make than metal ones and don't show up on metal detectors. A friend of mine has been considering an electric knuckleduster with a capacitor charging circuit and capacitor inside a container worn on the belt or put in the pocket with wires going to discharge terminals on the (plastic) knuckleduster.

inferno

June 14th, 2002, 08:37 AM

Xoo - no sh*t. Was my dad's friend. He got them on something to do with the fact that the skylight could have collapsed on anyone including someone working on the roof or whatever. And "ninja stars" could do a lot. Simple stars cut out of galvanized metal (as someone said) can stick into things pretty nicely. Commercial ones are much thicker and denser, and are probably better. But it they can stick 2-3cm in a tree, imagine into a body. With the spin on them, theyd cut you up pretty nicely.

xoo1246

June 14th, 2002, 02:58 PM

Since we are talking toy's in general, I like to show some caltrops I made recently(showed one in the blu-tack post). They are easily made from two horse shoe nails and can be manufactured in less than a miniute. No soldering necessary. Probably not the best for vehicles but good enough for feet/shoes. I have tried stepping on them and they pierce my shoes without much resitance at all. Here's two pictures of them: http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/ caltrop02.jpg (closeup) http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/ caltrop03.jpg (those small ones isn't large enough to pierce a shoe, made them only as a test) If any of this seems confusing, it depends on me having a bad cold in combination with too little sleep. <small>[ June 14, 2002, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

Whitey

June 14th, 2002, 06:52 PM

Here's in interesting article (above average) on the type of weapons typically found on the street. http:// www.righteouswarriortemple.org/New%20Folder/hidden.htm

knowledgehungry

October 8th, 2002, 10:15 PM

On the subject of knuckle dusters, my friend has one which is used as a belt buckle he found it at some punk gear store as a belt buckle but it works as good as normal ones, it is a great way to excuse yourself having them, he wears it to school and no one is the wiser. even if it is a regular knuckle duster you can hook it on your belt to at least make it appear to have some purpose...

PYRO500

October 8th, 2002, 10:34 PM

Almost all of the ones I've seen have some kind of stud that allows you to stick it onto your belt. The problem is that they aren't actually belt buckles and if a cop should see you wearing one they'll know exactly what you have.

Voltforce

October 23rd, 2002, 04:55 PM

Has anyone heard of a gang that uses crossbows? For such a good weapon, they a remarkably cheap, only $40 for a cheap one and around $150 if you want a moderately good one. No cleaning or bullets required. Armed with a crossbow, an attacker with a knife or chain would have little chance against you. If you want to get really cheap, you can make one for under $5 with popsicle sticks, super glue, elastic wire, and a shishkabob skewer. It would not be lethal, but its very presence might be enough to persuade an attacker not to come after you if he does not want a skewer stuck in his body.

Charlie Workman

October 23rd, 2002, 06:24 PM

My older brother has carried a pair of brass knuckles for years. No one knows he carries them and he is very adept at getting them out of his pocket and on his hand without notice. One punch, the fight is over, and they are back in his pocket. No showing off to the guys or bragging how clever he is. As you can guess, he does have a great rep as a one punch fight stopper. ------------------------------------------------"To paraphrase Aristotle, life is a gas!" -Gidget

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

<small>[ October 24, 2002, 02:10 AM: Message edited by: Charlie Workman ]

Machiavelli

October 23rd, 2002, 07:01 PM

Voltforce, you might want to delete your "idea" of a homemade crossbow, as it's truely the essence of kewlness. About the gangs, I've never heard of them using crossbows, which seems quite logic to me. Usual gang fights occur in a distance of less than 10 meters and are often associated with provocations, verbal abuse and such for warm up. A crossbow is bad for such situations since it's very bulky due to the bow ruling out concealed carry, it's a one shot weapon, takes very long to reload and sucks at manstopping. For your chain or knife wielding attacker, if you don't manage a perfect shot in the eye if you're lucky or maybe the right spot on the neck then you'll probably have about 2 seconds before a very angry armed person is so close to you that you can smell what he had for lunch and you might be able to guess what he'll have for dinner. You won't like his choice :D

BoB-

October 24th, 2002, 04:16 PM

A combination of pipe knifes (sometimes called "blood letters") and ninjastars could prove quite effective, 1/8" blacksteel pipe nipples could be welded together and then grinded to an extreme agle, then have straightened fish hook barbs soldered to all the points. I still love rolls of pennys. "Oh, I forgot to go to the bank today occifer." They add alot of power to your punches, if your already decently strong you will get a 1-hit knockdown. Theres no reason why you have to smooth out the hit face of your brassknuckles, infact I'd say that a bunch of square bleeding dimples in someones face would be quite a detterent to the next guy Butcher knifes make great weapons too since they're already designed to cut flesh. Just ask Michael Myers.

Darkbloodpriest

October 24th, 2002, 07:45 PM

http://www.awma.com/dsp_LargeImage.cfm?imagename=1556&producttitle=4PointMoonStarBlack I don't think this would be very hard to make at home if you started with a perfect square of metal...and I don't think you would need all the pretty crap in the middle. As for using crossbows for closerange fighting...it works in concept only. If you ever tried it...crossbows suck. You only get about a good 20 or so feet or range. If you manage to consistently hit a target past 20 feet with a crossbow...you're a bad man. If you were simply going for the stealth part of it though... whats so bad about blowguns? Short...silent...deadly(with poison-tipped needle darts), perfection. Undetectable by metal detector(plastic blowgun...darts are too thin to be picked up...or you could hide them in a pen)...you can have a fairly accurate blowgun that is only two feet long...you would go four a three or four footer when you get experienced at controlling your breathing and when you need to hit something at a further distance(50 feet is all I've ever gotten). Speaking of poison...has anyone ever seen blackleaf 40? It was probably banned a while ago though...

McGuyver

October 27th, 2002, 03:51 PM

Yeah, I am also looking for a good poison to put on the tips of my darts. A poison that kills almost instantly but isn't but some how isn't dangerous unless it gets in your blood. Not sure if that's possible but... edit- spelling... <small>[ October 27, 2002, 02:55 PM: Message edited by: McGuyver ]

SATANIC

October 27th, 2002, 08:19 PM

I like that nija star / shruiken / whatever darkblood priest, I know it has been discussed, and they are supposedly fairly useless as far as serious weapons go.... With that particular one, you wouldn't have to hope one of the corners / spikes hit first, as the entire edge is sharpened to a blade. That way even if just the edge slipd by them, they are going to get cut, and if it's sharpened well, then that could be a fairly deep cut too. It'd be worth testing anyway.

Darkbloodpriest

November 6th, 2002, 02:11 PM

I do not consider something like this a "serious" weapon, especially compared to some of the other things one could make with some metal working toools, but with a little concentrated nicotine sulfate...> :) (Which I have yet to find ANYWHERE btw) Although I do not know if such a small amount would do anything... I have been looking thru some of the pmjb's and I really like prussic acid...I just wonder if it leaves a residue? (On the weapon of choice I mean) If you could get a poison to gel or somehow stick to the metal...you would be in business. Steel doesn't absorb as well as aluminum...atleast oxidation wise, so I assume it wouldn't bond as easily to a poison. See where I'm going here? I wonder if garlic "juice" poison tipped bullets are simply a urban myth....hmm... I think you've been talking to Madwolf too much... "Poison" garlic anything ideas are not welcome here!

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Sounds like a good project to me...I'll post results when I find something that works. <small>[ November 06, 2002, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

Machiavelli

November 6th, 2002, 06:45 PM

Considering the fact that prussic acid is a gas at slightly elevated room temperature it probably won't leave any residues. It also won't stay on your weapon, read a bit more. Especially try some of our past threads as poisons for darts/arrows/weapons have been discusse ad nauseum. If you want your poison to adhere to a weapons surface you could mix it with a highly viscous oil. The garlic idea however is crap, the only useful "evil" application of garlic was demonstrated using an ex-member called madwolf who just couldn't stop spouting nonsense about poisonous garlic bullets and him being chechenyan war vet and some other fake bs. We stuffed his ass full of nitrated garlic cloves and set fire to it. He went off like a rocket and wasn't seen again. Problem solved :D <small>[ November 06, 2002, 05:50 PM: Message edited by: Machiavelli ]

nbk2000

November 6th, 2002, 11:45 PM

And I lit the fuse. :p WHOoooooossssh..........BOOM... :)

SATANIC

November 6th, 2002, 11:50 PM

Yeah, all throwing knives / stars are not serious weapons at all. When I get around to testing, I'm also going to try serrations in the flat of the blade. They would look like the serrations you find on many knives these days, but hopefully not just shred rather than cut, but act as a blood groove. As we all know, when the wound is opened, it closes pretty quickly, unless the skin can't meet back up. Hence: serrations. the blood groove idea is also part of it, because I would be hoping for the tool to stick in the victim. If it doesn't, it's still cut them up pretty bad with the serations. Also, I've just bought some real throwing knives (small set of three) that do quite nicely. between a metre - metre and a half, they stick blade in, not a problem. Outside that range, I can't get a straight throw. Practice makes perfect, and I love mucking around with them, (have a dart board) so it's only a matter of time before I get it right.

Harry

November 7th, 2002, 12:47 PM

Hey MacGuyver, it's called snake venom. Cobra, krait, coral, several marine serpents. Assuming no cuts or sores in GI tract, you could dring the venom. Rub it on your skin, whatever. But if it gets direct acces to your blood, if you're not in an ER already, just hope your will is up-to-date. Synthetic heroin (China White) is pretty nasty stuff--a dose the size of a few sugar grains is lethal. Hard to "safely" cut that stuff. I'd say its best use was to accelerate mortality. Avoid skin contact. But in my sleep-deprived fantasies, I use metallic sodium projectiles for a nice penetration. (Don't ask about manufacture, anything's theoretically possible at 4AM with a 20 hour workday behind you.) Harry vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum rocketry?

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> Do anyone have plans for high powered Log in

View Full Version : Do anyone have plans for high powered rocketry? anarkisten_83

S e p t e m b e r 2 4th, 2001, 05:11 AM

I was looking for plans for highpowered rockets...I was just wondering if I can load a big am ount explosives in it, and how big thrust they have, and if U can aim it, and their range...? -----------------Anarkisten_8 3

SawedOff8gaugeman

S e p t e m b e r 2 4th, 2001, 12:52 PM

W hat a (k3\/\/L haX0r!!)...!!

Mr Cool

S e p t e m b e r 2 4th, 2001, 03:01 PM

OMG, this gu y is unbelievable. BFL section!

PYRO500

S e p t e m b e r 2 4th, 2001, 04:19 PM

I leave the b oard for 10 m in. and look what happens -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro20 0 0 u s / ]

kingspaz

S e p t e m b e r 2 4th, 2001, 06:07 PM

ahahahahahhahahahahaha wow you m ust be real clever. i wish i'd thought of a high powered rocket full of explosive. for fucks sake....first learn som ething a b o u t t h e b a sics or rocketry like why they m ove. aaaarrrrrgggghhhh!!! you m a k e m e physically sick!! you m ust work out som e answers for yourself....whats the use?....dam kweeewwewls never pay any attention anyways.....i have to agree with BFL!!!

SofaKing

S e p t e m b e r 2 5th, 2001, 07:03 AM

There's another thread about rockets use it -----------------W ith Knowledge we find Truth - With Truth we find Freedom

PYRO500

S e p t e m b e r 2 5th, 2001, 06:15 PM

I thought I closed this thread. -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro20 0 0 u s / ] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> explosive dogpile

View Full Version : explosive dogpile S. Toppholzer

Log in

May 24th, 2002, 02:59 PM

sounds kewlish lol. Anyways, I was working on different thermite formulae lately and then I thought of flashbangs - which brought me to the idea of combining thermite and flashbang -like, say, a thermite bomb that blows molten slags all around. So I did some kind of preliminary testing, made a couple of thermite pellets and the "dogpile" which is better described in the file exploding dogpile.pdf you can find in the upload section on the forum ftp. I didn't pack all the stuff together in a tube since I first wanted to see wether it would work anyways - and if it worked what the possible result could be. I was amazed by the ferocity and the loudness of the bang the detonating HMTD made. A device with such a "dogpile" embedded within and lit on both ends with maybe a sparkler or a chemical initiator should work pretty nice. I'd think of lighting such a thermite filled tube on both ends since I'd like being sure the "dogpile" is surrounded on both sides with burning thermite. If lit on one end only, at least a part of the thermite would be wasted because the "dogpile" would destroy the whole device before the thermite reaction at the bottom would be finished. On the other hand, the thermite dust spread by the detonation might as well have a FAE effect. What do you think?

xoo1246

May 24th, 2002, 03:28 PM

I was thinking of something like this: http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/Drawing.jpg The "fast ignition charge" could be some BP with aluminum. The HTMD in plastic casing. I don't belive in the FAE effect, more incendinary. When I started with LE, I sometimes made mixtures of KNO3/S/Fe2O3/Al, there were no molten slag but the mixture was pretty hot buring and powerfull. I can't remember the ratios I used. I remember one cracker containing 10 grams of the above composition in a plastic pipe I once tried. I was only a few meters from it when it was set off(behind a stone with no hearing protection), I couldn't hear anything for a while.

CyclonitePyro

May 24th, 2002, 03:30 PM

Does the HMTD have enough time to make the thermite react? The aluminum and iron oxide dispersed in a cloud wouldn't be intimate enough to burn, at least I don't think so. Keep on playing though, sounds fun.

S. Toppholzer

May 24th, 2002, 03:49 PM

Cyclo - I don't know if the iron oxide would influence the Al when dispersed together with it in a cloud. If anything would happen (i.e. detonation of said cloud) the Al surely would take the oxygen needed from the air. And besides of that I thought "wtf, Al dust should detonate anyways". Sunno if I'm right but I believe the sparks provided by burning thermite should more than suffice. I guess you got one thing wrong: the thermite doesn't react because of the HMTD detonation but the HMTD detonates becasue of rapid overheating from burning thermite :p yep xoo - this drawig looks almost the thing I have in mind. Just think of the HMTD in the middle of the charge and make it a "fast ignition charge" on both ends. But I guess that's too complicated in real life.

xoo1246

May 24th, 2002, 03:50 PM

Hmm, if you are talking about my picture. I don't quite understand you, but I think you mean the HTMD should detonate first? My intention was to ignite the ignition powder from the top... Hmm let me draw something. :p Here it is: http://w1.478.telia.com/~u47802930/Drawing2.jpg Edit: Al 30um/air(21% oxygen) could be detonated in the right proportions. But Thermite is very hard to ignite. Sometimes I have had unburnt thermite when I have put thermite on the ground, when some thermite doesn't have physical contact with the rest. But my thermite is often quite crude. <small>[ May 24, 2002, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

S. Toppholzer

May 24th, 2002, 04:05 PM

Well, xoo - I thought of lighting both ends of the charge simultaneously (sp?) so that both sides would burn toward the core where the HMTD charge is nested. On detonation it would then trow burning slag or embers or what have you all around - with the difference that if done this way the slag surely would be a tad hotter. But I actually don't think that such a model would be feasible anyways - too complicated. I guess you construction is pretty straight forward and more practical. The thermite I am using is an extremely fine powder - like face powder. The iron oxide is made by (dang how's that anode/cathode stuff called now? Shame on me :mad: ) and thus of the real fine variety. The Al powder is bought and floats on air. once up in the air it's bound to stay there for at least half an hour. I always wonder how come it isn't pyrophoric. Amazing stuff and great to work with.

zaibatsu

May 24th, 2002, 04:06 PM

How about having a thick card tube, possibly 30mm in diameter, block one end, insert a CO2 powerlet, insert either coarse BP or KClO3/Sugar or Thermite and light. However, you could of course use a metal pipe, plastic might burn through though.

S. Toppholzer

May 24th, 2002, 04:15 PM

CO2 powerlet? Filled with CO2 or HMTD? OK guys - this brings up the ultimate question behind the dogpile If I'd like to fast and completely destroy, say a small trailer with an easy made, cheap but reliable device - what would be a good soultion? I'd like keeping it as simple as possible and not making any secondary HE for this. It should leave crime scene detectives no traces or those that are left could lead anywhere (for example matter nneded to make thermite are so commonplace it cannot be traced)... oh, naturally I would never ever REALLY intend any such thing it naturally is only pure theoretical :rolleyes:

zaibatsu

May 24th, 2002, 04:40 PM

Filled with CO2

xoo1246

May 24th, 2002, 04:53 PM

Hmm, if your little device wouldn't go off, the crime scene investigators are left with lots of usefull information.(especially if you don't use a "clean room") If it goes off the still have some information. One would have to keep it simple to avoid an extensive investigation. Make it look like a random act of mayhem/huliganism. Molotov coctails could be used. Or attack the vehicle when it has little fuel in it and drop some hypoclorite in the tank, in some container that will be dissolved by the gasoline. Preferably floating on the fuel. I don't know if it would work, but I could work. I bet the fuel concentration is too large in such an area(tank). Hope we are talking theories here, right? Not you burning up a couple of people by misstake. <small>[ May 24, 2002, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter S. Toppholzer

May 24th, 2002, 04:54 PM

aside from shrapnel effects - how strong would be the net effect compared to a small HMTD charge? What would make your design better, what would be its weakness? Sorry for these questions - never thought of somethink like that.

S. Toppholzer

May 24th, 2002, 04:57 PM

right xoo - I'd never burn theoretical people - only theoretical empty little trailers. I think a combination of explosion and burning should be (theoretically) ideal.

EP

May 24th, 2002, 07:17 PM

It seems to me that a molotov cocktail fits best for "easily made, cheap and reliable". If you wanted to get a little fancier, the fuel could be in something like a 1gal jug dispersed and ignited by an LE charge with some pyrotechnic stars to ensure ignition of the fuel.

xoo1246

May 25th, 2002, 04:59 AM

He seems to like thermite, some thermite in a plastic pipe in the container would work too, the fuel container would pop/explode open with fuel spraying all over.

PYRO500

May 25th, 2002, 12:19 PM

What about a thermite fountain? well, more like a cannon that will fire liquid thermite in a specific direction,I am thinking of a thermite with a bit of magnesium powder in it, your thermite would be vairly easy to ignite, this would be in a metal pipe capped at one end, the open end would have a length of fast burning fuse or pyro composition that needs no air in a tube coming to making a cone shape at the top to ensure the entire air exposed face burns and the thing burns back to a small HE+primary charge witch ejects the burning slag into the air causing the liquid metal (may cool in air not sure) to jet out in a shower of slag being perfect for pre placement in a place such as a crowded building.

S. Toppholzer

May 25th, 2002, 02:39 PM

yup. sounds good pyro. I shortly thought of making a combined thermite/HE/FAE by means of a fast burning thermite-like core with not-too hot thermate which detonates a charge of HMTD which in turn atomizes gasoline in which the thermite charge would be embedded - I guess this would be pretty difficult to accomplish for I think the gasoline would be gone due to the heat before the HE charge would get the chanche producing a FAE like weapon. Maybe I should go back to the drawing board and study a couple of patents...

xoo1246

May 25th, 2002, 03:20 PM

I don't think shooting hot iron slag at people sounds good. What I can tell you is that I once did a test with a KNO3/Al/S/Fe2O3 device in a bottle with ethanole. A fast rising cloud of hot alchol vapors were created after the explosion as far as I can tell. I have also tried "pure" thermite(in weak container)and ethanol in a small plastic continer. The contaier was ruptured and a small fireball was formed. The surounding were set on fire by the remaining fuel. Edit: By the way, using HE in a cannon would split it in a million pieces, second the thermite would burn and stick to the wallsof your pipe were the slag would cool very fast. <small>[ May 25, 2002, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

S. Toppholzer

May 25th, 2002, 03:44 PM

quote:

---

I don't think shooting hot iron slag at people sounds good.

---

especially if the shit happens to blow up while you're around :D The fast rising ethanol cloud you're mentioning: did it detonate?

xoo1246

May 26th, 2002, 05:24 AM

quote:

---

did it detonate?

---

How could it?, there was nothing there to detonate it and it was probaly not detonationable(only ignitable). vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> New Rules, New Sections. Listen UP! Log in

View Full Version : New Rules, New Sections. Listen UP! megalomania

S e p t e m b e r 2 9th, 2001, 11:11 PM

T h e r u l e s h a v e c h a n g e d . D o n t w o r r y , t h e y h a v e n o t b e e n a d d e d to, jus t clarified and c o m bined into a big r u l e s a n d F A Q p a g e . T h e F A Q h a s b e e n e x p a n d e d . I h o p e e v e r y t h i n g w e n t s m oothly, there might be a few bad links here and there yet. I advise everyone to read the rules and the FAQ, and of course fo llow them. If you have any questions about my rules or the FAQ, please post in the new Forum Matters section (I will make a thread). I am particularly interested abou t a n y s u g g e s t i o n s on adding more things to the FAQ . About the ne w sections: The opinions section is no more, but it will be brought ba ck on a new overflow site along with severa l NEW s e c t i o n s (that we don t h a v e t h e s p a c e f or here). I t m a y a l s o b e l a r g e l y u n m o d e r a t e d a n d a v a i l a b l e t o non- m e m b e r s ( I have not decided yet). The new Forum Matters section is for any issue pertaining to what goes on here (bugs, policies, etc.). For a com ple te description of what these sections do allow, click the link where descriptions norm ally go. I have m a d e a separate document to expand and clarify what is allowed in each section. I only have these two done so far. Again, com m ents can go in the Forum Matters section, which now allows open posts, so any m ember can start their own thread.

-----------------For the m o s t c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n d i n f o r m ative web site on explosives and related topics, go to Megalomania's Controversial C h e m Lab at http://surf.to/m e g a l o m a n i a vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Frag grenade. Log in

View Full Version : Frag grenade. DBSP

May 26th, 2002, 10:12 AM

I got a nice idea today when I saw some large rings(see the foto) my brother had found. They weigh 32g each and meassure 6mm in height, 37mm in with and with an internal with of 21mm. When I spotted them they where piled up on each other and thats when I got the idea to use them as frag grenades. If you pile up 10 of them you've got 320g of steel shrapnel and asuming that they get divided into 3 pieces in the explosion you have 30 pieces weighting about 10g each, that would shurely do some damage against many thinkable targets. The internal volume is about 19 cc(with 10 rings). If using a good explosive you could get 28g of explosive into the grenade asuming an explosive density of 1,5 g/cc. -->Frag Grenade<-- What do you think?

TariqMujahid

May 26th, 2002, 10:32 AM

Great idea. How much do these rings cost, what are they used for, and where did your brother find them? The rings piled together, I'm assuming should mimic a pipebomb; in which pressure is built up until the container bursts. In this case, when the container bursts, it spread fragments of the steel rings. But this might not work, because the bottom and top are open...and explosions take the path of least resistance. Therefore, you'd probably want to use a high explosive. This would probably be better since it would give the fragments more force behind them. Pardon my bad terminology, I don't keep up with explosives much =).

Mick

May 26th, 2002, 10:54 AM

er..there called washers. you put them underneath nuts (on a bolt). pretty common things. then problem with washers are 99.9% of the time the washer will fly side on creating as much resistance as possible - thus it will lose most of its enrgy before it gets to its target. you would do better using small clouts, or chip board screws. simply put a whole shit load of them in a bag(plenty more then 320g), then put your container of desired explosive in with them and tape the whole lot up. or if you had the money you could just go buy a box of 3 inch nails(1000 - 2000 nails, whieghs around 20kgs) and put 500g of APAN in the middle.

Microtek

May 26th, 2002, 11:17 AM

That would make a rather large grenade Mick. You wouldn't be able to throw it very far. Also, when employed in the manner suggested (using HE filler), the rings would be more likely to divide into several fragments than to fly in any direction intact. Even if the fragments did lose energy fast that would not be such a bad thing as the danger area would be more controllable.

xoo1246

May 26th, 2002, 11:22 AM

They would be better for a claymore, but not ideal at all. I had a dream once, with 200 grams of AN/NM/AL and 63 nails(claymore). I used a sheet as a target, I can't recall it by I think 11 hit from a distance of 10-15 meters. Some did hit trees, but didn't pentrate very far. They tend to hit from the side(as would the rings), thus giving a larger area of resistance, second, they are light. Nails could be used agains humans but I would use steel balls if the target were a vehicle. <small>[ May 26, 2002, 10:37 AM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]

DBSP

May 26th, 2002, 05:21 PM

One thing you could do to improve it would be to weld them together(not completely, just so that they keep together) and seal the ends and then use a saw to make lines where they will brake when pressure is applied. I'll try one of these in a few days. Off topic, I've had some real fun today and detonated some larger things. I've got some very nice pics and some audio for you, I'll put it up tomorrow in cap sensitive AN mixtures, so keep your eyes open guys :p !

Spudgunner

May 26th, 2002, 07:56 PM

How far is it you would have to saw through? I remember reading for real frags, the only part that matters as to the lines in the metal is on the inside, the outside is merely so it doesn't slip. I think trying four cuts (in a + shape) cut with a hacksaw about halfway through the metal would work probably. I still like NBK's post quite a while back (January 2001) found here . Unfortunatly, the pics are not there, and the pics were the best part of it. I remember when I first read it (I can't believe I remember reading a topic a year and a half ago) I was stunned at how simple, yet effective, of an idea it was. Anyway, take a look at that link, it is a really good idea. Spud

S. Toppholzer

May 27th, 2002, 01:29 PM

An excellent case for a frag grenade would be the syphon case one may find underneath a washbasin.

ShotgunsAreFun

June 5th, 2002, 09:26 PM

Moron. <small>[ June 05, 2002, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

S. Toppholzer

June 6th, 2002, 04:54 PM

fine. :rolleyes: so now that I know you think I'm a moron would you please kindly also explain why you think so? Please enlighten me with your wisdom.

kingspaz

June 6th, 2002, 06:33 PM

S. Toppholzer, he is the moron! his post has been edited my nbk. i suspect with a name like that he probably posted some crap about sparklers in bottles making great frag grenades.

S. Toppholzer <dissapointment>oh sh*t. I was hoping to battle this guy.</dissapointment> <relief>hey, thanks kingspaz!</relief> :D

June 7th, 2002, 05:01 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter ShotgunsAreFun

June 8th, 2002, 01:36 AM

Oh yay, sparklers in bottles. I posted some crap about some form of high explosive in a metal pen. Could probaly pass an x-ray test but would have a very small kill radius. I'll crawl back into my hole now. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Please do. NBK <small>[ June 08, 2002, 02:13 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

inferno

June 14th, 2002, 07:58 AM

I know the forum isnt Pipe Bombs 'r' Us, but an improvised frag grenade is really just a pipe bomb. A really damn simple way would be to get a pipe (Gee this reminds me of all the cookbook crap, "Ingredients for bomb: Pipe, end caps, black powder") or actually an aluminium can even? Thin shrapnel, but still very jagged and sharp. Either make a strong cap and surround it with nails and bolts etc, and the cap (a few grams of AP/hmtd and PETN would be pretty powerful for this?) should blow the nails etc outwards, so even if the shockwave didnt shatter the can, the nails and bolts etc would. Kewl, but effective im sure. Or, with the washers you have above, cut lines up and down them pretty far through, and put some HE filler inside them. They will break on the cuts sending kinda tile-shaped shrapnel out, hopefully on the thin side, so thered be less resistance = more speed and distance. It would also be blunter shrapnel, so would be more like cutting someone with a blunt knife than with a sharp blade But really, apart from doing frag grenades near objects to see what damage they do, i dont think anyone here is going to actually use one for practical uses, so detonating HE's would be just as fun and probably less dangerous (Imagine 5g of AP going off in your hand, then imagine 5g of ap going off in your hand in a can/pipe surrounded by small metallic objects!) <small>[ June 14, 2002, 07:23 AM: Message edited by: inferno ]

NoltaiR

June 15th, 2002, 01:12 AM

A pipe would fragment into a few lethal peices, but what would make it much more reliable is if you could etch into the pipe with some sort of saw so that there are lines of metal that are not as thick as the rest of the casing. You would make the case look like a grid fasion with engraved lines going horizontally and vertically every centimeter or so. This is what it might look like: <pre> /===\/======\/======\/======\/===\ |===::======::======::======::===| |===::======::======::======::===|>>>>>>>>X |===::======::======::======::===| \===/\======/\======/\======/\===/ <small>[ June 15, 2002, 12:18 AM: Message edited by: NoltaiR ]

inferno

June 15th, 2002, 06:51 AM

Noltair, thats pretty much what i meant. With the rings pictured at the top of this topic, if with a hacksaw you could cut the insides with deep grooves, each ring would shatter into say 8 pieces of shrapnel, very devastating to a human, though i HOPE noone on this forum would use them for that heres what i mean: http://www.angelfire.com/ia/antipokemon/frag.jpg (have to copy and paste) Note the grooves are on the insides Herr Reichsführer. HEIL HITLER *hand salute in the air* hehehe sorry. I see NBK did work when the forum was down before...he gave himself an avatar! lol <small>[ June 15, 2002, 06:58 AM: Message edited by: inferno ]

nbk2000

June 15th, 2002, 07:27 AM

External grooves have no effect on fragmentation. That's why all modern grenades use pre-fragmented bodies of either wire, stamped metal, or shot. And regular water pipe is about the worst thing you can use for a grenade. It's heavy, clunky, and doesn't break into effective fragments. Now, if you used a PVC pipe as an explosives casing with a removable sleeve containing steel shot fragments, then you'd have something. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Aerosol cans Log in

View Full Version : Aerosol cans Spudkilla

May 29th, 2002, 12:17 PM

I am sure that these would be a great weapon, or a tool to use. Simply get rid of whatever it was holding, but then you run into problems. How can you get the chemical (or gas) into the can, and then repressurize it? It seems pretty hard, but I'm sure with a little thinking we could make it work. Or not.

zaibatsu

May 29th, 2002, 02:27 PM

The only way I can think is by somehow tapping a hole in the bottom of an aerosol can and then fitting the type of valve thats in a bicycle. EDIT- you can get oil sprayers that you can pump-up to build up pressure, maybe if you found a heavy duty version of these? <small>[ May 29, 2002, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: zaibatsu ]

CyclonitePyro

May 29th, 2002, 02:30 PM

Did you search? This was discussed in the "Refillable Flamethrower" topic down near the bottom of the Improvised Weapons page. The good news for you is that it can be done, and it is pretty easy. But I don't think it could be used as a weapon unless you have problems, that would hurt! <small>[ May 29, 2002, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: CyclonitePyro ]

PYRO500

May 29th, 2002, 02:56 PM

I have tried the refillable flamethrower and air does not work really well to represurize it, mainly beacuse the air does not mix with the propellant and does not spray. I am currently building a device like this that will have electronic ignition but I have to have a stream insterad of a spray witch is only a few feet anyways. The stream is kind of weak but with a very volitile fel will be fun.

electric emu

June 1st, 2002, 12:32 PM

I saw a refillable aerosol can at harbor freight tools but its in the usa.

Fl4PP4W0k

June 2nd, 2002, 01:56 PM

You know those Air Horns? Ive got one for our boat.... anyway, they are an "aerosol" can with a small horn attatchment on the top (if you didnt know this...well). Commercial disposeable ones use tetrafluoroethane gas methinks. This one i saw a while back didnt... you actually pressurized it yourself :D It came with a bigger than usual can, and a fancier horn. You dont get anywhere NEAR as many 'hoots' out of the thing (as you can fit LOTTS of TFE in a can, seeing as its liquified) but it was the same loudness. Included, was a different attatchment for the top. It wasnt a horn, but a doodad that had a long bike style valve on it. (the ones used on racing bikes). You hooked that upto an air compresser and pumped as much air in the thing as you can. THis sounds relevant, although they were $$$. Ill look up the name of it l8r, rob

Fl4PP4W0k

June 2nd, 2002, 02:07 PM

Also, if ya lookin for a "defence" weapon.... Oven Cleaner works like a charm :mad: Its basically 25% NaOH in a can, pressurized, with foaming agent!!! Normally it comes out in a mist like burst.... which isnt exactly wot u want. A simple needle fixes that... just enlarge the hole a little until it streams out. This way, it shouldnt be blown back as much towards you. THis is effective, but it DOES cause permanent damage. So dont do it on ur buddies, k? :p Against the odd mugger\burglar\enemy this is effective and vicious. Most likely they wont see again... or atleast very well :D dont do this ofcourse.... im being hypothetical but you knew THAT l8r, rob

Fl4PP4W0k

June 2nd, 2002, 02:10 PM

http://www.taylormadeproducts.com/2002catalog/catalogma.htm there it is ....thats pretty similar to what i saw

J

June 2nd, 2002, 04:23 PM

Re-pressurising with air presents another problem: if you get a flashback into the can, you have a fuel/air mixture ready to explode...

Xtramad

June 3rd, 2002, 02:19 AM

I've been thinking a while about aerosol cans, but more in the direction of a non-leathal time bomb. I mean like a mechanical timer fixed to the bottom of the can which punctures it, would be great as a revenge weapon, specially with expanding building foam. Just imagine one of those left in a car or a room, he he. You would have to cut your way through it when it hardened. Or something less destructive like novelty fart gas would be great in a mall or other large places.

Probe

June 3rd, 2002, 05:25 AM

Hmm, that wouldnt be very hard, but why not just fill a CO2 cartridge with BP and then use a kitchen timer to set off an estes modle rocket ignighter with a nine volt? simple way: possitive on the hammer, negitive on the bell. the second it gos off there a small explosion and foam is everywhere. you could tape like, 5 cans around the CO2 cartridge and have ALOT of fun. :D , another way: tape a needle to where the 0 number is, and soldor a wire of the nine volt to that, then on the other, have the ignighter on a wire, and another wire leading to the hand itself, tape a needle to there so it will just go like this: 1) 2) 3) 4)

|_ ||/ | BOOM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter heh, just an idea.

Fl4PP4W0k

June 3rd, 2002, 08:16 AM

A while back i had a Pyrodex\BP cratermaker taped to 3 Butane cans in a triangle config.... floated it on a little wooden raft thingy and lit the fuse (long sparkler). Anyway, it was rather loud :) Unfortunately, it threw some nasty shrapnel (duh) - so you wouldnt want to do it NEAR someone. Unless you really do dislike them :mad: A small AP\HMTD cap would do the same, and be more compact. But for the danger involved, its not a smart thing to do :p The damage wasnt all that impressive either. l8r, rob

Xtramad

June 4th, 2002, 02:18 AM

If you puncture the can in the bottom where it is rather thick the can should not rupture but only release it's contents through the hole. Anyway I was thinking in the direction of a spring loaded hollow firing pin released by a clockwork mechanism. A detonator would rupture the can and probably ignite the contents, which wasn't quite my idea.

PYRO500

June 4th, 2002, 03:45 AM

what about using acetone on the valve on the top somehow? you could devise a way to get it to eat through the plastic, also you could get a solvent that could eat through the can, another choice would to take a can of the stuff (esp expanding foam) and put it in the microwave. That would be good. :) The only way I see of puncturing one of these cans is with a lot of force behind a small thing like a nail, you could rig up a black powder piston system to shoot a nail into one of these. A person could take a file and make a very weak spot in the metal carefully and have a capacitor discharge (eg camera flash capacitor charged) arc a hole in it when they tried to pick the thing up due to gravity or a springiness in the capacitor contacts, just have the open capacitor lead make contact with the weak spot and kapow! you'll have a small but loud leak but if it was in their face it could cause damage and ignite the contents, I just thought of a new idea, a timer that activates a switch (atached to an appliance timer) and is plugged into the wall, the timer runs to a heating element witch heats the can until it either explodes or the top melts away.

Fl4PP4W0k

June 4th, 2002, 10:58 AM

If puncturing the can and spraying the contents is all thats to be done... Somehow rigging up a glass ampule of really 'mean' acid should do the trick (when it breaks, acid spills and eventually burns hole in can). Perhaps perchloric or fuming nitric? These cans are steel methinks... l8r, rob

kingspaz

June 4th, 2002, 06:36 PM

i thought most cans where aluminium... pyro500, putting the can in the microwave would do nothing more than break the microwave. metal (the can) reflects microwaves so the inside would not get grilled. also depending on what is inside the can it may or may not be affected my microwave radiation.

Anthony

June 4th, 2002, 07:59 PM

A can in the microwave would heat up and explode like one on a fire, it would at least blow the door off of the microwave oven :) Some aerosols nowadays, especially cans of builder's filler/foam materials have a rubber plug in a hole in the base of the can to act as a safety valve if the can is heat. Simply heating the can should eject the contents through the plug hole, or attack the plug directly with a solvent or a hot implement.

PYRO500

June 4th, 2002, 07:59 PM

It dosen't matter if the microwaves are reflected by the metal, the metal is going to have an electric current inducted in it and then it will heat up, this is what actually happens to metal things in your microwave. if you put a can in a microwave it will most likely heat up and expolde, I guess the added metal in theresonant cavity would destroy it's resonance to microwaves of that frequency causing magnetron wear but that would take a while and the can most likely would have exploded. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> High Voltage (link) Log in

View Full Version : High Voltage (link) AmonDin

October 3rd, 2001, 09:27 PM

Powerlabs.org: For those intere sted in high voltage weapons, Big capacitors, coil guns, tesla coils, etc. Go here for som e pretty decent information. Don't know if I'm being reduntant, but I reccom e n d t h e m anyway. My small group of friends is currently making a flyback transform e r h o o k e d u p t o a s m all prod. This think can get you 30kv at 1 or 2 m illiamps, whe n finishe d, it will send static sparks up to six inches through the air. Also on the list is a negative ion vortex gun. Basically it fires a d onut-shaped blast of negatively io nized air at a ran g e o f a b o u t 100 ft. Not capable of doing perm a n e n t d a m a g e (unless you put your he ad right next to it, in which case, kiss your eardrums goodbye) but when it hits a person or group of people, it gives them a really bad case of static cling! The m ore powerful vortex generators can knock a 747 out of the sky. -----------------"When all else fails, just light their things on fire, people hate that..." - Fred

J

October 4th, 2001, 04:20 AM

6 inch sparks from 30kV? Are you sure about the output? A 30kV pulsed output m ay get you around an inch, but no way 6. The link has been posted before, it's a great site. I wish I could afford that kind of equipment :-( J -----------------Download the forum archive (http://forumarchive.tripod.com ) P G P k e y a v a i l a b l e h e r e ( h t t p : / / p g p k e y s . m it.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

AmonDin

October 4th, 2001, 08:44 AM

30kv is the output of the flyback I've got, hooked up to two or three large capacitors, and the power jumps quite a bit. -----------------"When all else fails, just light their things on fire, people hate that..." - Fred

J

October 4th, 2001, 09:29 AM

I'm still not convinced that a cap discharge wou ld go 6 inches at 30kV. Are you using a m ultiplier configuration? J -----------------Download the forum archive (http://forumarchive.tripod.com ) P G P k e y a v a i l a b l e h e r e ( h t t p : / / p g p k e y s . m it.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

a_bab

October 4th, 2001, 04:39 PM

6 inches = cca 15 cm , a n d a s p a r k o f 1 5 c m can be generated in air only by 150 KV*, so 30 kv is pretty insuficient for this spark (my oppinion).

*Note for keVVLz : 150.000 V

-----------------D a m n, I got a nitro-h e a d a c h e a g a i n . . . http://m ove.to/pyrom a n i a

Anthony

October 4th, 2001, 06:34 PM

Actually it's 150 000V or 150,000V 150.000 = 150V http://theforum .virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/sm ile.gif -----------------"Shit happen s. Get a fucking helm et"

Mick

October 4th, 2001, 10:12 PM

a cap discharge at 30 kv will go further then 6inch - in ideal conditions of course. however 6 inches is quite easily obtained in normal conditions.

bozza I always thought the general rule of thum b was that 10,000volts would arc 1 cm . 30kv would only be 3cm at best . correct me if im wrong.

October 4th, 2001, 10:22 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter a_bab

October 5th, 2001, 06:07 PM

Yes Anthony, you are right, but in m y country the 'separator' for numbers (thousands groups) is '.', not the "," . Is important that you get the idea : one hundred and fifty thousands volts. And I hope that everyone http:// theforum.virtualave.n e t / u b b / s m i l i e s / s m ile.gif I still believe that in dried air, with pulses of 10 ,000 volts (not high frequency as Tesla Coil's discharges) th e spark lenght will b e n o m ore that 10 m m .

-----------------D a m n, I got a nitro-h e a d a c h e a g a i n . . . http://m ove.to/pyrom a n i a

Mr Cool

October 6th, 2001, 03:11 PM

30kV WILL NO T c a u s e a b r e a k d o w n 6 " l o n g i n a i r a t R T P . C o r o n a d i s c h a r g e = * m a y b e * , f r o m a V E R Y s h a r p point. U n l e s s o f course you use a U HT trigger of about 150kV, like in a big flashlamp.

AmonDin

October 9th, 2001, 11:18 PM

I fired the thing up this weekend. Oh my lord, I got the 6 in spark I wanted (spark gap se t to 6 in.) but I doubt I'd get those kind of results under anything but lab conditions. Doesn't m atter, it'll be used to power m y 'galactic donut gun' in a few m onths. -----------------"When all else fails, just light their things on fire, people hate that..." - Fred vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> My new (mini) air cannon Log in

View Full Version : My new (mini) air cannon Energy84

June 6th, 2002, 07:04 PM

I've been busy in the shop lately, working on my latest creation. My miniature version of Glen Shindel's Spudzooka. It's 13.5" long, has a 12.25" barrel bored to .68 (paintball caliber :D ) and has a 13" by 2" chamber. Sorry about the poor quality pics, but I just couldn't pass up the price on the camera This is the rear of the cannon, opened up so that you can see the diaphragm and the endcap. Note: If you look very closely, you can see the o-ring in the endcap that seals everything up. This is the inside of the cannon. This is the diaphragm, the only moving part. It is made out of aluminum. I originally planned on putting two o-rings (hence the groves in the side) to seal it and force it to move, but the o-rings proved to be too tight and the cannon would not fire. So instead I put a short length of small braided rope into the rear groove and now it slides, and seals, perfectly. Here is the top of the diaphragm. Those two holes are to allow the air to flow by into the chamber. You can clearly see the imprint left in the gasket from the back of the barrel. The gasket itself is just some hotglue that I slowly melted into the bottom of the diaphragm. I'm very happy with the performance that I'm getting. Although I haven't actually measure my distances, with a 3/8"x1"long bolt I'm getting about 200yards@75PSI. The cannon has been pressure tested and leak tested to 150PSI but I'm confident that it is capable of at least 250PSI. I just haven't been able to find a compressor to match yet :( Edit: Changed image server <small>[ June 10, 2002, 09:09 PM: Message edited by: Energy84 ]

kingspaz

June 6th, 2002, 07:13 PM

the pics are dead. be careful with high pressures as you'll have one hell of a pipe bomb on your hands! edit: pics seem to be working now......maybe my computer was fucking up again :confused: <small>[ June 07, 2002, 06:45 PM: Message edited by: kingspaz ]

Spudkilla

June 7th, 2002, 12:48 PM

IN the topic of cannons, has anybody EVER tested to see if piston was better than diaphragm, or the other way around? I've never heard of it, and I don't have the time or money to do it. By the way, I've got an over-under sprinkler valve cannon, and two "grape-shooter" cannons.

Energy84

June 9th, 2002, 04:32 AM

I have thought about building a cannon using a piston instead of a diaphragm but figured that it'd be more complicated and thus harder to build. I might however try to build one. I think that it'd be a good project, but I'm not convinced that there would be any big performance gains. The beauty of the system that I'm using is that the air behind the diaphragm is vented almost instantaneously and once it's gone, the diaphragm moves with around 500lbs of force. Considering that the diaphragm only needs to move about 0.25" to be full open, I think that this is about as fast as you'll ever be able to open a valve. (Do the math if you want, but it's 3:30am and I'm half pissed, so I'm not going to even bother trying). Even though in my opinion a diaphragm system probably has better performance, the piston system is most likely more suited to larger cannons (think, pumpkin chukin'). EDIT: Typos <small>[ June 09, 2002, 03:35 AM: Message edited by: Energy84 ]

Fl4PP4W0k

June 9th, 2002, 08:05 AM

Well... that gun up there looks to me AWFUL similar to a piston gun :p I thought - I may be wrong - that a 'diaphragm' gun works on the principle of a sheet of neoprene\rubber being forced against the barrel and bending, allowing air to pressurize the main chamber. Your design seems to work by forcing a peice of aluminium, with an inernal seal made from hot-glue, against the barrel as pressure is applied from behind. The air fills the forward chamber through a couple pin-holes. When you instantly empty the rear chamber, the aluminium peice is slammed backwards with the force of the forward air pressure multiplied by the area of the 'diaphragm'. Thus the air follows the path of least resistance out of the barrel - propelling the paintball at stupendous speeds towards its unsuspecting target. Am I wrong??? If not, you have built a Piston Gun :D BTW, I have a little 12ga PVC piston cannon, and its pretty goddamn fun. That gun looks damn nice BTW... l8r, rob

Anthony

June 9th, 2002, 12:22 PM

I'd personally call Energy84's gun a piston gun too. It looks like there's some nice machine work gone into that, I especially like the breach end barrel support :) Most of those small car tyre inflators will do 250-300psi, their output is pretty small but it shouldn't matter too much on a gun of this size and they're pretty cheap too.

PYRO500

June 9th, 2002, 04:44 PM

300 psi! I haven't found a portable pump that will go over 200 psi. The pumps at gas stations are usually set to something like 120 psi or lower. I'd reconsider using very high pressures in a piston gun beacuse when the pison slams into the back of the gun it could cause damage and could slam against the back of the gun and hurt you

Anthony

June 9th, 2002, 07:40 PM

Yep, the 250psi ones are more common but I've seen a few brands that do 300psi. They're those units that run of the cigartte lighter in a vehicle. You could always a damping material or spring behind the piston to absorb some of the recoil shock. But I'd avoid putting your body directly behind the gun anyway (I do this as a matter of habit with all spudguns).

Fl4PP4W0k *chuckles*

June 10th, 2002, 07:41 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Those $US30 Air Compressors you buy for car tyres or whatever, may have a PRESSURE gauge rated to around 200-300 psi... I have one myself. I tried using it with a medium sized Pneumatic Cannon. It sucked donkey balls. Eventually (about a minute) it got the thing upto 100psi. *sigh* After that, it would go up like 20psi a minute... while the motor made a sad crunchy dying noise. Fuck that. I now use a $AU28 (about $15US) track pump, which reaches about 135psi NO PROBLEMS in about 30 seconds... with not too much effort. (this is a VERY small chamber... :) ) So, If you have chunky ass cannon (3 or 4" chamber) then a compressor would be a good idea... as you wont strain ur precious muscles :p But for a gun of your size, a somewhat decent track pump makes MUCH more sense. Ofcourse, having a cheap compresser permanently pressurizing either a compressor tank or old propane can would be pretty useful....

Anthony

June 10th, 2002, 10:30 AM

I did warn that the output was rather pitful! For a 3' or 4' chamber several feet long then yeah, it's not practical to get it to 250psi, but for small volume, high pressure guns it does work. One of mine gets a 3' length of 1.25" chamer to 250psi without too much difficulty. By track pump do you mean the stirrup types? I've got a cheapish one that goes up to 120psi nice a quickly and is great for the bigger, low pressure (100ish psi) guns.

Fl4PP4W0k

June 10th, 2002, 12:04 PM

Stirrup... I think so. Its a T-Style vertical one, you stand on the base. And pump the handle thingy... its not like a foot pump. Fuck man, Ive been playing with my just-revived 12ga piston cannon. :D At 45PSI, it shreds a coke can quite satisfactorily with a handful of screws. I fired it at that pressure, and it went thru a can and blew a ragged hole in the trash receptacle positioned behind it... then leaving a screw in the skirting board. I found a box of Water-Color paints at the local learning institution, and the little tubes fir perfectly in my barrel :) Time to redecorate the forementioned institution... How cool is the Sig !!

BrAiNFeVeR

June 10th, 2002, 01:13 PM

Isn't there something in the rules about sig lenght of max. 3 lines ? Though it's a very nice one, I must admit ...

kingspaz

June 10th, 2002, 06:14 PM

Fl4PP4W0k, i like the sig but it MUST be removed as there is a limit to 3 lines for sigs.

Energy84

June 10th, 2002, 07:35 PM

I suppose you could call it a piston but I still think that it would be more appropriate to call it a diaphragm. Even though the diaphragm is shaped like a piston. The only reason I gave it the piston shape, was to prevent it from getting cocked in the barrel. My understanding of what a piston type cannon looks like is shown in the drawing below. The piston would slide inside of the rear part of the barrel and would plug all the little holes. To fire, the chamber would be pressurized while the piston is plugging the holes, then once pressurized, you would simply pull the piston back via the rod that it's attached to. That's the theory behind it. I've been looking into it more seriously and there would be a bigger potential for leaks, but I think I could pull it off. I've already thought of a way that I could convert my gun into a piston type, but unfortunately, I won't be able to do it until next fall since I made all this at school. Gotta love all the free materials and equipment :p BTW, does anybody know of a better image host? I also setup a website which is basically just the above post. You can find it here. Unfortunately my host for this site doesn't allow outside linking <small>[ June 10, 2002, 09:10 PM: Message edited by: Energy84 ]

Devils Knight

June 10th, 2002, 08:59 PM

You can use a free host I've seen a few other member's using: www.boomspeed.com it allow's hotlinking, but with a small limit of 1mb account's. Oh well, nothing stopping you from making several accounts.

Fl4PP4W0k

June 11th, 2002, 05:34 AM

Thats a piston gun !? lol Im not even sure what one would call a design such as that... but a piston design it aint. A piston cannon uses a free sliding piston in the rear section of the chamber, which seals against the barrel when pressure is applied - and slams back when rear chamber is vented to atmosphere. Sounding familiar Basically, your gun _is_ a piston style - from what I can see here. A very NICE one mind you :D Sorry bout the sig :\ awwwww

Energy84

June 11th, 2002, 07:15 PM

quote:

---

A piston cannon uses a free sliding piston in the rear section of the chamber, which seals against the barrel when pressure is applied - and slams back when rear chamber is vented to atmosphere.

---

Now go download the plans for the spudzooka 234 at Spudzooka.net and tell me how the firing mechanism works. You'll clearly see that you have just described how it works, and that it IS called a diaphragm. I know my pic is rough, but the idea is that when the piston is slid back, the air is allowed to rush through the holes into the barrel. I believe that this is the same system used in those big ass "Pumpkin Chuckers". and yes, your sig is tooooo long. I've started work on a portable airtank that is roughly twice the volume of my cannon. It will have a shraeder valve (SP?) to fill it up and a short (3 ft or so) hose to attach to the cannon. Should be fun! Edit: Typos

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter <small>[ June 11, 2002, 06:18 PM: Message edited by: Energy84 ]

Anthony

June 11th, 2002, 09:05 PM

The 234 is indeed what I've come to know as a diaphragm gun. The main difference between piston and diaphragm that I have seen time and time again on various websites, is that a diaphragm mostly flexes with the changing air pressures and a piston slides back and forth. The 234 has a rigid diaphragm so it's really a bit of both.

aussie_boy

August 11th, 2003, 01:14 AM

well i have a good one for ya a six shot cannon try going to www.Techleague.com let me know what ya think

Skean Dhu

August 11th, 2003, 05:53 PM

i have a portable aircompressor,it has a 12V I/O port for recharging itself adn things such as cell phones. its rated up to 260 if i recall correctly. but the air flow sucks ass and take ~2min to get to 100 psi on my 3"X20" chamber. i might build a new airchamber soon , one with a PSI gauge so then i can use CO2 from those portable bke pumps that run off of 12g. canisters. or if i have the time and motivation i might rig it to use my paintball tanks

Yorki_pyro

March 1st, 2004, 12:57 PM

Does anyone know where to find pressure rated PVc pipe in the UK? BnQ dont even have the right parts in standard ratings (not that I'd use them) and the plumbers supplier doesnt stock them either. By the way, the cannon I have in mind is a piston exhaust valve cannon, 2 inch barrel, 4 inch chamber, 6 foot long barrel, 4 foot long chamber. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Infrasound (less than 15Hz) Weapon Log in

View Full Version : Infrasound (less than 15Hz) Weapon Bander

October 13th, 2001, 01:07 AM

Theoretical Design of a ~7 Hz Whistle

I have done extensive research into the design of human flesh resonance weapons and I have come to the conclusion that they are possible. To what extent is still questionable. There are many amateur (1) documents that say a ~150 decibel 7 Hz tone can kill, but I have had a hard time finding the same data in the few military and professional R&D documents (2) that are available to the public. Luckily, most sources seem to agree that a ~7 Hz tone matches the resonance frequency of some human flesh and will cause nausea. (as long as we're on the subject, 3000hz is the resonance frequency of the ear canal) So far I have heard of 3 ways to generate this effect and apply it to a biological.

Through the use of a modulated fast firing vortex weapon (3). (that's a future post in itself) By altering a standard whistle to lower it's frequency. Really fucking large tubes (not sure how this works) ;-) [/list=a] Large tubes are out of the question, so that leaves me with 1 and 2. My work on the modulated vortex weapon should be complete in a few months, but I am concerned about the feasibility of shooting 7 high energy vortices a second (possibly a modified 2 cylinder motorcycle engine). Because of this I did a little research into the physics behind everyday whistles (4). And from the little knowledge I have gathered I think it's possible to make 7 Hz 'tone' using a basic design. http:// www.darknebula.org/superkuh/science/infrasound/whistle3.gif Simple Diagram Showing the Operation of a Whistle and The Design of an Efficient Lip to Cut Down Turbulence So, because of that research I found a bastardized equation for whistle frequency: f = 17174 / L, where f = frequency or pitch in Hz , L = length in centimeters and the diameter to length ratio is 1: 2 With a little simple math this leads me to conclude that a 248.714 cm long, 12.435 cm diameter tube would produce a ~7 Hz tone. I do not know how the size of the fipple (hole that lets air out) effects the design so experimentation would be required (unless someone here knows). If this whistle were to be powered by compressed air, or something to that effect, I think it would be possible to get a sufficient decibel level. Anyway, I'm sure there are people here far more knowledgeable than myself, is this possible? If so, is there anything I've let out that could adversely effect the performance of the device? 1. http://www.overloadmedia.co.uk/ library/deadvib.shtml http://paranormal.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm? site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.borderlands.com%2Farchives%2 Farch%2Fgavreaus.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ Skyopen/message/1495 http://hometown.aol.com/ultra21753/ http://www.ocarina.demon.co.uk/ horror.html http://home.intekom.com/salbu/ apollo/HumB.html http:// home.intekom.com/salbu/apollo/Infrasound_JohnCody.html http://home.intekom.com/salbu/ apollo/HumA.html 2. My Directory of Infrasound Related pdfs Acoustics.org on Infrasound Effects 3. My Vortex Project (in design stage) 4. Basic Whistle Design [ January 04, 2002: Message edited by: Bander ]


This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Agent Blak

October 13th, 2001, 03:06 AM

The question on my mind is... "Is the Deployment of this type of Device Practical Outside of the Lab?" The only way I can see this working is as a leave behind device. Possibley operating off of a 12g CO2 Powerlet or a 9oz Paintball style tank. Unless you can figure out a way that this could be used and not harm the user it severely limits this type of device. Although maybe you could use it with a CO2 Powerlet(12g) as Sonic Grenade of sorts. There is a thread statred by myself from sometime back under the name of White Noise; there is a lot of info on Frequencey of sound etc. it might be worth a gander. -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak")here</a> to download my files.

Machiavelli

October 13th, 2001, 07:42 AM

A french scientist called Gavreaux worked on this stuff, he planned to mount the sonic generators on robotic platforms. Anyway, great post Bander. I've been interested in this stuff for a long time, but couldn't find any useful resources on sound generation. -----------------Give someone a match and he'll feel warm for a few seconds, set him on fire and he'll feel warm for the rest of his life

Bander

October 13th, 2001, 05:17 PM

About the potentially lethality of an infrasound device to the user, yes I did realize this (primarily from my readings about Gavreaux's work). I really don't see how making a delay system would be that hard. If anything finding a pipe with the specified length and diameter is going to be a bitch. Heh, also I don't think a sonic grenade would quite work. The pipe's length is around 8ft. I think I remember that thread...I'll check it out again, thanks. A long time ago a member of the forum, 'feticidalfantasy' or something to that effect suggested powering a 7Hz device with a small aircraft engine as a compressor. Imagine the chaos it would cause if the theory is true. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ ubb/smilies/tongue.gif -----------------Round the firewall, Out the modem, Past the server, Through the router, Down the wire, NOTHING BUT NET.

PYRO500

October 13th, 2001, 05:49 PM

What about a sonic missle? with something like that we eliminate the need for a deployment and power source method. you could set it up to be propelled by LARGE rocket engines and have it pass slose to the ground that way the missle would have air blown into the intake, and be deployable. any ideas on this? -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]

Bander

October 13th, 2001, 07:51 PM

While the idea of an infrasonic rocket is interesting, but I don't think it would stay over the target for long enough to have any effect. Also, I re-read a bit of the 'white noise' thread and did a little research on 33hz tones. The information I found conflicts with the claims of the thread. http://home.intekom.com/salbu/apollo/apollo2.html and http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/forum/science/archive/messages/1950.html But I'd love to further discuss and expierement with that frequency for obvious reasons (it'd probably be easier to make 33Hz whistle than a 7Hz, and more fun). Now I just have to find someone/something that will make a aluminum pipe to my specifications, or a formula that will allow for a different diameter to length ratio. -----------------Round the firewall, Out the modem, Past the server, Through the router, Down the wire, NOTHING BUT NET. [This message has been edited by Bander (edited October 13, 2001).]

BoB-

October 14th, 2001, 02:41 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Wouldnt something powered by Co2 be so loud that it would damage/destroy hearing? No frequency technology would be needed that way, just decibels.

Bander

October 14th, 2001, 02:25 PM

I don't think so Bob, unless you make a really bad whistle (lots of tubulence, ect). The co2 expanding might make a little noise, but not that much. If I wished to make a device to damage hearing (as opposed to a whole body weapon) I'd just make a really loud 3khz tone. The best part about infrasound is exactly what it's name denotes, you cannot hear it. Also, powering a whistle type device with co2 might have an adverse effect on the frequency. Sound travels at a different speed in pure co2, and even though this whistle design (as opposed to an open tube) doesn't depend on the speed of sound that much, it still might change the frequency the output. Which is why I feel compressed air is the best 'fuel' for a device like this. -----------------Round the firewall, Out the modem, Past the server, Through the router, Down the wire, NOTHING BUT NET.

nbk2000

October 14th, 2001, 08:50 PM

Not directly related to infrasound, but related in the way of using sound as a weapon. I had the idea of using those electronic earmuffs that shooters use that filter out loud noises, and modifying them to filter out certain frequencies. Those frequencies would be coming from high powered electronc "screamer" grenades, like the jogger alarms, only MUCH louder. The screamers are tossed into a place you're about to do your business in, and anyone inside is going to be deafened. Unable to hear each other, or you, they'd be easier to deal with. You, on the other hand, can still hear just fine any noises the targets make. The advantage is yours. As for infrasound, I class that in the same catagory as EMP, HERF, Rail Guns, and other "Be neat to have if I ever take over the world or make a billion dollars" weapons. Neat to think of, but not within our reach. Stick to guns and bombs, the old reliables. Speaking of which, this'd be part of the new rules. "NO talk of homemade EMP, HERF, etc, etc. It's a waste of time and counterproductive."

-----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

kingspaz

October 15th, 2001, 05:52 PM

it may be counter productive but even just the concepts of these weapons is interesting. or maybe how to combat EMP devices if employed against you...

Jhonbus

October 20th, 2001, 11:33 PM

Bander is correct in saying that using CO<sub>2 would adversely affect the operation of the whistle as a weapon. The formula stated for the frequency of a whistle is for air only. This formula would include a different constant for operation in different gases. Think of breathing helium. Helium has a much lower molecular mass than air, and so the resonance frequency of the larynx is increased, producing a mickey mouse voice. The opposite is true of breathing Argon - it gives you an "arnold schwarzenneger voice" (Beware - to remove argon from the lungs you must bend over and breathe deeply several times or risk asphyxiation.) (I have also tried this with CO<sub>2, also heavier than air, but not as much as argon. It produces the same "Arnie" voice, but unfortunately has an adverse affect on consciousness, so you can only get a few words out before falling on your arse) Using CO<sub>2 would reduce the resonance frequency of the whistle cavity. -----------------You must create. [This message has been edited by Jhonbus (edited October 20, 2001).]

PYRO500

October 21st, 2001, 01:37 AM

I didn't know you could do that with argon, but I have heard about doing that with sulfur hexa floride, I would not recomend anyone try CO2 as it does not only displace air, but it becomes toxic very rapidly and can kill, I had a 12 OZ CO2 paintball tank burst it's seals due to overfilling and I barely got out of my room when I woke up. -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]

nbk2000

October 21st, 2001, 03:27 AM

Try breathing SF6 and you'll sound like Schwarzenegger when you talk. COOOL. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

tongue.gif (I know one of the SFx gases is toxic, just got the wrong one. NBK2000) Still not a good idea though. Argon is inert, thus no toxic effects besides simple asphixiation from air displacement. CO2 alters blood gas balance since it is absorbed. Since gas density affects resonance, why not use the densest gases you can? I'm thinking freons. High molecular weights, inert, liquids under pressure that readily vaporize at ambient, and available. Like a pocket airhorn, only evil. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif As for being counter-productive, it is. All these things are being developed by the military because the CNN effect has them scared of killing "innocent" civilians. Thus the search for non-lethal weapons. We, on the other hand, as civilians, aren't bound by any such restrictions as the geneva convention, hague treaty, CBW, or any other "Rules of War". Thus, we can strive for the most lethal, heinous weapons conceivable, limited only by our allowances. HAHAHA! http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos. [This message has been edited by nbk2000 (edited October 21, 2001).]

PYRO500

October 21st, 2001, 01:53 PM

I saw it on the jay leno show, I also found several web pages like these. http://www.physics.umd.edu/deptinfo/facilities/lecdem/h6-05.htm and a msds I checked before posting. http://www.boc.com/gases/pdf/msds/G080.pdf

-----------------"Death may come from above, but terror most certainly comes from below."

Bander

October 25th, 2001, 11:23 PM

Sorry to continue a counterproductive topic but I've found the most exceptional source of physics information that has existed...well, quite simply, EVER. It includes a great section on open, closed, and conical tube resonance! HyperPhysics (http://230nsc1.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html) and Sound Resonance Section (http://230nsc1.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/sound/rescon.html) Also, I agree with you to an extent nbk2000, but I believe non-lethals do have a place in the civilian arsenal. While we are not bound by any restrictions, public opinion could be very important in some cases (also, you could avoid the death penalty if caught). If you are trying to coerce the public to believe in your cause it'd probably be best not to kill anyone, else the media would have more material to vilify you. -----------------Round the firewall, Out the modem, Past the server, Through the router, Down the wire, NOTHING BUT NET.

nbk2000

October 25th, 2001, 11:53 PM

I'm not saying all less-lethal weapons (more accurate description than non-lethal) are useless, just that the applications must be considered diferently than in the military context. We would use LLWs because we need the targets alive for a purpose later on. Such as access codes, combinations, or such. NOT because we give a fuck about what CNN is going to say about it. I'm including LLWs in the NBKv2 since they have applications in robbery, kidnapping, etc. One must always have lethal weapons on hand though for use if the LLW proves inadequate or if the target responds with lethal force. Remember the RTPB: "Victory Through Superior Firepower". Also, even if you don't kill anyone, you can still get life in prison with no parole (the Big Bitch) or so many years from multiple counts that you'll never parole. Now, faced with the prospect of 40 years of life in prison, doesn't death in 5 sound like a much better alternative? Having been there, I'd say kill me quick. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Mr Cool

November 22nd, 2001, 12:10 PM

Not an infrasound weapon, but a sound weapon which appeared in a recent New Scientist mag: It consists of a polymer tube, 1m long and 4cm in diameter, with piezoelectric discs all the way down it's length, facing the opening at the end. The first disc has an electric pulse applied to it, causing a shock wave to travel down the tube. The wave is then amplified in a laser-like fashion, so that when the wave reaches the next disc, that disc fires so it amplifies the pulse.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

The device operates at 6 to 10 KHz (I think that's what it said), and can produce 140 dB. Apparently effective range will be c. 100m. It causes intense pain and temporary/permanent hearing loss. Shouldn't be too hard to improvise really, if you assume that the speed of sound is constant in all weather conditions. If not you'll need sensors to time the firing, but I think this would be uneccesary (I hate trying to spell that word, I'm sure I always get it wrong...) with a tube only 1m long, since the effect over the tube's length would be very small. Apparently the inventor made a small version which nearly knocked him over or something. Get the magazine if you want more detail, I can't remember the rest.

Cricket

November 26th, 2001, 05:25 PM

I once heard on the Discovery channel (Non Lethal Alternatives) that if you direct two seperate VHF (30,000hz seems right) waves at an animal, it will cause sever discomfort and nausea. Then It showed a computer created demonstration of what it would look like. They had two pipes about 5 meters apart shooting the waves at people so that they would intersect just below his sternum (chest bone). Then that had what was basically a pipe with a fuel (kerosene I think) injector and spark plug in it that supposedly caused the same effects. If anyone has cable, the Discovery Channel shows several shows in the evening of the weekends. This is quiet interesting to me, as is the White Noise. In a recent JC Whitney catalog, I saw a speaker that played as low as 10hz for 50USD. That was very cheap and twice as low as any other speakers I could find. I plan to buy it it within the next 1-2 months and do some testing with it http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif. -----------------"You will not be taught the knowledge you seek, you must teach yourself." - Megalomania

nbk2000

November 26th, 2001, 06:49 PM

I've got that discovery Channel show on tape! I'm including bits of it my PDF. If you could give anything more specific about that article, I may be able to find it on the net. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Cricket

November 28th, 2001, 04:43 PM

Yea, thats why I like watching cop shows and the like, to learn how not to get cought doing anything fun. Lets see, what was that guys name... ah I think it was Lt. Sidney Heal (he was on that show), but I'm not sure. You will see him on many of the non-lethal shows and of California's gunfights and car chases. He is (or was when the show was taped) a Marine reservist and got sent to Desert Storm and helped in the devleopment of many non-lethal weapons. That tape you have is valuable. It talks about a study they did in the late 70's of a massive bubble generator to make running harder. Now a days they have something simular in effect (although the people in the bubbles seem as if they are having a good ol time at a pool party), but it is like the shit Spider Man shoots from his wrists. They just shoot the bag guy and he is essentially stuck. One example of the value of the show would be is if it said what the foam was. If it did (it might), you might find out that it is water soluble. In such a case, if you thought fast, you would try to set off the springlers if you are inside (possibly by shooting the sprinkler heads). And the SWAT probably won't be trained what to in that situation, giving you an extra edge and possibly evading capture or aiding in doing so. So if you know all kinds little odds and ends like that, you will be much more likely to know what they will do and what to do to counter act that. One example is in some LA (I think thats where it was) prison riots, the guards would just start lobbing stingball grenades left and right. The prisoners didn't like that to they started using thier matresses as shields (a good idea). But eventually, they started dropping them from the floors above them. Sorry to get off topic though. And I am not sure what you mean, nbk2000, by more specific. I will try to see if it is on this weekend and tape it. Well I just went to discovery.com and searched for it and I can't find it. Mabye someone else will have more luck. I think it was "On the Inside". -----------------"You will not be taught the knowledge you seek, you must teach yourself." - Megalomania

Mr Cool

November 30th, 2001, 06:31 AM

I've seen those "glue guns" you're talking about that stick people's legs together so they can't run. They reminded me of the guns the Ghost-busters have... Anyway, I believe it can be removed with an oil - pour oil over it, and you can pull it off without it sticking to your hand. When it has been takem off an area, cover that area in oil so it won't stick back on. I don't have any more details on the device I was talking about. I think the company that patented it was called "American Technologies". -----------------"Nothing makes a man fear much, more than to know little." - Francis Bacon.

Bander

December 9th, 2001, 02:11 PM

Here's a link to the piezo-electric sound weapon mentioned by Mr. Cool. Pentagon considers ear-blasting anti-hijack gun (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991564). The Ultrasound weapon is a semi-proven concept and I have read about it's use to induce naseau many times before. Amazing1.com (http://www.amazing1.com/ultra.htm) has something analogous to that device in their ultrasound section. The kerosene accoustic weapon most likely was infrasound (human flesh resonance) weapon to achieve the same effect. After all, I don't think it's possible to get a combustion tube like that firing 30,000 times a second. While I love the idea of accoustical weapons, and I do believe they are possible, one has to look at all sides of the arguement. I suggest anyone interested read this paper by the Acoustical Society of America (http://www.acoustics.org/press/ 137th/altmann.html). -----------------Round the firewall, Out the modem, Past the server, Through the router, Down the wire, NOTHING BUT NET.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter [This message has been edited by Bander (edited 12-09-2001).]

atropine

January 1st, 2002, 04:23 PM

i thought that frequency was almost directly proportional too the preasure supplied too the whistle. Correct me if im wrong. Oh another frequency is 16Hz which induces epilepsy, and 18.5Hz which makes eye balls resonate

Mr Cool

January 1st, 2002, 05:45 PM

(Edit: Sorry, the main point of this post has already been covered.) Uurrrghh, that'd be horrid, having a weapon that makes people's eye balls wobble themselves to bits. [ January 01, 2002: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]


nbk2000

January 4th, 2002, 03:18 AM

Exploding eyeballs....sounds fun :) Wouldn't be much of a stretch of the imagination to envision the Feds using something like that though. They've already developed and are field testing a "non-lethal" weapon that uses directed microwave energy to raise your skin temperature to around 50C, analogous to touching a 150 watt lightbulb to your skin. The pain of this is supposeded to "deter" you from whatever it is that you're doing. They do admit though that continued exposure to the beam (more than 20 seconds) will cause 3rd degree burns. I can see how the seattle WTO riots would have gone if this was already in existance at the time>>>>> We were trying to disperse the protestors at the World Trade Organization summit by using our newest humane non-lethal compliance device that gently heats the skin to feel like a sunburn. But the protestors kept laying down to block the road. We had to aim at their faces because they deliberatly dressed in heavy clothes to nullify our non-lethal weapons effect. They even tried to cover their faces in an effort to furthur resist REALITY: The protestors faces were deliberatly targeted by pigs who think that anyone who doesn't do a 9 to 5, Ozzy and Harriet lifestyle is untermensch (sub-human). And when their eyes began to explode from being heated to boiling, the flesh peeling off their skulls, and their brains being poached into goo, by a lethal energy weapon, they instinctly grabbed their faces and feel to the ground in agony and blind. Oh, and they wore heavy clothes because it's fucking cold in Seattle. Reality is nothing, Perception is the TRUE Reality. And he with the best spin doctor, wins. And the glue guns are bogus. Ever notice how in every demo that the "victim" is standing still? That's because the foam doesn't do any good unless it gets into a big enough blob to get both legs stuck together. Buckshot aimed at the legs is much more effective.

atropine

January 4th, 2002, 06:20 AM

i found something interesting on that the other night. It works basicaly as a resonant tube which combustable air fuel mix is burnt through. The frequency is regulated via a timing device much like that of a cars to ignite the mixture at the desired HZ. Due to the fact that the tube is resonant and the "explosion" produces around 100db+ i think this would be great for trying as a "theoretical" weapon. Sorrey about my spelling i just bin informed that im mildly dyslexic

Bander

January 5th, 2002, 12:12 AM

[quote] ...resonant tube which combustable air fuel mix is burnt through. The frequency is regulated via a timing device much like that of a cars to ignite the mixture at the desired HZ. Due to the fact that the tube is resonant and the "explosion" produces around 100db+ i think this would be great for trying as a "theoretical" weapon.

---

Yes, it is possible to generate very high decible level sounds in this manner. I think the best, cheapest, simplest way to achieve this effect would be a pulse jet. I'm sure a quick look at the links below will explain the topic far better than I ever could. How Pulse Jets Work A comprehensive archive of Pulse Jet design documents and theory. Pulse Jets As Musical Instruments Of course all the methods for generating the required frequencies of vibration are horribly crippled by the inverse square law (not effective at long distances), and omnidirectional except one: modulated high energy vortices. These vortices could carry chemical, marking, ect agents as well. If any of these theorectical devices could succeed it would be a vortex weapon of some sort. On that note I thought I'd mention my newly updated archive o' acoustic weapons. Still a work in progress but the documents are there. ;) [ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: Bander ]

Mr Cool

January 5th, 2002, 07:20 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I saw a video of a high-powered vortex "cannon" firing at a sheet of water falling from some sprinklers. I know water isn't the hardest of targets, but you could tell it was powerful. Looked enough to knock a man down, so it'd be good for using like an anti-riot water jet, but not as a lethal weapon. I think the vortex was made by a fuel/air combustion inside a large drum, which only had a small (a foot or so) opening. Also, the edge of the opening may have been shaped to make the vortex more stable.

Bander

January 6th, 2002, 02:00 AM

You may download the vortex impact video mentioned above here. http://www.ict.fhg.de/images/photos/wi-1sf_13.gifhttp://www.amasci.com/wing/smrg4.gif Yep, pretty much just a tube with a vortex forming plate on the end. A better design would be a modified 2 stroke engine hooked up to a pipe. One of the big keys to a successful design is to minimize the standing shock wave, turbulence, and burning. Laval nozzels do this quite well. http://theblog.hypermart.net/thurstonia/miscimage/vortex_shockwave.gif Illustration of muzzle blast showing (a) turbulence, burning, shocks and (b) traveling blast shockwave and stationary mach disk. http://theblog.hypermart.net/thurstonia/miscimage/vortex_destroyed.gif Half view of vortex ring: (a) Expanding over normal shock and (b) ring being consumed by muzzle blast. http://theblog.hypermart.net/thurstonia/miscimage/vortex_nozzle.gif Optimal nozzle design. *Most knowledge came from this document. [ January 06, 2002: Message edited by: Bander ]

nbk2000

January 6th, 2002, 09:38 AM

I remember a toy gun back in the early 80's that shot an air vortex up to 20' away that would move a foil strip target. Kinda goofy actually, but the principle worked. If someone found one and scaled it up it might be useful for something. As it was, it could have been used to propel a bit of teargas powder or toxin. BTW, the link to the video above was 404, but the file is still there at this link: http:// www.darknebula.org/superkuh/science/vortex/vortex%20launcher%20impact.mpg Looks exactly the same to me, but it works. You'll notice in the video that there's about a seconds delay between the two impacts. Which, from the perceived distance between the two water screens, would indicate a fairly low speed. From what I've read, the latest military incarnation of this goes about 100 m/s with enough force to hurt at that distance (100m). A football field in one second. :eek:

Bander

January 6th, 2002, 04:57 PM

The toy in question is the "Wham-o-Puff" gun. They were pretty popular back in the day until they were taken off the market. Apparently some kid thought it would be funny to shoot it in his sister's ear, blew out her eardrum. They can still be bought on auction sites such as ebay for a good sum of money. *Link Fixed* About the speed of military vortices, SARA's HETV (High Energy Toroidal Vortex) was capable of speeds from .5 to .8 the speed of sound and could carry up to 500 joules of energy within it's rapidly rotating core. Compare this to the 449 joules of a 9mm bullet with a muzzle velocity of 1099 ft/s. Pretty impressive. :D [ January 07, 2002: Message edited by: Bander ]

Mr Cool

January 8th, 2002, 02:40 PM

Bander - d'ya know roughly what the diameter of the vortex from the military one was?

Bander

January 9th, 2002, 09:39 PM

http://theblog.hypermart.net/thurstonia/miscimage/HETV.jpg From the above picture of the HETV I'd estimate around 6". But I cannot be sure. So I've just sent an email to one of the creators pretending to be a high school student doing a science project on non-lethal weapons. Hopefully I can get a few more specifics very soon. Scientific Applications & Research Associates, (SARA) Inc. is the commercial entity (military contractor) that makes it. The military is also working on adapting their series of grenade launchers to cut deployment costs. In their words: [quote]

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

A canidate platform for military police and law enforcement communities is the GL-6 repeating revolver 40mm grenade launcher. The concept is to provide a two piece kit that retrofits to the gun and provides quick converstion between lethal and non-lethal modes of operation. The kit consists of a set of blank cartridges and a disposable rod which slides into the barrel and afixes to the muzzle.

---

The rod serves as the vasal nozzle and injects chemical agents applied to it's surface into the vortex. Auto grenade launchers are being considered as well to take advantage of resonance effects. [ January 09, 2002: Message edited by: Bander ]

Mr Cool

January 10th, 2002, 02:39 PM

Excellent, a picture says a thousand words. Yeah, looks c. 6". I thought it might have been some huge great 3' diameter one. I've started work on a little model, which may or may not have potential to be scaled up to something decent. Very simple - a 1.5' long bit of 4.5" diameter pipe, with the nozzle on one end (I'm making it similar to the one in the picture Bander posted) that will have an opening of around 1-2". The other end will have a balloon attached inside it, that when inflated will force the air out of the nozzle. The balloon will be inflated by pumping up an air chamber to X psi (I'll have to do some testing to find the best pressure), and then discharging this through a ball valve or sprinkler valve or something into the balloon, to rapidly inflate it. I was going to have an air/propane mixture, but I thought this way would make it simpler to get consistent results, and using the balloon rather than dumping the air straight in will reduce the turbulence inside the big bit of pipe, which has got to be a good thing I suppose. The balloon then deflates by itself through a small opening in the pipe which carries the air from the compresssion chamber to the balloon. I'll try to draw you a diagram to help explain if that isn't clear. Might work, might not. What do you think?

Bander

January 10th, 2002, 11:37 PM

It sounds like it would work for low power testing, as long as you keep the inflation time sufficiently short. That's one of the keys to forming a good vortex. Also, vasal nozzles are mostly used to expand gases to atmospheric pressure and eliminate standing shock, problems your device won't have. A simple hole in a typical vortex forming plate configuration will probably give you near the same performance with much less hassle. Plus if you start with a small hole you can test progressively bigger holes easily to find the best ratio. I'd skip the laval nozzle for now. Otherwise it's sounds great. I'm sure we all know many ways to generate smoke to make the vortices visible, but combining the vapors of hydrochloric acid and ammonia worked the best for me. Just soak two paper towels with the respective liquids and set them in the device. Nice and simple. Toxic fumes make the vortices infinetly more fun as well. :D

mrloud

January 11th, 2002, 12:11 AM

I once used a vortice generating device to blow smoke rings a distance of seven or eight metres. It was as simple as an old bass drum with a 50cm diameter circular hole cut out of one side. A quick squirt from a smoke machine to fill up the drum and I would beat the other side (without the hole) of the drum with a beater. A 1m diameter smoke ring would launch itself out of the drum and shoot accross the stage at about 3 or 4 m/sec. This leads me to think that a great quantity of air is not required to generate an air vortex. Just a short sharp pulse at one end of a tube. I think a ball valve will release the air far too slowly to be much use. There is a different type of valve available though. I cant remember what they are called but they are almost digital. They are either open or closed and at the touch of a button they open, instantly releasing the pressure behind them. I suspect paintball guns use this type of thing.

Mr Cool

January 11th, 2002, 03:51 PM

Yeah, I realised that about those nozzles today. I remembered the diagram wrong, and thought the vortex was produced inside the nozzle and was helped to stay stable by the walls. Better idea for getting gas into it - an exhaust valve like on good pneuamtic spud guns, the ones with the piston that flies back and uncovers the rear end of the barrel so the air can rush in. They open almost instantly. Yeah, I've now decided to have a smaller volume chamber, and a smaller amount of gas going into it, since a c. 6" diameter vortex dosn't need much air, and any excess air would probably only disrupt it rather than helping. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Respect Primers More

View Full Version : Respect Primers More HMTD Factory

Log in

October 15th, 2001, 03:29 PM

Tinkering with firearm primers is very tempting for explosive lovers of our like. Before you glue some primers onto your airgun pellets, wanting to have some fun, you have a letter to read. This letter is found in June 1993 issue of American Rifleman. From Darrell W. Norman of Fernley, Nev. to the editors. Take Care With Duds Editor: I was making a letter holder from .308 and .30-'06 brass, all of which had dented primers and was, I thought, fired. I figured I was safe as I soldered them together. I was heating one with a propane torch and heard an explosion. The primer, though dented, still had some priming compound intact. I felf a hot funny feeling in my right chest and when I lifted my shirt, blood was running from an entrance wound. It caused a weird sensation, and I felt a little faint. At the emergency room, they took several X-rays to try to locate the primer. I ended up spending 24 hours in the trauma ward. Later I had an allergic reaction and broke out in hives. More X-rays showed the primer 2 1/2" deep in my right lower lung. The doctor theorize that it was as hot as 1800 degree when it entered abd probably cauterized the flesh as it went. They decided removing it would cause more damage than leaving it where it is. It doesn't seem like much, but it was very scary and could have been fatal if it hit my heart. So don't trust a dented primer--it may be a dud or just look like a dud! --------------------------------------------Why cartridges for letter holders? Appreciate it before civilians lose the right to tinker around with "dangerous stuff". Now if it were a detonation of a fresh primer, instead of a crooked one, that entered Mr. Norman's brain, instead of his chest, Mr. Norman would probably be killed instantly. Now guess what will happen to his propane torch that he dropped, and hadn't been turned off? Remember a firearm primer is a two-piece assembly that comes apart readily into fragments when detonated. It could surprise people to see the primer breaks free from glue or whatever ways the user wanted to had them secured. In a firing cartridge, the primer will try to pop out of the case's head, but backed by the bolt face. When the powder ignited, the cartridge pops back and seats the primer back in. So you can see that the friction of the primer pocket doesn't hold the primer when it fires, yet all fired cartridges had primers intact that people are fooled to underestimate a primer as a leathal projectile in itself.

EventHorizon

October 16th, 2001, 09:59 AM

Good warning for the KewLs, the less accidents anyone has relating to any of our "hobbies" the better. He should have removed the spent primer (using the correct tools, no pounding), then soldered them together, then taken some good primers, soaked them in water to remove the priming compound and inserted the empty cups. This is not only safe, it makes for a better looking job as well. -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Sex at age 90 is like trying to shoot pool with a rope." George Burns PGP ID 0x147CEF54

Boob Raider

May 9th, 2003, 02:34 PM

a new thread so here is my problem. I can buy fired .22 cal shells (small ones) but I need a license to purchase primed shells. Is it possible to re-prime those fired shells I can buy from the army store and if it is .... how may I do it.

Liam C.

May 9th, 2003, 11:13 PM

Yes it is possible to do it, but with the method I tried it's horribly time consuming and tedious work when you consider what you're getting out of it. Another consideration is there's no guarantee that you won't have misfires.... The method I used, which I originally got from an old Ragnar Benson book, was to thoroughly brush out and clean the brass (removing the firing pin dent from the rim as well) first. Next, you remove the tips from a bunch of Strike Anywhere Matches and add just enough water to make a thin paste out it. Here's where your problems begin, IMO. I don't think that you're really getting a homogenous mixture when doing this, resulting in some shells getting a good dose of chemicals and others getting pretty much nothing but inert crap. Anyways, after you've made your paste you paint the inside base of the cleaned brass with it making sure that it's getting into the crushable rim. If the paste is too thick it won't want to seep in there. Then let it thoroughly dry out. Once it's dry, you can reload it normally (with reloading powder) or use whatever improvised goody you have for it. Ragnar mentioned a 1/1 mix of sugar/chlorate so that was what I tried. I reprimed 30 rounds and reloaded with the sugar/chlorate, then proceeded to attempt to fire them all. Success was about 50% on the first run through. I then took the unfired ones and ran them through again and maybe 3 or 4 fired. I didn't try the rest a third time. They can be reloaded, but you'll want to try a different primer mix for sure as the strike anywhere method isn't consistently reliable at all...

irish

May 10th, 2003, 06:01 AM

Boob Raider, when you say you can get small .22 shells do you mean .22 lr or mag rimfire rounds or centrefire cases like 5.56 NATO ?. centrefires are easey to reload reliabley rimfires are not.

zaibatsu

May 10th, 2003, 12:29 PM

You could spin the shells to get the priming comp. distributed evenly along the insides. But I think it's be better to reload centerfire shells.

Boob Raider

May 10th, 2003, 01:28 PM

I was talking about. http://www.boomspeed.com/boobraider/22cal01.JPG and [/url] http://www.boomspeed.com/boobraider/22cal02.JPG[/url] Anyways I think I am going to use the powder actuated tool blanks instead, with a teflon or Al slug crimped on them for my MAG LITE pistol. But for curiosity sake ... what are the compounds used to prime cartriges ... esp .22 rimfire ?

irish

May 10th, 2003, 08:30 PM

Those are .22 lr, not worth the bother of reloading go with the blanks. I think the main comp of rimfire prime is lead azide mixed I presume with a binder.

zaibatsu

May 11th, 2003, 07:03 AM

Lead Styphenate I think. Although I heard the Russians still use MF because it's the only thing that'll go off reliably at those temperatures.

Liam C.

May 11th, 2003, 04:36 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter I always thought it was Lead Azide as well, although I see no reasom why Lead Styphenate or MF can't be used too. ".....You could spin the shells....." Ya know zaibatsu, I have a centrifuge and it never occurred to me to try that! That's so simple it can't help but work... :)

Boob Raider, I agree with irish. I assume the MAGLITE pistol is a single shot. You'll have alot less headaches using the power hammer blanks, I believe.

Boob Raider

May 12th, 2003, 10:04 PM

I emptied out one of the blanks ... took a while as the brass is hard. It cracks while being opened. Anyways ... here is a pic of the powder in it http://www.boomspeed.com/ boobraider/Openedblank.JPG can someone ID the powder and tell me weither or not it is good for cartriges ? Also I took one flare apart ..... the small hand fired one (pen sized) and I found only the flare comp and this cap seperated by a sponge in the polyethylene flare case. http:// www.boomspeed.com/boobraider/Flareprimercap02.JPG and http://www.boomspeed.com/boobraider/Flareprimercap01.JPG Is that cap powerful enough to shoot out an ~ 8g flare 30 ft in the air ?

irish

May 13th, 2003, 01:51 AM

bit hard to id any powder even looking at it first hand but it should be ok for what you want. just be carefull for a few shots that it does not have too much pressure with a bullet. edit= fixing my shitty spelling.

Liam C.

May 13th, 2003, 03:04 AM

Take a look at the barrel size (thickness) on a powerhammer, and consider the size of barrel you intend to put in your mag-light. I'll say right now that that is way more powder than you need. Heck, I haven't even seen that much out of a .22lr. Also, it just looks like double base powder to me (look kinda like little paper circles?). I don't remember which power load is yellow... Is that the strongest one? Anyway, you probably already know what follows but I'll feel better saying it (so, no offense intended)... When you build your 'zeeper' do a lot of remote firing/testing. Start out using the weakest blank with only half the powder load in it (without projectile), to make sure your firing mechanism works consistently. Then begin testing it with projectile included, starting with the lowest load (as described above) work your way up in powder loads and blank sizes until the barrel bursts. If the barrel doesn't burst using the strongest load, that's cool too. Now you should have a good idea of the limits that your barrel type can handle. Then build another one and scale it back down a few loads. If it'll fire at least ten consecutive rounds without any barrel deformation, cracks, etc. it should be safe (for that size load) to hand fire... although if it was me, I would make yet another (fresh) barrel just like the previous two to actually put in the flashlight. ".....Is that cap powerful enough to shoot out an ~ 8g flare 30 ft in the air ?...." With that particular powerload, I see no reason why not. It would probably do it with half that much powder, but now I'm guessing...

irish

May 21st, 2003, 05:50 AM

Bit more info re primers plus some other interesting stuff on the MSDS from olin au, http://www.olin.com.au/MSDS/htm/MSDS's.htm zaibatsu is correct about the primer comp. edit= fixing link.

Boob Raider

May 25th, 2003, 04:12 PM

Is it possible to reuse primer caps. Lets say I remove the caps from the spent casings, wash them with hot H2O, clean them, and fill them with Pb-styphanate or Hg-fulminate. Then can I use these caps to reload shells ? Or does the cap undergoe some change (eg. position of the anvil) that it can't be reused. This is my only option to reload 9mm parabellums as I need a FAC to purchase primers.

zaibatsu

May 25th, 2003, 08:16 PM

When the firing pin strikes the primer it dints the end and bends the anvil. You can reshape it, and there is something in one of the PMJBs about it. You could use the mix from matchheads as an impro primer comp.

prespec

April 3rd, 2007, 04:18 AM

If you have access to a copy of 'Hatchers Notebook' , there is a reference in there to an arsenal worker blithely strolling along , enjoying the sound made by several thousand primers rattling about in a steel bucket which he carried. Shortly after , he was replaced by a smoking hole in the ground. These things are dangerous and you will observe they are allways separated in packaging. BTW.... Julian Hatcher was in charge of Aberdeen proving ground and several arsenals around the 1930's , and his book is an excellent source of info on many " I wonder what would happen if..." questions, related to firearms and explosives, even if a bit dated.

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2007, 05:29 AM

And you brought up a 4 year old post to say that? vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and W eapons Forum

> Military Science

> Im p r o v i s e d W e a p o n s

> C ell-phone controlled spy vehicle Log in

View Full Version : Cell-phone controlled spy vehicle J

October 1st, 2001, 12:46 PM

I was just talking with an email contact about a computer controlled RC car he has built. O ne idea he had was to allow it to b e controlled via the net. The disadvantage of this m ethod is that a com puter would have to be placed so as to be withing range of the R C system. Either that, or the vehicle would have to have a phone, modem and a com p u t e r o f s o m e kind on board, + a hefty battery pack. My idea would dispense with e verything but the cell phone and a sm all comm and interpreter. To control the vehicle, frequencies would be sent down the lin e, which would be translated into actions by the interpretter. The circuitry would be sim ple (maybe even just a frequency controlled am plifier IC, a summ i n g a m p , a n d s o m e logic), and the b a n d w i d t h o f t h e p h o n e l i n e i s h i g h e n o u g h t o h a v e m a n y c h a n n e l s . T h i s i s a n o t h e r a d v a n t a g e ; c o m mercial RC system s o f m ore than 2 channels are expensive (especially those over 4). T h e v i d e o c a m e r a c o u l d b e m o u n t e d o n directional stan d, which could be adjusted by the user over the phone. Wire l e s s v i d e o cams can be bought off-the-shelf, alth ough they are usually low range. T h e r a n g e c o u l d p r o b a b l y b e i m proved b y a d d i n g o n a n R F a m p ( p o s s i b l y d i s a b l i n g t h e o n e a l r e a d y on board first). This might attract unwanted attention tho ugh. T h e b a s i c ( m inus video receiver) control system could be smaller than a standard RF transmitter. It could h ave a built in cellphone, and/or have the ability to attach to a standard phone handset. It would sim ply generate the correct frequencies acco rding to the com m a n d s o f t h e u s e r . T h e v i d e o r e c e i v i n g e q u i p m e n t could b e a s m a l l m o n i t o r ( m aybe LCD) with the video receiver attached. Although no t feasible now (AFAIK), in the future one of the next generation m o b i l e p h o n e ' s c o u l d b e u s e d . T h e s t a n d a r d p h o n e o n t h e v e h i c l e c o u l d be replaced with a video capable phone, which would also receive the regular comm ands. Another phone could be built into the controller to receive the video! This will prob ably be another project th at I never get off the ground, but I thought I'd share the idea anyway. One obvious disadvantage is the cost of the phone calls. Another advantage is the sim plicity of the control unit. It would be easy to im provise in the field (m inus the video receiving part) if the com mand syntax was carefully thought out. By comm and syntax, I'm thinking of whether a continuous frequency would be transmitted (the com m and is carried out while the frequency is present), or a start and stop frequency pulse. I ' d a p p r e c i a t e a n y s u g g e s t i o n s o r c o m m ents. J -----------------Download the forum archive (http://forumarchive.tripod.com ) P G P k e y a v a i l a b l e h e r e ( h t t p : / / p g p k e y s . m it.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

Snipie

October 1st, 2001, 02:34 PM

W h y d o n t y o u j u s t u s e a P M R ( Private Mobile Radio) ?? they can transm it com m unications over 2 kilo m e t e r ( 1 . 6 m iles I guess) and with tone squelch (CTCSS, or digital squelch DCS) you have plenty of channels free to use, and if you use som e sort of encryption (very easy to m ake with a m icro controller) no one can take over your controls. The video transm ission is s o m ewhat difficult over a long distance, but if you can e ncrypt th e signal to MPEG 4 (witch is very difficult) it is possible to transm it it th r o u g h t h e P M R I g u e s s , m aybe low quality and a low FPS. A f r i e n d o f m ine is working on a video signal trans mitter (range 300 M) for his RF helicop ter, and he is using s o m e I C s f rom M a x i m ( Maxim ) I t h o u g h t h e s us ing t h e M A X 2 6 2 0 , b u t I m n o t s ure. M a x i m o f f e r s f r e e s a m ples from there IC assortm ent (I tried it, and I have now 1 6 brand new ICs in front of m e http:// theforum.virtualave.n e t / u b b / s m i l i e s / s m ile.gif).

[This message has been edited by Snipie (edited October 01, 2001).] [This message has been edited by Snipie (edited October 01, 2001).]

Predator

October 1st, 2001, 05:03 PM

b e c a u s e a p m r o n l y h a s a 2 m i l e m a x r a n g e . . t h e c e l l p h o n e i d e a is limite d o n l y b y s a t e l l i t e a n d a t e n n a e c o v e r a g e

J

October 1st, 2001, 05:56 PM

T h a n k s f o r t h e l i n k t o M a x i m , I'll probably have a use for the RF chips at som e point. Som e of the m l o o k i d e a l f o r b o o s t i n g the power of a wireless video camera with not too many extra com p o n e n t s . As p redator said, the point of using m o b i l e p h o n e s i s t h a t t h e r a n g e i s h u g e . I t w o u l d p r o b a b l y b e e a s i e r t o u s e s t a n d a r d R C gear than PMR's, alth o u g h a s y s t e m that works on cell-phones could probably be hot-swapped directly for use with PMR's. My P2 300 has difficulty with a lot of MPEG4 (DivX), never m ind a portable tx/rx setup :-( I think plain com posite video is the way to go here, although it m ight be easier to build in encryption on the MPEG4 encoder/d e c o d e r t h a n d o t h e s a m e with composite video. MPEG4 encoded video just m ight be com pact e nough to send over a standard phone line at very low quality, whereas there's no chance with com p o s i t e . J -----------------Download the forum archive (http://forumarchive.tripod.com ) P G P k e y a v a i l a b l e h e r e ( h t t p : / / p g p k e y s . m it.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792)

BoB-

October 1st, 2001, 06:13 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

It would be cool to have an onboard GPS to send inform ation through the cellphone, that way your model a irplane, or car could be tracked and controlled from miles away. -----------------T e a m work is essential. It lets you to b l a m e s o m e o n e e l s e .

mrloud

October 3rd, 2001, 04:41 AM

The brain of your spy vehicle could be an old 486 laptop running Linux. Linux supports the AX.25 protocol which is a way to set up a TCP/IP network over a radio link. You could then send and recieve data from the vehicle over the one data link which could be encrypted using the linux version of PGP. A digital cam era will plug straight into the laptop. A friend of mine has a sm all robot which is software controlled via an RS232 port. The robot and software came as an inexpensive hobbyist's kit and could easily be adapted to contol forward, reverse, left and right steering. I d o n ' t s e e m to be able to find a straight answer as to what sort of bandwidth you can get using packet radio. I guess it depends on the quality of the transceiver. I would only use a cheap black and white CCD camera due to the limited bandwidth. Also B&W CC D cam eras can pick up infra red. Here is a link to the AX.25 Howto at www.linux.org (http://www.linux.org) http://www.linux.org/docs/ldp/howto/AX25-HOW TO.htm l This would be a very cheap and reliable way to control the vehicle but you'll need to be very knowlegeable with Linux and TCP/ IP networking.

J

October 3rd, 2001, 07:44 AM

I've always b een curious abou t packet radio. It does seem very com p l i c a t e d a n d q u i t e e x p e n s i v e : - ( I've found th is site which has information about the hardware used and links to other sites: http://www.wa4dsy.ne t/ J -----------------Download the forum archive (http://forumarchive.tripod.com ) P G P k e y a v a i l a b l e h e r e ( h t t p : / / p g p k e y s . m it.edu/) (ID = 0x5B66A792) vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> Cross Bow mech. Log in

View Full Version : Cross Bow mech. Agent Blak

October 17th, 2001, 01:59 AM

I am interested in how the manufactoring of this would be carried out. I am interested in on that would be for a 400-500lbs pull so it will have to be able to with stand some force. Will "Cold Rolled Mild" work? any help would be greatly appreciated. Also can a low power scope be mounted on to a cross bow? or is it just aimed by line of sight?

-----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak">here</a> to download my files.

SawedOff8gaugeman

October 17th, 2001, 09:28 AM

A scope can be attached IF there is a rail for it. It's up to the xbows manufacturer. I really suggest making some kind of sights, even simple iron sights. Maybe installing some adjustable surplus sights would do... Of course a multi-reticule scope is the best... 400-500 lbs? http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/tongue.gif Definitely not a toy.

EventHorizon

October 17th, 2001, 10:22 AM

400-500#'s ?!?! You would need some kind of good spring steel or spring system, steel cable and solid steel shaftd bolts. Then there is the factor of how you cock it, you would need some type of arming system for a 500# crossbow, unless you are one bad dude. IIRC, most of the top end cross bows only top out at around 200-250#, I've shot a 125# one and they are wicked, 10" groups at 100yds!!! -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54

nbk2000

October 17th, 2001, 12:35 PM

Car leaf spring for the bow, and a winch to draw it back. Steel wire rope for the string, and small rebar for arrows. OUCH! Rent the movie "The Good Son" with Macaulay Culkin (the "Home Alone" punk). He has a crossbow built like this that he uses to skewer dogs with. BTW, they got the design from a 30's popular science article. Read some of them at a library if you can, all kinds of neat shit in those old magazines. As an aside, if I was the burglars from Home Alone, I'd either leave the fucking place alone, or surround it with 20 gallons of napalm and burn the fucking place to the ground with the screaming brat in it. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ smile.gif -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2ooo) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

Agent Blak

October 17th, 2001, 01:18 PM

The bow is made from the leaf spring off on an old truck I belive about 30" long x 1 1/2" wide x 7/16 thick. I am using a cocking mech. aswell so don't worry about that. I got the idea from PMJB vol 3, P.62. I am thinking about using the mech design from shown there. -----------------A wise man once said: "...There Will Be No Stand Off At High Noon ... Shoot'em In The Back And, Shoot'em In The Dark" Agent Blak-------OUT!! Go <a href="http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/agent_blak">here</a> to download my files.

PYRO500

October 18th, 2001, 05:48 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

what about one of those mini winch things they use for strapping things down, they can pull alot. and a 500 pound crossbow! if the bowstring ever broke you'd lose probably more than a digit. that would make a good sniper weapon, assuming you have a good projectile. I think I'd have trouble with a 250 pound crossbow and I consider myself a large guy, past a certain point it will cut into your hands no matter your strength, you'd have to wear thick welding gloves to not hurt your hands -----------------visit my web page at: [URL=http://www.geocities.com/pyro2000us/]

Agent Blak

October 18th, 2001, 08:34 PM

I would assume that Aircraft cable or laminated steel cable would be most appropiate. I levered/ratched system seemed to be most practical.

-----------------A wise man once said: "...Never, never--We don't exist, We don't collect, We don't know, No body knows anything and If there is a bullet coming at The head of the United States Then we can tell you precisely what time it is going to Arrive" --Nicholas Rostow Agent Blak-------OUT!!

Mick

October 19th, 2001, 11:50 AM

did it occour to anyone that letting off a 500lb crossbow would rip your shoulder right off? and, if you did have a 500lb crossbow, how do you plan on aiming it? it would wiegh a ton. i made a crossbow with a leaf spring from a 2tonne truck, and mounted it on a piece of 50x40x4mm section steel, and used a low geared boat whinch to cock it and used a piece of 20mm re-bar for a test bolt the first test, the boat whinch stripped it gears even before i could cock it so i got a better an stronger whinch, and managed to wind it back an cock it. as i was preparing to release the whinch clip(and i'll point out at this time, i wasn't holding onto the bow, i had it mounted on the ground) the 200kg steel cable which i used for the bow string snapped, and the bow flipped up in the air and came crashing to the ground. after finding some 400kg cable, i tried again, and this time i managed to fire it only it snapped the makeshift stock in half, and launched the half that whinch was attatched to into a wall, distroying the whinch on impact. the bolt was found in 2 trees, it hit the first tree, and snapped in half, launching the other half into a tree next to it. (and i assume there was a 3rd pice that broke off because the 2 halves in the trees never fitted together) so yes, a 500lb would be cool, but as for sniper type applications, it would be pointless because you could not fire it accuratly, or without snapping your body in half.

[This message has been edited by Mick (edited October 19, 2001).]

Predator

October 19th, 2001, 03:30 PM

On a 500lb bow you'd better be using some very sturdy bolts/projectiles unless you want the bolt/projectile to snap upon launching and take your arm with it

SawedOff8gaugeman

October 19th, 2001, 03:53 PM

BTW, do normal, for instance 150lb xbows have a strong recoil? I'm interested because have never fired one http:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/smile.gif Compare to rifle calibers?

Agent Blak

October 19th, 2001, 05:45 PM

I am not stupid enough to fire an untested weapon from my sholder. To me is it common sense tomount it to test fire it. But the warnings are much appriciate. -----------------A wise man once said: "...Never, never--We don't exist, We don't collect, We don't know, No body knows anything and If there is a bullet coming at the head of the United States then we can tell you precisely what time it is going to Arrive" --Nicholas Rostow Agent Blak-------OUT!! (Blak, you're signature is seriously getting out of hand, verging on kewl. Trim it down to 3 lines or less. NBK2000) [This message has been edited by nbk2000 (edited October 19, 2001).]

EventHorizon

October 19th, 2001, 08:41 PM

Crossbows don't have "recoil" in the sense of firearms. The energy is away from you, hence the crossbows would pull it self out

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter of your hands rather then kick you down.

-----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54

BoB-

October 20th, 2001, 04:39 AM

Leafsprings come apart, I can bend the longest section on this leafspring I have using all my bodyweight, but when it was all together It felt like my spine was going to snap trying to get that thing to bend. Imagine how far lightweight arrows would go in such a bow.

Zach

October 20th, 2001, 11:53 PM

BoBF=M*A Force = Mass x Acceleration. So, you may be able to get that light weight "arrow" (actually a bolt) to go a long distance, but the force would be like getting shot with a cottonball from a slingshot. There is also the possibility of "overpowering" a light weight bolt, where the force applied causes the bolt to bend when launched/in flight, throwing off the accuracy. z

twinkle

October 22nd, 2001, 10:15 AM

I think it is interesting that you want to build such a heavy bow but I think that for normal use it will be to heavy , 250 lb is already a very high powered crossbow .Also you can do two things ,one is making to xbow like a medieval xbow with a very strong short draw like your car leaf spring or with fibreglass/resin bow (prod ) which has a longer draw with less force but the result is the same .It is just as with a normal gun you have a bullet and the charge and with a xbow you have the bolt and the draw force / draw length , at a certain draw and draw length belongs a certain bolt length /weight .So you have a lot to experiments to do I think that when you would like to built something so heavy you better could built a roman "catapult" like the Ballista or so although that is not something you take with you so easy. If you like I do have some information on trigger systems of xbows which I could sent .Also be carefull with these experiments the forces you use are easely underestimate

Mick

October 22nd, 2001, 10:29 AM

i wasn't trying to call you stupid or anything agent black, i merely suggesting to everyone, that if they were to try something along the lines of this it would be an idea to benchtest it first (its just that some people get 1+1=3...if you get what i mean)

crossbows don't have a lot of recoil, more so *snap* then anything. When you fire them they make your arms fly forward, which you then counter by pulling back. there a good way to pull a few muscles. i used to have a 300lb bow, and i found even after firing it god knows how many times i still sometimes pulled my neck/ shoulder out from the snap when it fires

BoB-

October 22nd, 2001, 11:25 AM

I am aware of Newtons' laws, which is why I mentioned how far they would go. You dont have to use physics to build a crossbow bolt, pointy stick going fast = ouch!

twinkle

October 22nd, 2001, 01:14 PM

I don't agree that with you Bob a pointy stick as a bolt Iam busy now for about 8 month trying all kind of things with bolts and a self-made xbow and getting the right bolt for it is not so easy as you say okay all "sticks" fly but to get the best result is another story .

Agent Blak

October 22nd, 2001, 03:42 PM

I would greatly appreciate it if you coulfd send me those triger mechs. I didn't think that you were callin' me stupid... and I know what you mean. for instance some will try to make a Slam-bang Shot gunusing 3/4" and an end cap. Than they wonder why it destroyeditself on the first firing. after they anwser a few questions it comes about that they used CPVC or Cu pipe instead of Galvized. Can you send the info on those mechs to: [email protected]

-----------------"I Always Have A Spade Or Two Handy" Agent Blak-------OUT!!

BoB-

October 22nd, 2001, 04:25 PM

Twinkle, If you bang a razor knife into the end of a peice of wooden dowel, forming an x shaped split, then you can fit quivers in and

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

secure them by wrapping the dowel in sinew (for looks), or duct tape. I'll upload pics to the ForumFTP if you dont understand. These bolts fall apart (literally) after a few shots, a more sturdy one could be formed from aluminum rod.

-----------------Teamwork is essential. It lets you blame someone else.

EventHorizon

October 22nd, 2001, 06:33 PM

BobAre you refering to "feathers" or "fletches"? Quiver is a term I associate with the device that holds the arrows. Most any sporting good store sells fletches and fletching glue. Fletchtite comes to mind. They are essential to getting the bolt or arrow to fly straight. Some simple math and a peice of paper wrapped around the bolt should be sufficient to align them at 120°. To give you an idea of what type bolt material you'll be looking at, a 60# pull compound bow can't use the cheap wooden arrows. You just might be looking at solid aluminum shafts if you have a beefy crossbow. -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54

bangandow

October 23rd, 2001, 02:44 AM

a while back at a gun show, there was a blowgun booth. the guy had a kit that you just hooked on and you powered your blowgun with co2 powerlets(from the cheap walmart paintball guns). the bolts used were solid aluminum and (according to the vendor) could take enough oomph from the co2 to go straight through a deer without any adverse effects to the bolt itself. id say using wooden dowels is a definite no-no with a bow this powerful. solid metal bolts is the only thing i can see working... [This message has been edited by bangandow (edited October 23, 2001).]

twinkle

October 23rd, 2001, 04:49 AM

It was not meant as an insult Bob and i know how to make bolts you even can make a bolt more simple using wide tape to make vanes (instead of fletching the bolt it is not as good as fletching but it can do the job ) , however if you make the bolt to light it will flutter and when the bolt is to heavy it will drop to fast when the fletches or vanes are to big they will result in a brake when they are to small they don't work properly. It makes great difference what type of point (arrowhead) you put on a bolt the flight pattern of a bolt with a broadhead is different from a "bullet point " you can make a bolt of wood , aluminium or glassfibre and I think for such a heavy xbow as 500 lb even steel tubing could be used .I see that they are saying to use solid rod instead of tube but for the strength it does not make much difference if you use tube or solid the bending strength is the same only it could help if you want more weight for a bolt . this was for the bolt but the same applies for the xbow itself what type of trigger mechanism you are going to use and how long the draw is . There are a lot of variables you can "play" with .

BoB-

October 23rd, 2001, 09:03 AM

Quiver is used in the south as a synonym for feathers, bad habit of mine.

Mick

October 23rd, 2001, 01:33 PM

agent black: i never got as far as designing a trigger mech for it, all i used in the test phase to fire it was a piece of string tied to the release on the whinch and i never finished the bow due to lack of time the trigger mech was something i could never figure out - one of the ideas i had was the trigger mech off a spear fishing gun(obviously modded so it could take the extra strain)

twinkle

October 23rd, 2001, 02:13 PM

agent black maybe this can help somewhat to , if you want drawings of trigger mechanism I can email them to you I did not have the url addresses anymore . http://crossbow.hunter.ru/making/bowstring.html http://www.atarn.org/chinese/cn_arc_indx.htm http://jim-diana-hart.home.att.net/cbsite.html http://www.geocities.com/colosseum/1486/string/ http://www.en.com/alchem/crossbow.html http://crossbow.hunter.ru/making/lock.html http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3433/crsindex.htm http://198.144.2.125/Crossbows/crossbows.htm http://www.atarn.org/chinese/yn_xbow/yn_xbow.htm http://www.atarn.org/chinese/rept_xbow.htm

twinkle

October 24th, 2001, 01:59 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter this is the address of the National Crossbow men of America they have a nice gallery with a lot of pictures of target crossbows they also sell plans of the Bailey's crossbow (which is nice , scale 1:1 ) http://www.usarchery.org/naapub/crossbow/xbow.htm

Boob Raider

October 9th, 2002, 02:35 PM

15 days short of a year. Anyways I was working on a kind of a bow that can be carried like a handgun so it doesn't have the cross leaf spring. Instead I am using 2 posts, one on either side to which 2 sling shot "power bands" have been attached. Rest of the design is same as a conventional crossbow. For the arrows/bolts I am using chop sticks (the bamboo ones). The chopsticks can carry impact sensitive 10-15 g AP or HMTD heads or the good old pointy end.

Fukineh

December 8th, 2002, 09:37 PM

A friend of mine made a ballista with a truck leaf spring, and yes, It destroyed itself as we all anticipated. If your going to make something that powerful that is hand held It will have to be extremely strong yet light enough to carry. Now, the question is can anyway afford to make a crossbow out of magnesium :D ? My main point is that making something handheld and that powerful is impracticable, but I would love to see it successfully done. About the pistol "crossbow" that is relatively flat shaped, you should try making a magazine for it. Preferably one that is spring loaded instead of gravity loaded so that you can still aim accurately. <small>[ December 08, 2002, 08:38 PM: Message edited by: Fukineh ]

Harry

December 10th, 2002, 10:54 AM

Check the USPTO database. I remember seeing such a device, with short quarrels. Search keyword archery. Harry

McGuyver

December 12th, 2002, 10:17 PM

I love the idea of having a small crank mounted beneath the bow to aide in pulling it back. It's noisy and might take longer but it seems really handy. It would also have to release quickly. I think the leaf spring thing was tried on junkyard wars but they were trying to lauch a football and it sucked. The other guys were using a huge air cannon. :D <small>[ December 12, 2002, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: McGuyver ]

Fukineh

December 13th, 2002, 12:11 AM

Ya I've seen that episode. Pneumatic cannons kick ass and are quite reliable, but If you could get a giant ballista to work consistently right that would be a shit load of fun also.

Anthony

December 13th, 2002, 10:33 AM

You should have seen this serie's grand final - they had to build a device to throw a car. One team made a trebuchet from telegraph poles with a skip full of 4 tons of lead as a counter weight. Oh man, you should have seen when they pulled the release pin :D

nbk2000

December 13th, 2002, 11:03 AM

Does that mean it worked and the car went flying? Or did it fly apart, impaling silly wankers with shards of wood and metal scrap?

zaibatsu

December 13th, 2002, 12:37 PM

Wankers, do they actually say that in the US? Anyway, while looking through my local library I found a very interesting book pertaining to this topic. It's called "The Crossbow - medieval and modern military and sporting, its construction, history & management". Problem is it's HUGE (~400 pages) and is a reprint of a 1903 book. I can't obviously scan it all in, as I have neither the patience or time to do so, but I can scan some sections in if you'd like. Here's a brief contents: Part 1 - The history of the crossbow, with notes comparative on the longbow shortbow and handgun I - The military crossbow II - The Sporting crossbow III - The General dimensions of crossbows IV - The bolts used with crossbows V - The range of the medieval crossbow and how it compared to the longbow VI - The shortbow and longbow in relation to the crossbow VII - The Handgun in relation to the crossbow VIII - Summary of the development of the mediaeval handgun IX - A summary of the history of the crossbow Part 2 - The construction and management of crossbows: Mediaeval X - The primitive crossbow XI - The 13th and 14th century crossbow XII - How the bow of the primitive crossbow was attatched to the stock XIII - How the crossbowman placed the bolt of his crossbow on the stock of his weapon

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

XIV - The various contrivances employed in the 13th and 14th century for bending the bows of crossbows XV - Continued XVI - Continued XVII - Continued XVIII - The 15th century military and sporting crossbow with a thick steel bow XIX - The construction of a powerful crossbow such as those used for killing deer in the 15th century XX - Construction continuted XXI - Construction continued XXII - Construction continued XXIII - Construction continued XXIV - Construction continued XXV - Construction continued XXVI - Construction continued XXVII - Construction continued XXVIII - Construction continued XXIX - The Slurbow XXX - The 16th century sporting crossbow XXXI - The cranequin and how it was applied to bend the steel bow of a crossbow XXXII - The 16th and early 17th century Spanish sporting crossbow XXXIII - The 16th century stonebow XXXIV - The 16th century stonebow with a thicker steel bow XXXV - The 17th and 18th century sporting and target crossbow XXXVI - The 16th century improved locks which were fitted to porting and target crossbows Part 3 - The construction and management of crossbows XXXVII - The bullet-shooting crossbow XXXVIII - The bullet-shooting crossbow continued XXXIX - The bullet-shooting crossbow continued XL - The bullet-shooting crossbow continued XLI - The large bolt-shooting continental target crossbow XLII - The small bolt-shooting target crossbow as used currently in Belgium XLIII - Belgian target crossbow continued XLIV - Belgian target crossbow continued XLV - Belgian target crossbow continued XLVI - The bullet-shooting target crossbow with a barrel XLVII - The popinjay XLVIII - The crossbowmen of Dresden-Privilegirte Bogenschutzen Gesellschaft XLIX - The chinese repeating crossbow L - Arrow throwing Part IV - A treatise on the siege engines used in ancient and mediaeval times for discharging great stones and arrows LI - Introductory notes on the siege engines used in ancient and mediaeval times for discharging great stones and arrows LII - The antiquity of ballistas and catapults LIII - The effects of ancient siege engines in warfare LIV - The distances to which ancient siege engines cast their projectiles LV - The catapult, its construction and management LVI - The catapult continued LVII - The Ballista, its construction and management LVIII - The trebuchet LIX - The spring engine As you can see, there's a lot of stuff! Bear in mind this was written around 100 years ago.

Anthony

December 13th, 2002, 01:47 PM

No, I think NBK is the first :) Well, the car flew a bit, just in the wrong direction, and as an indirect result of a "fault". The problem was that the RSJ they had used for the main arm, although it looked pretty substantial, wasn't strong enough. When the counter weight fell, the arm bent and thus didn't raise the car, which meant that the energy from the weight wasn't transfered to the load. So the counter weight just accumulated kinetic energy until it reached the end of it's travel, whereapon it dumped it all into the frame (think 4T falling from 30+ feet), which promptly disassembled itself - in a most spectacular fashion :) I ain't never seen telegraph poles snap like that before :D Oh, I loved those Devonshire farmers :) "Propah Jawb!"

nbk2000

December 13th, 2002, 09:49 PM

Hey, I'm trying to expand my vocabulary to be international . :D That hundred year old book is guaranteed to be much more detailed than any modern book on the subject of construction of these ancient weapons. "bullet throwing" crossbows? Hmmm...previously fired rifle bullet projected at high speed via crossbow...cops looking for silenced rifle.... :) I'd say scan anything that gives DETAILS on the construction of these weapons. All the history and background is obtainable elsewhere. If you do scan it, do a good job of it and don't bollock it up. <small>[ December 14, 2002, 10:26 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Anthony "Bollock(s) it up" NBK :)

December 14th, 2002, 10:50 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter smokey

December 19th, 2002, 04:33 AM

ok guys ive got to say that imho i think that a 500lb cross bow would be a bitch to both use and maintain i think you would end up with a ballista style weapon( good for seiges) build yourself a 175 lb weapon and use it to nail dogs to trees and telegraph poles .ive got a 60lb pistol crosbow and its great for nailing rats to the rafters of my mates shed! hahaha i woul have to agree with twinkle in tha the use of tube for bolts is the way to go in fact im gonna try it out with my gear and i love the co2 powered blow gun thing would you classify it as a mini portair cannon? <small>[ December 19, 2002, 03:41 AM: Message edited by: smokey ]

SmallR2002

October 9th, 2003, 09:28 AM

tip: dont brace it only for back-recoil, brace for frount as well - crossbows dont fly straight! And hurt alot

dinkydexy

October 11th, 2003, 10:35 PM

IMHO any talk about 500lb draw crossbows is just silly. The impracticalities of building and handling such a weapon have been well covered and are all well-grounded observations. What would someone hope to gain by more than doubling the drawing power of a readily available crossbow...extra range perhaps? Well, what use is that without accuracy, which it would be virtually impossible to gain? Or maybe extra penetrating power or clout at normal ranges? If so, what's your intended target for goodness sake? I'm a reasonably experienced crossbowman. Take it from me, the weapon you're thinking of building is a loser's weapon. I'll back myself with a humble 150lb crossbow and a handful of homemade wooden 14" quarrels against it any time...and curiously enough the advantages I'd have would be the same as those enjoyed by the English Longbowmen who readily proved their superiority over their Continental European crossbow handling opponents way back when; superior rate of fire and increased mobility. You fancy handling a crossbow? Cool. If you have half the pleasure that I have with mine then you'll be delighted...but just go buy one!!

mr. wiggles

October 22nd, 2003, 10:23 PM

I have never used large scale crossbows, but I would assume that with 500lbs, you will be dealing with less of a crossbow and more of a "javelin launcher"*. I would recommend looking for books on medieval siege weapons a and they should have a fair amount of info on javlin throwing machines. The picture I have seen in some midieval weapons book had the the launcher mounted on a large quad-pod. Many things may be differint from the midieval design, as you will be using metal and they made thiers largly out of wood. *that isn't the historic name, I tryed to search for it but came up with nothing

Arbalest

January 20th, 2004, 11:51 AM

There is nothing silly or inherently difficult about building a 500# crossbow. Such a weapon doesn't have to weigh a ton or be a "javelin launcher", it will not rip off anybody's arm and it will not need metal arrow shafting. The pull of a bow tells little more than the amount of force needed to pull the string back. Two men can both weigh 200# yet the strength or speed difference between them can be huge. The same fact applies to crossbows. Medieval crossbows typically had a draw weight ranging from 300 to 1200 pounds, and they were made mostly from wood, horn and sinew, materials much weaker than modern spring steel / fiberglass etc. Some of the 500+ pound 'bows don't have any metal in them apart from the trigger, and they are compact weapons weighing under 10 lbs. The reason they hold up is that they have very short draw lengths, often only 6 - 8". Consequently they don't store any more energy than a modern, highend, long-draw crossbow. Which means the strain on the parts isn't particularly huge. Why would anyone want to make a 500# crossbow if you can have a 200# crossbow that's just as powerful? Well, it's a hell of a lot easier to make a simple, straight, spring steel bow with a short, really heavy pull than to build an equally effective crossbow of half or third that weight. It would take well-designed, laminated reflex /recurve limbs or a compound system. Not something that can be done from scrap metal with a grinder. Commercial, good quality crossbows cost from 400 to 800 dollars, a worthy motive in itself for building a home-made version. With a 500# crossbow it might be wise to follow the example of medieval bowsmiths and use a simple, rolling nut trigger mechanism, where the trigger is a long lever that's pulled with the whole hand instead of only an index finger. It takes some oomph to release a sear holding back hundreds of pounds. Most of the heavier, modern crossbows are compound bows. A 200# compound puts only 100# or less onto the trigger mechanism thanks to the let-down. A 500# home-made 'bow puts five times more. By far the best string for a home-made crossbow can be made from the modern bowstring fibers that are sold in rolls in archery shops. A single strand of FastFlight has a breaking strength of 55#, so a thirty-strand string will hold up for 1650 pounds! And FF is very light for it's strength, a prerequisite for an efficient bowstring. Ordinary Dacron is a cheaper, weaker option. Wood is still a very functional arrow material, and when used properly, will endure the forces generated by the heaviest crossbows. Crossbow bolts are short, so their stiffness is very high compared to conventional arrows. A wooden shaft doesn't have to thicken much to strengthen manyfold. The wood for serious heavy-crossbow ammo must be strong, not the weak cedar and pine that commercial wood arrows are made of. Hickory is the best in this regard, ash, maple or oak are good, readily available alternatives. The grain of the shafts must be absolutely straight; a shaft with stepped or wavy grain will crack dangerously when shot from any bow. The heaviest crossbow I've built - 180# - shoots 3/8" X 18" hickory bolts beautifully. A half-inch + diameter shaft might be a better choice for a 500-pounder.

Dave the Rave

January 23rd, 2004, 07:20 PM

Yes, Arbalest is rigth. I am an archer too, and have an xbow with 500 lbs, but it´s comercialy made, and it is not huge or heavy. It´s design can be duplicate by anyone with some skils on wood, and an smal workshop at hand, I think, in about 10 hours on nice work.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

It isn´t made of strange materials, only of wood and fiberglass. It´s cordage is made of dacrom, (40 strings) and it´s bolts are made of AL tubing and epoxi with exactly half inch diameter. When it shoots, there is no higher recoill than an convensional 200 lbs crossbow, and it´s bolts are driven easily throug an 3 inch plywood. About those triggers: Trigger one (http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/crossbow/vwp?.dir=/crossbowstonebows&.src=gr&.dnm=Image2.gif&.view=t&.done=http%3a//photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/crossbow/lst%3f%26.dir=/ crossbow-stonebows%26.src=gr%26.view=t) Trigger two (http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/crossbow/vwp?.dir=/crossbowstonebows&.src=gr&.dnm=Image1.gif&.view=t&.done=http%3a//photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/crossbow/lst%3f%26.dir=/ crossbow-stonebows%26.src=gr%26.view=t) Simple trigger (http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/crossbow/vwp?.dir=/crossbowstonebows&.src=gr&.dnm=trigger.jpg&.view=t&.done=http%3a//photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/crossbow/lst%3f%26.dir=/ crossbow-stonebows%26.src=gr%26.view=t) Those 3 images are from an crosbow forum on Yahoo, nice images and files to anyone who wishes to browse the entire archive. - Later I´ve realised that those links are useless to anyone who does not have an yahoo account. Sorry guys I´ll keep the llinks to those who wishes browse through the forum, but I will post only the pics ( as soon as I get it working ) -

lamar pye

January 23rd, 2004, 08:22 PM

I've seen a crossbow made from a leaf spring that used bolts made from farm haying rake teeth. It was very powerful and the accuracy was not bad but it seemed like a giant leap backwards in my opinion. A sound suppressed bolt action in .45 would be much more fun and you wouldn't have to hunt for the bolts after they dissapear.

Dave the Rave

January 24th, 2004, 12:35 PM

Ok, Surely shoot some rounds on an nice (and supressed) .45 is one of mine ideas of fun, and most sure that we don´t have to search the grass to find lost bolts after that, but on the other hand, an trustfull crossbow have some advantages: 1- Less recoill - A .45 haves an kick that is an annoing thing 2- No signature - Crosbows don´t ligth in the dark 3- Better range - A supressed .45 haves a low range of "kill" 4- More penetration, even on bulletprof vests - A bolt with hunting tip or even with plain steel tip can penetrate easily on most BP vests Plus it is a weapon to snipe the prey, it´s shorter than an rifle, ligther, simplier and much more terrorizing. Imagine the fear of the enemy when they see one body with a bolt protuting of a bloodly wound. It´s like found someone killed with a knife, we can manage the fear of being shoot with a bullet, but the pain of the tissue cut or pierced by an serrated hunting tip, made of cold steel and almost impossible to remove by "normal" ways, and which cuts and tears the tissues, nerves and tendons at every little attempt to movement, it´s beyond human tolerance. Anyway, here are the triggers that I mencioned before. - Dear Mods, why my pics don´t appears ? Is the add attachment option working ? -

Rhadon

January 24th, 2004, 01:16 PM

Attachments have to get approved before they show up. This can take between minutes and one day (or even a few days on exceptional cases), depending on how often we come to have a look at the submitted attached files.

McCarthyite

January 29th, 2004, 11:51 PM

I think Dover reprints that book under the title - "The Book of the Crossbow" by Ralph Payne-Gallwey.

Jacks Complete

January 30th, 2004, 01:45 PM

You can see bits of "The Crossbow" here. A "Javlin thrower" is called a ballista, by the way. The Chinese repeating crossbow is quite interesting!

zaibatsu

January 30th, 2004, 02:05 PM

I am now in possession of that book, it's very good, but also very large. Problem is, no scanner. Anyone (respected UK member) that wants to have a huge task on their hands can have it mailed to them, but only serious people - it's a serious task.

Jacks Complete

January 30th, 2004, 02:42 PM

I would and could do it, but like you say, it is a huge job. Do you have an older version or a newer version? OCR software tends to get stuck on a lot of the olde english and the odd turns of phrase. I borrowed a copy printed in the 1950's, but couldn't scan it as the owner wouldn't let me break the spine, let alone cut it up! I

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

tried the trick of taking and scanning photos, but it just didn't work.

zaibatsu

January 30th, 2004, 02:53 PM

I'm not sure what you mean by old/new version, it's a straight reprint, so the language/phrases are the same as the original. It's significantly newer that the 1950s, like mid 1990s. If I sent it out, I really would prefer it not be damaged.

dinkydexy

January 31st, 2004, 10:55 PM

"The pull of a bow tells little more than the amount of force needed to pull the string back. " lol. I think you'll find that there's a direct corellation between this force and the amount of force stored as potential energy when the the string is cocked, and then subsequently released and imparted to the bolt...which is to say they are all exactly the same. Bigger draw weights mean more energy stored and transferred to the bolt, usually exhibited as a faster initail velocity and thus greater range and/or clout.

Jacks Complete

February 1st, 2004, 07:00 PM

dinkydex, There are limits to how fast that energy gets fired out though. Hence the need for changing the material the arms are made of, and the mass of the arrow. A light arrow will not get as much energy from the bow as one that is just right, and one that is too heavy will have a limited range. Research by the Royal Armouries in Leeds shows that, over the course of centuries, the range of crossbows only increased slightly, despite massive advances in the materials and techniques used to make them. The power went up, and bolts got heavier and heavier, and the total energy increased, but the "muzzle velocity" of the crossbows stayed the same! The energy went up a long way, but there was a limit to how fast the bow would throw the bolt. Even the big seige crossbows, which fired inch-thick bolts and cut through armour, still only threw the bolt at the same kind of speed. This is why armour persisted. The big advance on the speed was actually down to gunpowder. Suddenly, there was a weapon that, whilst not very accurate (yet loud and good at intimidation), could throw a ball at ten times the speed of a bow. This meant that armour had to adapt. Modern crossbows with glassfibre prongs are still beset by the same issues, hence the "Velocipeed" types bows that use leverage and pulleys to make them easier to cock and pull the bowstring faster. Another issue is that the power stored in the bow has to go somewhere, and if it cannot, the bow, made well or not, may break. I have been close to a top-of-the-range new crossbow which some pillock fired without a bolt (in the fucking shop!) which snapped the string and destroyed itself. That energy has to go into the bolt, and too light a bolt means much energy is wasted. So, no, the energy in the bow has little to do with the speed of the bolt. Edit: Ziabatzu, I suspect I wouldn't have the time then. I think that scanning a 400 page book without being able to use a sheetfeeder would takes weeks! Heck, even *with* a sheet feeder... To do it without cutting out the pages would take forever!

Arbalest

February 2nd, 2004, 06:20 AM

[i] I think you'll find that there's a direct corellation between this force and the amount of force stored as potential energy when the the string is cocked, and then subsequently released and imparted to the bolt...which is to say they are all exactly the same. Bigger draw weights mean more energy stored and transferred to the bolt, usually exhibited as a faster initail velocity and thus greater range and/or clout. [/B] lol. The pull of a bow is only a small part of the equation determining the energy stored in a bow. Draw length (the distance the string travels), has a huge effect, as well as the shape and length of the limbs, the initial tension in the bow before the draw, the mass of the limbs, mass placement etc. etc. Simply changing the string of a bow can increase or decrease the speed of an arrow dozens of FPS. I suggest you check the basic literature ( "Archery - the technical side" by Hickman, Klopsteg and Nagler, or the more easily accessible "Bow design and performance" by Tim Baker in "the Traditional Bowyer's Bible vol. I"). Or better yet, make some practical experiments. Take an inch thick, three foot long oak board, attach a string to it and start hanging progressively heavier weights from the string. You'll need hundreds of pounds' pull to bend the "bow" two inches. Next, shave the board down to 3 / 8" thickness. The "bow" will now have a measly pull of maybe 100 pounds at twelve inches or so. It will, however, shoot a 500 grain bolt many times farther, with much more velocity and KE than it's awesome multihundred pound predecessor. Modern crossbows with a 150 - 200 lbs. pull shoot no faster than compound bows with a 70 - 80 lbs. pull ( the world's fastest commercial compound shoots 350 FPS at 70 lbs. The world's most powerful commercial crossbows manage about 330 FPS with two- three times the weight and only slightly heavier bolts). If you compare bows with different limb configurations, the difference is even greater. Medieval crossbows, with their short draw lengths, heavy limbs and strings, and the friction between the bolt and the stock and the string and the stock, need 1200 lbs. to equal the cast of a 50 lbs. flight bow. There is no direct correlation between the pull and the energy storage, let alone bolt velocity. The correlation only exists between bows that are excactly identical apart form the pull.

dinkydexy

February 3rd, 2004, 03:06 PM

"A light arrow will not get as much energy from the bow as one that is just right" Hello? I'm sorry, but this is just plain wrong. Perhaps what you are trying to say is that a light arrow will not be able to

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

overcome air resistance as well as a heavier arrow would, in exactly the same way as a ping pong ball will not cut through the air as well as a golf ball. Both receive the same amount of energy, but the lighter object has less inertia and is thus more readily slowed down. "So, no, the energy in the bow has little to do with the speed of the bolt." Sorry again, but if all other factors remain constant then greater energy will result in greater speed. "The pull of a bow is only a small part of the equation determining the energy stored in a bow. Draw length (the distance the string travels), has a huge effect, as well as the shape and length of the limbs, the initial tension in the bow before the draw, the mass of the limbs, mass placement etc. etc. " Sorry for the third time, but the enegy stored in a bow, when it is cocked, is determined by its draw weight. All the other factors you list, amongst others, affect the rate at which that energy is transferred to the arrow when the weapon is fired. Two totally separate issues. "There is no direct correlation between the pull and the energy storage, let alone bolt velocity. The correlation only exists between bows that are excactly identical apart form the pull. Well this is just nonsensical. Whether you can get your head around the concept or not, the energy stored in a cocked bow is determined by its draw weight and vice versa, whereas bolt velocity is determined by a number of other factors. As for your acknowledgment that there is a correlation only in bows '...that are exactly identical', well excuse me but it should go without saying that if you start altering other things then OBVIOUSLY you will alter the whole equation!! How much sense would it make for respond to the statement 'a dog is a 4 legged animal' with words to the effect of 'actually it has 5 if you include the tail'??? If what you're saying is correct, then kindly explain why it is that every bow available for purchase anywhere in the world has its draw weight listed as its primary specification...indeed, as often as not, its ONLY specification.

ps.I think my point is proved; any talk about building a 500lb+ bow is silly...just go out and buy one.

Arbalest

February 4th, 2004, 06:10 AM

Dinky Dexy: I am lousy at expressing my thoughts about physics here, since A) English is a foreign language to me, and B) I have no physics education of any kind. I have, however, built, shot and tested appr. 50 bows of various types, including longbows, sinew-backed bows, recurves and crossbows, in the past 12 years. Additionally, I have owned and tested with a chronograph and a tape measure two commercial compound bows and three commercial crossbows. I am the reigning flight shooting champion at our local Bowyer's Guild. I have changed ideas about how bows and arrows work with the most highly acclaimed modern bow experts, including men like Tim Baker and Dan Perry. I honestly think I know what I'm talking about when it comes to bows. Do you know what a force-draw curve is? It is a line drawn on a graph, with draw length indicated on the horizontal plane and draw weight on the vertical, based on the pull of a bow at various draw lengths. Simply put, the area under the line is the energy stored by the bow. Not only draw weight and length, but also many other factors I mentioned affect the size of this area. This is thoroughly tested and proved common knowledge you can read from any serious book on bows and arrows. I hope some Forum member with a physics background expresses this idea to you using the correct scientific jargon. The force-draw curve is the single most important indicator of arrow V and E. Why does a 50 lbs. compound bow shoot a 500 grain arrow about 30 FPS faster than a 50 lbs. longbow? Why does crossbows have to be two or three times heavier than hand held bows to achieve the same V and E? The FD curve is the answer to these questions. At identical draw weight and length, a compound stores much more energy than a straight limbed bow, as shown by it's highly curved FD curve compared to the longbow's almost straight FD curve. A crossbow, with it's short draw, puts much less area under it's FD curve than long - draw hand held bows at similar poundage. The energy stored in a bow is only partly the result of draw weight. Since there are many, many factors affecting how much of the bow's potential energy is transferred to the arrow, in the end draw weight often really tells nothing about a bow's performance. None of the hundreds of bow ads I've seen over the years have the draw weight listed as the primary specification. Yeah sure, some of those really sketchy SE Asian Barnett copy ads... Every quality bow model is produced in various draw weights, which are typically shown in small print at the bottom of an ad. "Bow speed" is very often used as a primary attraction. Maybe the fact that you use advertisements as your source for dependable proof tells something of your depth of knowledge in this field? Flight shooting is an excellent way to test various theories about bow and arrow design. I could bore you with dozens of instances where a light bow has out shot a very similar heavy bow. With different types of bows, even similar weight bows have strikingly different cast. Long-draw bows typically shoot arrows much farther than same-weight short-draw bows (to a point). The amount of evidence contradicting your claims is so massive it's hard to know where to begin. Tests have shown (see the literature in my earlier post) that a heavy arrow is more efficient, ie. uses a larger percentage of a bow's potential energy, than a light arrow, but the effect is only slight. The heavy arrow's better KE and ballistic coefficient is the main reason why appropriately heavy arrows fly farther than lighter arrows. Medieval crossbows, with all the energy-transfer problems I posted earlier, don't shoot light arrows faster than any simple hand held bow, but can spit out incredibly heavy bolts with just as much speed.

kEFIR

February 4th, 2004, 10:24 AM

I have recently been given the book "the croosbow" by R. Payne-Galloway and are planning to scan the part about the construction of a typical crossbow. Will be done sometime during the weekend.

dinkydexy

February 4th, 2004, 10:19 PM

"I am lousy at expressing my thoughts about physics here, since A) English is a foreign language to me, and B) I have no physics education of any kind." You're either out of your depth or you're both misunderstanding other people's posts and not expressing yourself properly.; in

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

either case it's ridiculous for you to continue repeating the same point again and again, when it is simply WRONG. You can try to impress the world with boasts about your knowledge, achievements, etc till the cows come home...you can make silly patronising remarks to others who you've taken a dislike to till you're blue in the face...you can point to as much pseudoscientific and technical data as you wish...but the fact remains that what you are saying about the storage of energy is just plain incorrect. Get your head around this, if you can; energy storage and energy release are two completely seperate matters. A sack of coal contains a certain amount of energy which can be released in countless different ways, such as simply burning it or grinding it to a powder to create a flash...but it is folly to think that once it has been ground it suddenly has acquired more energy because it will burn much more rapidly!! A set of springs of different lengths, thicknesses and made from different materials but all possessing the same elastic limit will all store the same amount of potential energy when stretched...but, again, it would be folly to think that the springs with a fast contraction property had somehow acquired more energy than the others when expanded!! A tank of water posseses potential energy which could be released by making a hole in it...and the rate of release of this energy could be increased by enlarging the hole...but this would not mean that enlarging the hole had given the tank of water more energy!! You could fill two cars with an equal amount of fuel, thus giving them both the same amount of energy...but different models of car will release that energy differently; if you seriously believe that when you put 10 litres of petrol in a Ferrari Testarossa you are giving it more enegy than if you were to put it in a Ford Fiesta then quite frankly I despair!!! And the amount of energy stored in a cocked bow, which is merely a spring, is not affected one iota by such factors as the material from which the bow is made, the size, shape, drag coefficeient or mass of the arrow, whether the bow be compound, long, recurve or whatever!! All of these are factors that affect the rate of release of the stored energy and subsequent flight of the arrow...NOT the amount of energy actually stored. ps. The area under the curve on a force-draw graph does NOT display the amount of energy stored in a bow.

Narkar

February 6th, 2004, 02:31 PM

Dinkydexy, go buy a "Traditional Bowyer's Bible" vol.1 , read it through 3 times and then come back. Because at the moment you know very little about general physics, and about nothing about designing bows. Your comment about the ping-pong ball and the golf ball is ridicilous. They both have about the same air resistance (golf ball a bit less because of the dips on its surface though). What is different is energy in them when you throw them from the same crossbow. Fact is that crossbow limbs dont return home fast enough to give ping-pong ball even a small amount of the energy they have. But since golf ball is much heavyer, at the same speed or even smaller velocity (because of its weight) it gets much more energy out of the crossbow. The limbs come home a bit slower but the golf ball can take much more energy in it at the same velocity as ping-pong ball. Air resistance has almost nothing to do with it because it is connected to the surface area, which is almost identical. Now try to get this into your head: Draw lenght makes a huge difference in how much energy can be stored in a bow. This is just basic school physics. How to calculate how much energy you give to a rubber band when you strech it? It's only about the lenght and the weight of the pull. NOT ONLY WEIGHT. What you are basically saying is that in a 500# at 2" bow is the same amount of energy as in a 500# bow at 20" THIS IS NOT TRUE, come on think about it a bit. The reason why in the catalogs the bow's pull is the most important factor is that bows are mostly custom built. Every person has his own drawlenght. This varies usually from 24" to 32" You tell them the pull at what drawlenght and they build the bow for you. IF it isnt custom built then its usually the kind of bow that can tolerate being drawn into lenghts of 32", but the drawweight is taken from the drawlenght of 28" (default) Area under the force-draw graph curve directly displays the energy put into the bow. In case of a pulled rubber band the formulae is F(power of deformation) = -k(stiffness) * delta l(change of lenght). With the bow the energy storage basics is similar. Power of deformation there translates into the energy put into the bow. k(as stiffness) directly translates into the stiffness of the bow and delta l(change of lenght) directly translates into the change of distance from bow to the string (draw lenght minus bracing height)

dinkydexy

February 7th, 2004, 01:54 PM

I can't believe this...I really, really can't believe this. Am I the victim of some kind of wind-up here? 1. You say that the point I made about the ping pong ball/golf ball is ridiculous, then you state that they both have about the same air resistance; SAME AIR RESISTANCE-THAT'S THE POINT!!!! But the reason a golf ball will overcome that air resistance...which you have acknowledged will be the same on both balls...more much easily, and thus travel further through the air is because it has more mass and therefore more inertia...and therefore will not be affected so much by external forces. Such as air resistance!!! Not because it has received more energy!!!!!!! And the stuff you've said about crossbow limbs being too slow to impart all their energy to a ping pong ball etc etc can only be described as gobbledegook. 2. You have completely, totally failed to understand what I have said, and am saying, about draw length. I have never, ever, said that drawing a string back just 2" will provide it with the same amount of potential energy as if it were drawn back further...and of course I would never, ever say that because it is just wrong!!!! You tell me to 'come on, think about it a bit'...well I challenge you to point to a single thing I've said in any of my posts that would support your silly claim that I believe that draw length does not affect energy storage. Go ahead. 3. You're partly right when you say that the reason manufacturers provide draw weight as the primary (and as often as not ONLY) specification so that a prospective purchaser will know if he's capable of handling the weapon; but the main reason is because draw weight is the most important factor regarding the amount of energy a bow can STORE. By the way, i note that you disagree with Arbalast who reckons "...None of the hundreds of bow ads I've seen over the years have the draw weight listed as the primary specification. " Hmmm! 4. "...at the moment you know very little about general physics, and about nothing about designing bows." Like I told the other guy, making silly patronising remarks to others will not put you in the right here.

Narkar

February 10th, 2004, 09:24 AM

But the reason a golf ball will overcome that air resistance...which you have acknowledged will be the same on both balls...more much easily, and thus travel further through the air is because it has more mass and therefore more inertia...and therefore will not be affected so much by external forces. Such as air resistance!!! Not because it has received more

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter energy!!!!!!!

And what exaclty do you think interia is other than the kinetic energy pushing it forward? Same thing! If you shoot the golf ball out of the same bow lets say 50 m/s it will get more energy out of the bow than a ping-pong ball shot out of the same bow which moves much faster because of its lighter mass. That because the air resistance doesn't grow in linear shape but sq. That is why there is certain limit to how fast can the limbs return home on a bow, because of that the golf ball can take more energy out of the bow(thus its more energy efficent when shot out) even when it moves 50 m/s. SO IT DOES RECEIVE MORE ENERGY FROM THE BOW THAN A PING-PONG BALL!!! And the stuff you've said about crossbow limbs being too slow to impart all their energy to a ping pong ball etc etc can only be described as gobbledegook. what the...???

2. You have completely, totally failed to understand what I have said, and am saying, about draw length. I have never, ever, said that drawing a string back just 2" will provide it with the same amount of potential energy as if it were drawn back further...and of course I would never, ever say that because it is just wrong!!!! You tell me to 'come on, think about it a bit'...well I challenge you to point to a single thing I've said in any of my posts that would support your silly claim that I believe that draw length does not affect energy storage. Go ahead Dont try to tell me it wasn't you who claimed that the area under the force-draw curve doesn't show how much energy is stored in the bow Force-draw curve is the drawweight/drawlenght graph that shows how does the drawweight change in relation to the drawlenght. Or maybe are you trying to imply that there is a third variable too beside weight and lenght of the pull that determines the energy stored in the bow? 3. You're partly right when you say that the reason manufacturers provide draw weight as the primary (and as often as not ONLY) specification so that a prospective purchaser will know if he's capable of handling the weapon; but the main reason is because draw weight is the most important factor regarding the amount of energy a bow can STORE. By the way, i note that you disagree with Arbalast who reckons "...None of the hundreds of bow ads I've seen over the years have the draw weight listed as the primary specification. " Hmmm! No i dont disagree with him. Traditional and primitive bows are mostly custom made (primitive almost always custom made). I believe he knows much about designing bows, even you could learn it if you had read the bowyers bible vol 1 And ofcourse the draw-weight is the most important thing to look when you are buying the bow but you cant buy it based on ONLY the draw-weight. Besides i thought this discussion was about design of the bow and the energy it stores, not how to buy one.

4. "...at the moment you know very little about general physics, and about nothing about designing bows." Like I told the other guy, making silly patronising remarks to others will not put you in the right here. No that's not patronising remark, we are all here to learn and you should learn too, im just stating what i think about your current level on bow design. I thought about it that if you currently think that force-draw graph doesn't display the energy stored in the bow and you think that a ping-pong ball would recieve the same amount of energy from the bow as a golf ball then you obviously don't know as much about bow design and it's energy storage. This is the place to learn :p

Dave the Rave

February 10th, 2004, 12:22 PM

Narkar, The point isn´t the air resistance, it´s the bolt´s capacity of store energy. If you shoot an .22 pellet with a 12ga cartridge it will go less far as an solid 12ga slug shot from the same cartridge. It happens because of the size and density of the ammo which stores more energy. The ammount of this energy is the same, the velocity of acceleration is the same, but the way of this energy is stored and discharged is that counts. About the bows, the velocity of return of the limbs only afects the acceleration ratio of the bolt, not the energy stored in it, again, when you give an ammount of energy to an object like an rocket or to an cannon, the inicial velocity of it isn´t the same, but the energy is. The draw / weigth show ecxactly the ammount of energy used to stretch the limbs at one given weigth throug one given distance, so, it shows the energy stored on the bow. When you have a bow with 200lbs, it needs the wegth of 200lbs to be cocked and gives the bolt teh energy of 200lbs. At composite or recurved bows, the draw/weigth remains the same, what changes is the way the energy is distributed to cock the limbs. When it´s said that at identical draw weight and length, a compound stores much more energy than a straight limbed bow, as shown by it's highly curved FD curve compared to the longbow's almost straight FD curve it´s because the energy is distributed throug the several parts of the bow, and if you make one single and straight bow, down to the pieces of one compound bow, you will get one longbow bigger and heavier to achieve teh same draw/weigth So, Arbalest and JC are completely rigth at all theirs statements, and you may learn something from them. By the way, the fact that some of you read a book several times or make several bows don´t give the rigth to flame the others. Please, when quoting a book, write the formulae and equations to give us some solid points. We don´t need someone who shows us how ignorants we are, but rather than that, we need someone to show us how much we can learn.

dinkydexy

February 10th, 2004, 03:43 PM

This thread has degenerated into a pointless quarrel...there's a pun in there if you look for it...and I, for one intend to take no further part in it. I don't doubt for a second that some people will take that as some kind of surrender or backtracking or admission that I've been proved wrong etc etc etc, and that's fine by me- the facts will remain as I've stated them regardless of what any amount of ignorant people say or think.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Here's my final remark. 1. "...what exaclty do you think interia is other than the kinetic energy pushing it forward? Same thing! This is incorrect. The inertia that a body possesses is affected hugely by its mass; it is not determined solely by its kinetic energy. Go study. 2. " If you shoot the golf ball out of the same bow lets say 50 m/s it will get more energy out of the bow than a ping-pong ball shot out of the same bow which moves much faster because of its lighter mass. " "SO IT DOES RECEIVE MORE ENERGY FROM THE BOW THAN A PING-PONG BALL!!!" This is incorrect. According to you, if you were to take a golf ball and a ping pong ball, place them in a vacuum, and then project them forward from an identical device the golf ball would travel either faster or further (or both) than the ping pong ball....because it was capable of receiving more energy. If you seriously believe this, then you seriously need to study. The fact is that they would travel in an identical manner. The only reason this does not happen in air is because of the resistance of that air; and in this instance the golf ball, being much more massive and therefore having much more inertia, will not be affected to the same degree and will thus travel further. 3. "Dont try to tell me it wasn't you who claimed that the area under the force-draw curve doesn't show how much energy is stored in the bow." The statement that I made is correct, and for you to cite it as an example of something that I've said which would support your silly assertion that I think that draw length does not affect stored energy is just totally bizarre. PS. This is not the first time in history that an Englishman has been mocked for his 'ignorance' on the subject of archery. But as the history books show only too well, he who laughs last laughs loudest!

Narkar

February 10th, 2004, 04:15 PM

If you shoot an .22 pellet with a 12ga cartridge it will go less far as an solid 12ga slug shot from the same cartridge. It happens because of the size and density of the ammo which stores more energy. The ammount of this energy is the same, the velocity of acceleration is the same, but the way of this energy is stored and discharged is that counts. Hmm, weird, i always thought that an object's kinetic energy is only about the weight and the speed of the object. Please explain me how the .22 pellet and a 12ga slug, moving at the same speed can have the same energy? :confused: About the bows, the velocity of return of the limbs only afects the acceleration ratio of the bolt, not the energy stored in it, again, when you give an ammount of energy to an object like an rocket or to an cannon, the inicial velocity of it isn´t the same, but the energy is. From your talk i get the impression that the kinetic energy isnt the velocity times the weight, please explain. The draw / weigth show ecxactly the ammount of energy used to stretch the limbs at one given weigth throug one given distance, so, it shows the energy stored on the bow. When you have a bow with 200lbs, it needs the wegth of 200lbs to be cocked and gives the bolt teh energy of 200lbs. At composite or recurved bows, the draw/weigth remains the same, what changes is the way the energy is distributed to cock the limbs. When it´s said that at identical draw weight and length, a compound stores much more energy than a straight limbed bow, as shown by it's highly curved FD curve compared to the longbow's almost straight FD curve it´s because the energy is distributed throug the several parts of the bow, and if you make one single and straight bow, down to the pieces of one compound bow, you will get one longbow bigger and heavier to achieve teh same draw/weigth I know that, it wasn't me who said that FD curve doesn't show the energy! So, Arbalest and JC are completely rigth at all theirs statements, and you may learn something from them. Read again who said what because i have never disagreed with Arbalest or JC :mad: By the way, the fact that some of you read a book several times or make several bows don´t give the rigth to flame the others. Please, when quoting a book, write the formulae and equations to give us some solid points. We don´t need someone who shows us how ignorants we are, but rather than that, we need someone to show us how much we can learn. I was just explaining to dinkydexy that i wasn't making patronising remarks! What do you want me to repeat that again? I WASN'T MAKING PATRONISING REMARKS, to you too then, happy now? :mad: Also i wasn't quoting the book, i was reffering to it, because it is a good book, person can learn much more from bow design and performance from there EDIT:

1. "...what exaclty do you think interia is other than the kinetic energy pushing it forward? Same thing! This is incorrect. The inertia that a body possesses is affected hugely by its mass; it is not determined solely by its kinetic energy. Go study. and you're saying that the interia is affected by the mass, but kinetic energy isn't?

"SO IT DOES RECEIVE MORE ENERGY FROM THE BOW THAN A PING-PONG BALL!!!" This is incorrect. According to you, if you were to take a golf ball and a ping pong ball, place them in a vacuum, and then project them forward from an identical device the golf ball would travel either faster or further (or both) than the ping pong ball....because it was capable of receiving more energy. If you seriously believe this, then you seriously need to study. The fact is that they would travel in an identical manner. The only reason this does not happen in air is because of the resistance of that air; and in this instance the golf ball, being much more massive and therefore having much more inertia, will not be affected to the same degree and will thus travel further.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

I never mentioned the vaccuum, ofcourse the two balls behave the same in vaccuum when shot out of the bow. That because the limbs dont have any air-resistance in vaccuum, that would slow them down (air resistance isn't linear, its in sq, so it slows the limbs considerably when approaching higher speeds) Fact is that in the air the bow can't impart the same energy to the ping-pong ball as it can to the golf ball. That's because there is a certain limit on how fast the limbs move home. No bow can move fast enought to give all the energy to the lighter arrow that it would give to heavyer arrow. That energy stays in the bow, it is felt as the recoil and vibration. Ok, lets try a different approach to the same thing: If a lighter arrow is shot with more recoil and vibration (which indicates that there was still energy remaining in the bow after the arrow flew, right?) than with the heavyer arrow(and if you ever shot a bow you would know that) , then where else does that energy of recoil come from than the energy of the bow that wasn't given to the light arrow as completely as it is given to the heavy arrow. (this might not make much sense if you just read it but think about it) In a conclusion: The vibration and recoil is that same energy that you stored in the bow, but because lighter arrows cant absorb it as well from a bow as heavyer arrows can, it is left in the bow, and you feel it as the recoil. Thus the heavyer arrows are more energy-efficent. Prove that thought wrong, i challenge you.

3. "Dont try to tell me it wasn't you who claimed that the area under the force-draw curve doesn't show how much energy is stored in the bow." The statement that I made is correct, and for you to cite it as an example of something that I've said which would support your silly assertion that I think that draw length does not affect stored energy is just totally bizarre. Don't try to evade my question or change the subject. Force-draw curve is determined by drawweight and -lenght, which you say doesn't represent the energy stored, BUT, now you say that drawweight and -lenght does affect the energy stored. So why do you think that drawweight and -lenght put in a graph doesnt show the energy stored anymore? PS. This is not the first time in history that an Englishman has been mocked for his 'ignorance' on the subject of archery. But as the history books show only too well, he who laughs last laughs loudest! Just because you are from England doesn't mean you know more about bows than others.

Dave the Rave

February 10th, 2004, 04:54 PM

Narkar, I must apologize myself to you, my topic wasn´t only to you, but I´ve write your name on it because the 1st reply are to your last post. lets go, when I said that the acceleration was the same I was telling that the inertial energy imparted to those two shots was the same, not that the velocity was the same. My point was exactly that those two shots can´t have the same energy stored, although the initial energy was the same, just because : object's kinetic energy is only about the weight and the speed of the object. The initial velocity of a rocket isn´t the same as the initial velocity of an cannon round, even if the propelent charge was the same. So, the initial velocity of an arrow insn´t the same as the initial velocity of an bolt, even if the bow or crossbow have the same draw/weigth. From now on, The post was not about yours assertives, so, again I hope you apologize myself... I know and understand that you agreed about the FD, and that you know that JC´s and Arbalest´s points are rigth and I find rigth that you wasn´t making patronising remarks to anyone. By the way, I may be too rude when ask you to quote the book, but I feel the urge to know, at writers words, how he find those informations. sorry again. From now on, white flag to all of you and let get our focus back to the purpose of the topic, an trigger capable to handling an draw of 500lbs or bigger.

Narkar

February 10th, 2004, 05:37 PM

By the way, I may be too rude when ask you to quote the book, but I feel the urge to know, at writers words, how he find those informations. sorry again. Dont worry about it: Bow's design and performance, by Tim Baker "Left: To measure a bow's stored energy draw the bow using a spring scale, noting its draw weight at various lengths of draw. A typical 50 lb. longbow will weigh: 10" = 8 lb; 15" = 20 lb; 20" = 30 lb; 25" = 41 lb; 28" = 50 lb. Label the bottom and side of the graph as shown. Make a dot where the 8 lb line and the 10" line cross. Make a dot where the 20 lb line and the 15" line cross, and so on. When finished, connect the dots. The resulting line is called the force-draw curve. Area under the line represents energy stored. f. Right: F-d curves for a 30 pound and a 60 pound bow. Squares under a curve represent energy stored. Draw Weight Everything else being equal, higher draw weight stores more energy. These force-draw curves show the energy stored in typical bows made from straight staves. One having a draw weight of 30 lb at 28", the other 60 lb at 28". The number of squares below a curve represents total energy stored. This stored energy is the ONLY means available for propelling the arrow." "Draw Length Everything else being equal, longer draw lengths store more energy. A 59" maple bow, made from a straight, unaltered stave, shooting a 500 grain arrow, was tillered to draw 45 pounds at 22", shooting 128 fps. This bow pulled 14 pounds at 10" of draw, and after being unstrung had taken a 1/2" set. It was retillered to draw 45 pounds at 24", shooting 133 fps. Weight at 10" dropped to 11.5 pounds and set rose to 3/4". Retillering continued to 45 pounds at 26", shooting 137 fps. Ten-inch draw weight fell to 10 pounds, with 1" set. Each re-tillered version was equally hard to draw to length, but stored increasing amounts of energy. Note how early draw weight fell as set increased. As will be seen in this chapter, set would have remained even lower if limbs had been wider, longer, or made of a more elastic material. Early-draw weight would then remain high, storing more energy, raising arrow speed even more."

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Then he talks about various other stuff like limb-cross view, brace height, reflex and recurves, et cetera After that it continues like this: "All of the factors outlined so far affecting arrow speed- draw weight, draw length, string height, and bow profile -determine the amount of energy stored in a bow's limbs. But at release, as this energy begins to flow to the arrow, the following obstructions come into play. Limb Mass Medium length, straight-stave, 50 lb bows weigh about 23 oz. For bows of this length, weight, and mass, a difference of one ounce in limb mass, on average, affects arrow speed by about one foot per second. For mid-weight bows a difference in one pound of draw weight also equals about one ips of arrow speed. Lowering limb mass allows a lighter draw-weight bow to equal the cast of a heavier draw-weight bow. Heavier woods are generally stronger and more elastic, therefore, less wood is needed to do the same amount of work. Lighter woods are generally weaker and less elastic, requiring more wood to do equal work. But, mass ends up about equal for sameweight bows made of light or heavy woods..." et cetera, one part is about the energy efficency of heavy arrows: "Much of the energy stored in long and heavy limbs remains in the limbs after ,release, becoming hand shock, string twang, and limb vibration. This is why slower moving, very heavy arrows leave the bow quietly. Heavy arrows make bows more energy efficient because more of the bow's energy has time to leave with them. This is why flight bows are golf club-like: short, low mass, fast-reacting limbs. Flight arrows, arrows light enough not to impede these fast limbs, can be shot much faster than normal weight arrows. The same flight arrow shot from an English war bow of equal weight would be considerably slower." Tell me if you want me to scan more text from the book

Narkar

February 12th, 2004, 03:55 AM

cant edit, http://www.hot.ee/marti184/sear.jpg It is a bit like gun trigger mechanism and is also used in some commercial crossbows, but the disk (black in the drawing) is oval and off-centre to lesssen the pressure on the trigger(red part). The mechanism will cock itself when you draw the string back. I think you would need some short lenght of rails over the system to prevent the string from jumping above the bolt, EDIT: I made a pretty big mistake, that design on my drawing wouldn't be able to withstand 500# You would need to make trigger more like on medieval crossbows, the lenght above the spring would need to be shorter from the pivot point, and the trigger part should be very long and designed to be released by the whole hand, not just the trigger finger (just like medieval ones).

Dave the Rave

February 12th, 2004, 02:56 PM

Narkar, Now we´re talking ! With your copy of the book´s terms, I can understand some of your assertives, and also clarify some dark spots at my knowledge. About your trigger, I think that it can hold 500lbs, as it will rely on the release system to held the pressure. One wholehand lever trigger can be more reliable and comfortable choice, but I think that it can be turned on an "single finger" to compact the size of the weapon and to make the action of discharge more smooth. Maybe an lever to hold the circle and another lever to sear the 1st one... What do you think ?

Jacks Complete

February 16th, 2004, 05:58 PM

Glad to see the arguement has subsided! The scanned text from the book was very useful, thank you to Narkar. The wasted energy that makes the string go "twang" is what you use a heavier bolt for. Ok, so, on with the design. What was the obvious mistake in the picture? I didn't see one. However, you would be well advised to use a better angle on the face of your release, as a vertical face needs very little force in order to tilt past vertical, and if that lets the bowstring ride over the cam, you might lose our arm with a bow as powerful as we are discussing here. I would tilt it back at least 5 degrees. Also, I would cut further into your pivot/axle, as this will reduce the force felt by your trigger sear. Obviously, you want to be using high yield steel for this part, but even so, don't go too far. Also, if you have a long lever like that, it might upset your shot as it turns, making the bow jump further than otherwise. I would go for a more circular one, and a two-stage sear and hammer system. That spindly sear/trigger you drew looks like it would bend long before it overcame the friction on the end of it, and the trigger would be very heavy, as the leverage goes the wrong way.

Dave the Rave

February 16th, 2004, 06:17 PM

Yes, that´s my point. The roller block is one of the best designs to the xbow, and with one sear and one trigger the counterforce will rest against the pin, till the sear is moved by the trigger. I think that the sear/trigger of the bolt action rifles is whats bether explains what I´m talking about.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Anyway, I´ll draw an skech to post here.

MMIV

September 18th, 2004, 11:57 PM

why would you bother with such large pull weight? it would be useless in a defense situation such as you need winch to cock it and the size of it would make it less concealable, also dangerous to the user. it would better to stick with minimum 150LB200LB. :)

tinkerman

September 29th, 2004, 04:44 PM

i made a rather rough version of a cross bow that would have a very high pull, the only problem is that i cannot make a efficient cylinder (like hydraulics but i was planing on pnuematics). use the leaf springs but design some type of lever system to be pulled back in the middle and it will tighten. pull the cable back and then pressure up cylinder. more pressuer means more power. need sturdy bolts or they will snap and go haywire. i made another using fiberglass rods*4 loads of power and i encased the rods to prevent "an accident" when testing make several versions auntill ur sure it is good enough for what u want. for a string i used a medium aircraft cable. i only went to close to 200 lbs. crossbows are not supposed to be long range. 500 lbs would be more like a ballista vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> EtronX for impro weapons? Log in

View Full Version : EtronX for impro weapons? zaibatsu

October 23rd, 2001, 07:23 PM

Someone a while back suggested a battery of tubes with either rockets or bullets (can't remember which) being electrically ignited, so that they would have a fairly high amount of shots in a short time (ala Metal Storm). However, the usual problems would be with the priming systems. So, how about buying some EtronX primers and using them? The remington 700 that works with EtronX uses a 9v battery, so it shouldn't need a massive battery pack to get it to work. Also, this would make it easier to make small firearms, as all you would need would be a contact for the cartridge. It would do away with the need for semicomplicated firing mechs, although it would only realy work easily with a single shot rifle/pistol I guess. Anyway, what are your thoughts on these things? Some info: http://www.remington.com/ammo/PAGES/centerfire/etronx.htm http://www.remington.com/firearms/centerfire/700etronx.htm -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

nbk2000

October 24th, 2001, 12:58 AM

Why not e-mail remington and ask them where you can buy the primers for reloading? And I'll bet you that they don't sell primers for reloading so that you have to buy factory loaded ammo at exorberant prices from them for that very reason. Also, I believe that the voltage is stepped up to create a spark, not just 9V straight. -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

zaibatsu

October 24th, 2001, 03:06 PM

Quoted from the Gun Mart magazine that I first saw this in: "... the only difference is the primer, so the empty case can be reloaded in the conventional manner, or with etronX primers from Remington." So, I guess you can buy them specifically for reloading, although this was written in a magazine, not straight from the horses mouth. -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

AR-15 Man

October 24th, 2001, 07:24 PM

What real advantage does this have over conventional firearms other than reduced lock time when the firing pin is being released. Only in high precesion, match rifles would you really notice any difference from a system like this. I would say it might cut down on some weight though as this is why it is being marketed as a hunting rifle. As for a semi gun I don't see any advantage at all.

zaibatsu

October 24th, 2001, 08:50 PM

I don't understand, are you commenting on the EtronX system in conventional firearms? If so, then that isn't what I'm talking about, I apologise if my original post confused you. What I am talking about is how we could make a much easier firing system using EtronX than if we had to impro one. We could then make weapons smaller (easier to conceal) and have the possibility of making the multi-barrel type weapon I said before. -----------------Handguns don't kill people... Half as well as full-auto Visit me at www.surf.to/eliteforum (http://www.surf.to/eliteforum)

AR-15 Man

October 25th, 2001, 12:27 AM

Oh hell yes it would make improvising a lot easier. That would take one of the hardest parts out of improvising a gun. Really your imagination, wallet, and resources are your limit. It would make guns easier to set up for traps, more concealable because you the firing mechanism wouldn't be that big at all.

nbk2000

October 25th, 2001, 01:59 AM

It'd only make it easier if it's ignited by 9 volts. But I'm fairly certain that the battery is amped up to create a much higher voltage, the spark from that being what actually sets off the primers. So, if that's the case, you need to create an electronic circuit to fire them. Big pain. And what's with the oddball calibers? When they start making them in 7.62 or 30-06, then I'll notice them. And $2,000?! Holy shit! -----------------"I have begun evil, I shall end evil. That is the end that awaits me." Go here (http://briefcase.yahoo.com/nbk2k) to download the NBK2000 files and videos.

A-BOMB

October 25th, 2001, 11:10 AM

Actual, NBK2000 22-250 is a good caliber I had one once, but traded it in for a .22 magnem browning with rosewood stock. And why did I trade it in may you ask, it because the shells are to fucking expensive $12 (USD) for a box of twenty and not even a brand name! But it is the ground hog gun from hell it has speed up with the .220 swift! It has a speed of 3500+ fps. -----------------live by the bomb die by the bomb

EventHorizon The .220 Swift is one of my favorite calibers, although barrel burnout is bad. You can reload the Swift to 4300fps IIRC. As for cost of ammo, I can reload 50rnds of .308 (match grade) for about $12, not including the brass; I use Lapua and Norma.

October 25th, 2001, 11:59 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

And the Etronx, total gimmic IMO. If I'm going to spend 2K on a rifle, it won't be a factory model, it would be a used match rifle and getting it rebarreled if need be. And nice wide selection of calibers offered, .220 Swift, 22-250, and .243. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/rolleyes.gif -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54

HMTD Factory

October 26th, 2001, 03:21 AM

Ordinary primers respond to electricity if you zap it really hard, electronically. Etronx primers are made to be used with mild current/voltage (higher voltage may arc) produced by their circuit, the electron flow through the priming mix instead of around the primer cup, heats up the priming mix, boom. As far as I know, no Etronx primers are sold alone in the market.(I bet both the rifle and the primer are patented so those who desire an Etronx will have to buy/use a Remington)

SawedOff8gaugeman

November 5th, 2001, 03:46 PM

"You can reload the Swift to 4300fps IIRC." That's nothing compared to a project I heard about: IIRC it went like this: a few of .308 cartridges were loaded with very light bullets. They were of course very high-pressured "fuck CIP etc..."-loads. Bullet speed was measured at a few meters from the muzzle. About 1200 meters/second (=3937fps http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/ biggrin.gif according to my Texas Instruments P.O.S.) I'm unable to give any details, because I didn't do that myself. Yes, I still have some thought in me http:// theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/wink.gif -----------------No vittu. Vittu saatana. Helvettiäkös siinä tuijotat?

EventHorizon

November 5th, 2001, 04:06 PM

How is 4300fps nothing compared to 3937fps? 4300 fps is nothing compared to some experimental conventional loads. Around 7000fps is about the fastest a smokeless powder cartridge can acheive. .17 Remingtons are about 4400fps I think, but thats only a 30 grain bullet I beleive. They have sabot sleeves that you can load .224" bullets into .30 cal shells. Velocities as you described are easily acheivable with those. My Dad handloads a hot 110 grain RN bullet into a .30-06. It leaves wad-cutter type holes in paper at 100yds. LOL Now if you are talking about energy, well then, thats a different story. A 50grain bullet going 4300 fps from a 220 Swift and a 240 grain matchking going 3800 fps from a .30378, the Swift is just no comparison. Last time I read an article about rail guns, they were firing a 6# projectile at over 10,000 fps. http://theforum.virtualave.net/ubb/smilies/eek.gif -----------------"Chance favors a prepared mind" - Louis Pasteur "Happiness is a large pile of links." - Me PGP ID 0x147CEF54 [This message has been edited by EventHorizon (edited November 05, 2001).]

SawedOff8gaugeman

November 6th, 2001, 02:37 PM

It was a .308 and the projectile was a full-sized (lighter than normal, of course... 3-4grams IIRC). I think that really IS something. Ok, it's not any Wonder of the World©. In some small-bore/lot of powder space calibers like the .220 that's not SO special i.e. they normally have high velocities. -----------------Always have a spare head handy! [This message has been edited by SawedOff8gaugeman (edited November 06, 2001).]

BoB-

November 16th, 2001, 02:01 PM

When firing model rocket engines using primers, the firing pins will wedge the primer in place in the nozzle causing an explosion. Electronic primers would solve this problem since they are set off by electricity, if there detonation depends on current and not amps, then a firing system could be improvised from a disposable camera flash circuit.

[This message has been edited by BoB- (edited 11-16-2001).] vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter The Explosives and Weapons Forum

> Military Science

> Improvised Weapons

> urban knife throwing Log in

View Full Version : urban knife throwing frostfire

April 18th, 2002, 01:13 PM

I know this is an often discussed topic, but I hope I'm not reinventing the wheel here. If I do so, please disregard this whole thing alright, before we start, just like on the internet; the text is for only informational purpose only...and don't get your mother's kitchen knives, stay away from them as long as possible....for knives and visible veins are two related and tempting things. Don't go looking for cheap knives in wal Mart or one dollar store, instead, go to salvation army/goodwill etc.....you'll be amazed by some quality gourmet kitchen knives you might find for less than 50 cents each I stayed for a while without internet access and while out of fun, I returned to some old activities learnt from the old days of real boy/girlscout survival lesson; knife throwing. Now I modify this skill a little bit. When it says survival, it depends on the location. I believe most of people here don't live in the middle of nowhere by the jungle like Kazynski, so this survival means urban survival. Therefore I'm not talking about buying commando knives, Gibben knives/axes, or the 3 for $100 precision throwing knives....I'm talking about....kitchen knives, steak knives etc....laugh if you want, but most of you are living in urban area with laws prohibiting any combat knives in the street. Now, carrying your lunchbox with steak knives in it won't be something unlawful isn't it. Choosing the knife: You probably can rationalize the shape of an "aerodynamics" object, so I'll leave the shape of the knives to you. I didn't experiment with classic butcher knife, but that is almost as heavy as any tactical knives and I don;t think you'll have a good reason for carrying it around. You don't want anything to light like paring knife, you'd later find out from practice that the lighter the knife is, the closer its throwing distance. Now, kitchen knives are not as heavy as those true throwing knife so you don't need to hold the knife with all you fingers. Instead, hold it with your middle, index, and thumb only. Closer hold to the tip of the blade is for longer throwing distance. To start you can hold it about at the middle of the blade like holding a pen. The best way to get the feeling of turns is to throw it to the ground at first. Throw with the same knife at first. With different twist of wrist, and movement of the whole upper torso, you should soon get a hold of sticking that knife in the ground. Now it's time to set a target, trees could be a good idea, but missing too many times can create a frustating and spirit breaking condition. Just use some...well in my case some old large wood or anything that's just wide and tall enough. Remember, your goal is to stick that knife, accuracy and precision are second things. Just like throwing to the ground, just try to throw naturally, bending your wrist and the whole body. Your knife will likely to stick at low height at first. When you got the feeling to stick the knife, an aim feeling and need for accuracy will come in natural. Paint a human figure with your same height. Knives are not powerful projectile, especially common kitchen knives, so aim at one point; neck. Throw, and throw, and throw....until you wake up the next day with a sore right/left/or both arms. When you get a hang of one distance, walk back and try again, until you find a favorable maximum distance. In my experience, 10 feet is the easiest, 94% success rate throwing distance. This is for those average thick plastic handle steak knives. Heavier knives with wooden handle like the nice solingen are throwable from 10 to 13 feet. Now try to walk normally and throw a knife in a sudden, get a good accuracy rate. Try walking/running backwards and throw those knives. Basically try to imagine any real panicking situation on the street. Throw while screaming, throw under the rain, if friends are available, let them scream, bang metal pans, crack glass bottles etc , and you try to throw those knives. Try to throw in the dark with your familiar target, therefore you can know whether you're still using your eye-brain interaction to throw the knife or a true feeling. In simple term: let it be your second nature. The most interesting thing I found is throwing in a completely dark room using NVG ,it's a total awesome and different experience. The only problem is IR illuminator is visible if being viewed head on and that thing hums. So make sure you know how stealth you can be before planning anything. Finally, it's kinda sick but...get a feeling of the knives and the pain felt by your target....go figure that out with your own fantasy. This is my first time to make some guide based on experience, so I believe I'm missing a lot of things. Suggestions/ questions/scoffing/bullying are welcome

nbk2000

April 18th, 2002, 05:12 PM

Throwing knifes are a waste of money. How many people are killed by knives that are thrown? You could count the number in the entire world per year on one hand. Knives are for sticking, not throwing.

10fingers

April 18th, 2002, 05:39 PM

Frostfire, I'm glad you're back because I really enjoy reading some of the things your mind comes up with.

Zero

April 18th, 2002, 11:49 PM

I much prefer razor edged playing cards. Little sheet steel, little coaxing with an angle grinder, stencils, metal primer. And they're ever so stylish... ~Zero the Inestimable

mark Those are the best! They sell them at china town for like 20 bucks. I think I might make one.

April 19th, 2002, 12:04 AM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter BoB-

April 19th, 2002, 03:53 AM

Sure, you might not kill someone with a thrown knife, but its one hell of a detterent, I think a 6" spike sticking out of someones face would certainly surprise him/her abit. I would always "cheat" with my thrown weapons and attach tassles, or cardboard fins, this would make them stick point first even if they were thrown in a burst of adrenaline.

Zero

April 19th, 2002, 09:38 AM

What, the cards? If you're paying 20 bucks a pop for the things I'll make you some and sell them for half that. Talk about profit. I get the metal for free, and the only other thing I have to pay for is the paint. ~Zero the Inestimable

frostfire

April 19th, 2002, 06:17 PM

yeah NBK, but guess we'll never know when we need one eh? esp. if you consider yourself the weak/vulnerable kind Somehow I think throwing at face might not be totally effective, I don't think the common knife would be hard enough to pierce the skull, hence leaving the target disfigured, going berserk, and ready for a vengeanceful revenge.....neck I believe is one of the "safest" area to throw at nice to know someone appreciate your thoughts 10fingers, thanks... usualy what I got was "she needs to be excused for not making any sense"

Whitey

April 19th, 2002, 08:02 PM

I think throwing knives is an interesting hobby but not a very practical technique. I have always been told that throwing a knive is almost the same as giving it to your opponent. It is very hard to hit a moving target with a firearm and I would guess it is even more difficult to do so with a knife. However if you were going to throw a knife at an opponent I would go for the center mass (chest) since your chances of hitting the target are much greater. You may not get the same lethal effect but "most" attackers lose their aggression once they recieve a serious injury. This does not apply to those with serious psychological disorders or those under the influence of drugs (crack, coke, pcp, alchol). But like I said it seems like it would be an interesting hobby. Also I imagine if you practised enough you could become proficient enough to use this technique in combat, but I doubt most people would be willing to devote the time and energy necessary to develop that level of skill.

A-BOMB

April 19th, 2002, 09:17 PM

Heres my response, did any one here see the scene in "StarShipTrooper" were there learning knife throwing.

Project IGI

April 19th, 2002, 09:40 PM

No, and the point to your post would be?

mark

April 19th, 2002, 10:02 PM

Well arent we snappy? Btw, does anyone know how I could make a throwing spike? I dont want it as a weapon, just something to toss at my fence.

Zero

April 19th, 2002, 10:08 PM

I used to make spikes by sharpening the hell out of masonry nails (the big 7 inch ones that cost 50 cents a pop) and affixing streamers to the back. They were fun to throw around. I hear stories about people actually hunting with the things... ~Zero the Inestimable

mark

April 19th, 2002, 10:28 PM

Your the man Zero! Thanks!

BoB-

April 20th, 2002, 02:28 AM

Zero, did we see the same webpage? About turning those galvanised spikes into the throwing weapons? If this is the case man please post the link, I've been looking for that page for at least a week. I didnt mean to go OT.

Zero Possibly. I got the link off the AGL forum back when it was still up. I long since forgot the URL... ~Zero the Inestimable

April 20th, 2002, 07:11 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Bert

March 7th, 2004, 05:13 PM

does anyone know how I could make a throwing spike? I dont want it as a weapon, just something to toss at my fence. If you want to practice actual knife throwing skills, as opposed to throwing spikes with the little drag tassles... Go get some cheap ice picks. The kind with about 6" steel spikes in a wooden handle. They cost less than $2.00 each, and they throw better than you would believe, very consistent and surprisingly well ballanced in my experience. And you can use your dartboard for practice without chewing it up, though they WILL go through to the wall if you toss them too hard. Throw these from a blade hold, of course. You are unlikely to ever use a throwing knife for self defense, but it's very satisfying to be able to consistently do this. THWICK!!! THWICK!!! THWICK!!! Makes you feel life James friggin' Bond, it does.

Hang-Man

March 7th, 2004, 05:28 PM

Yes, it is amazingly satisfying. And it's really impressive ;). I found some one-piece stainless steel kitchen knives at zellers for next to nothing. I made them doubble edged on my grinder :D. They work well, except I broke the tip off one. One question, why is this in in the 'chemistry related' section?

MP5Guy

March 8th, 2004, 12:35 AM

Don't Be Stupid...

MP

Cheese

March 9th, 2004, 05:08 AM

Its a great way to bleed off stress isnt it? Besides, even if you just get the tip to stab into your target and run like hell, itll give them a hell of a shock....

xyz

March 10th, 2004, 05:48 AM

I agree with MP5Guy, throwing your knife is a dumb idea, you can put many times the energy behind the stab/slash if the knife is in your hand at the time. If you must waste a good knife, simply stab them and let go of the knife so it stays in them. Personally, I don't see the point of throwing away a perfectly good knife, when all you are doing is giving the person a fairly shallow wound anyway. If you want to carry a knife in an urban environment, having steak knives in a lunch box is another idea that's a few cakes short of a picnic. "Oh, you're attacking me, hang on while I open up my lunch box to get my knives" Why not just have a shiv (flat blade with an almost flat handle, only about 4mm thick at most) strapped to an ankle or a forearm. They are made with a leather sheath that is designed for this purpose, and they are undetectable in a pat-down search due to their flatness.

Dave the Rave

March 10th, 2004, 10:26 AM

Personaly I don´t like the idea of give the enemy an knife. Better is to stab his kidney or his back and let the blade stay. But frostfire has an point, sometimes throw an knife is the only way to disable the target, IF the knife reaches some soft spot, like the throat. Altrhough carrying an lunchbox with the knives can be an good idea, at least to justify the fact that you are carrying several blades, it can be very hard to open and grab an knife, on an momment of stress. Better is the flat knife, on an pouch in between the shoulders, at the back of the neck, where the B&W don´t search. I realy like knives, it´s quiet, quick, unespected and eye-on-eye weapons, but must be handled with proficiency, dexterity, unless it´s more an harm than good. Of course it involves the hability of throw it with precision, when it´s needed. By the way, Frostfire, "SHE needs to be excused" Are you an girl ?

Bigfoot

March 10th, 2004, 04:31 PM

First off, when I throw a blade, it's for fun. Found a book in the library titled Comabat Knife Throwing: A New Approach to Knife Throwing and Knife Fighting. by Ralph Thorn. Having read other throwing books, including the one by Blackie Collins (hey, he sells a knife actually warranteed for throwing!), I can say that this one beats all. Author even discusses alibis for carrying several long knives. "Honest, Ociffer, I do a juggling act for parties. Watch!" Killer is, I got no scanner. Soon as I can get one, the book will be scanned for anyone who wants.

Skean Dhu

March 10th, 2004, 05:38 PM

I make throwing spikes from 8.5-9" sections of coat hanger, they're good for practice I can get one to stick in a 13"x13" target from 12-13ft. also I had some unfletched blowgun darts laying around, they're about 3" long and made from rectangular wire fence. A good cheap target can be made from a section of cork, a couple sections of the newspaper or if you find ads folded to the right size, and duct tape, which keeps the cork from falling apart when you pull your spikes from it. then trace the outline of a playing card, and then a pokerchip or quarter on the inside of the card outline.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter xyz

March 11th, 2004, 05:16 AM

Dave, yeah, Frostfire is one of Roguesci's few female members, there are a few others who I can't think of right now.

Dave the Rave

March 11th, 2004, 12:40 PM

Nice, an girl between us ! Frost, wellcome back ! I found some nice ceramic knives, to make japanese food, realy sharpen and hard. It can pierce an penny with one hard blow of an hammer. The problem is the size, those are huge, almost 30 centimeters ! I purchase one, and, with an grinder, cut off the handle and resized the blade, sharpened both sides, getting one double edged weapon, then, with paracord I make a new handle and it´s done. It can´t be found by an pat-search, as it´s on the back of my neck, nor by any metal detector, as it´s made of nonelectricresistence material. It can´t be thrown, as it´s not very well balanced, but it´s an very impressive hand-to-hand weapon, can cut through leather and thin metal easily.

Neoknite

March 15th, 2004, 10:47 PM

Although almost never needed being able to consistantly hit a target with a knife is a handy skill to have. Mostly it could be used to impress your freinds but if you are not within stabbing distance what are you going to do. Say your at gun point or something like that and all you have is a knife. Also I have found that knives that are blade heavy are eaiser to stick into a target.

Impact

March 16th, 2004, 02:11 AM

well my first post and i hope it's decent. there is a point in a throwing knife in todays world. a throwing knife is more of a distraction weapon. throw it at the target to give yourself a second or 2 of vital time to escape or to cause an opening to attack further. a stunned opponent is alot easier to take down to the ground and thats the way everyone should start to escalate damage. throwing stars, caltrops, and spikes can be used to also to distract opponents but they usually draw attention to themselves as they are not everyday seen items. anything will work as long as it is thrown right and you practice with it. also, throwing knives are usually balanced in the middle. as for "giving you enemy a weapon"...unless they catch it in the air, theyd have to reach down or divert their attention from you and noone does that and wins a fight. i was also thinking about the comment dave the rave said. those salad knives made from delrin would pass thru metal detectors and can be shaped down into a nice concealable knife. too bad i, nor does almost anyone, have a use for such a tool. then again...stateside, i can just march on down to a gun show and purchase Israeli made covert knives made of delrin for 2 bucks each. hope this was decent and please dont ban me --------------------Use your shift key! Rhadon

berkut

March 16th, 2004, 07:47 PM

Zero, did we see the same webpage? About turning those galvanised spikes into the throwing weapons? If this is the case man please post the link, I've been looking for that page for at least a week. I didnt mean to go OT. Galanized nail can be turned into amore lethal and precise weapon than a throwin knife. just hammer the sharp edge and shape it like the point of a spear then put a tassle in the other end. and make a slingshot as a drive. ahh its difficult to put into words how to make it maybe I can i mail to you the plan for better visualization. Can I have your email address? . Oh you might search for it in the web, the keyword is indian pana. Just try it.

berkut

March 16th, 2004, 09:13 PM

I used to make spikes by sharpening the hell out of masonry nails (the big 7 inch ones that cost 50 cents a pop) and affixing streamers to the back. They were fun to throw around. I hear stories about people actually hunting with the things... ~Zero the Inestimable Helloo Im new to the forum and read your discussion about the galvanized nail as a throwing knife. Im sending you a file of a plan for a homemade slingshot using the galvanized nail as a bullet or shall I say spear. this weapon is concealable. but I need to go out of this forum coz i cant attached the powerpoint slide. Can you send me your e-mail address. Hope you use it just for hunting not for any bad ideas.. you know what I mean. I once used this hunting rats in out home in the province.

+++++++++++ The above, "signing", of a post, is NOT permitted. Remove or be removed. NBK

Dave the Rave

March 17th, 2004, 12:09 PM

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Impact, I believe that it was an good post, but please, don´t beg ! If you think that your post can get you banned, just don´t post. About the topic, an serious atacker can´t be distracted by 5 to 7 inches of steel on his body, unless it hits some vital spot, hence Frostfire always aim at the neck, nor by calltrops, unless it´s on the midle of the path, or thrown at his face. You can´t gain 2 secs of "vital time " and you, probably, will loose an good weapon that can be used to stab and cut some veins and tissues... Your idea about ceramic knives, when you say that you don´t have an need for such a tool, I think that the correct idea is to have an tool to such a use. It´s better have an knife that can´t be found than don´t have any weapon at all... And by the way, I will NEVER buy anything made by isralis !!! Berkut, why the insistence on gettying members emails ? You can email anyone by clicking on his/her nick at the top of the post. And no one wants to know that you´re new at The Forus, as your subtitle is allway showing it. Shoot an iron barbell with an sling ? How do you do it ? Its your idea or an common weapon at your Country ? I´ve seen some flechets being lauched from an rubberband powered cross bow, but never seen your idea before.

Impact

March 17th, 2004, 03:36 PM

I hate to explain myself in this way but here it goes. "an serious atacker can´t be distracted by 5 to 7 inches of steel on his body, unless it hits some vital spot, hence Frostfire always aim at the neck, nor by calltrops, unless it´s on the midle of the path, or thrown at his face. You can´t gain 2 secs of "vital time " and you, probably, will loose an good weapon that can be used to stab and cut some veins and tissues..." Any attacker will flinch, move or be temporarily stunned whenever anything...much less a 5 to 7 inch knife is thrown at them. And hitting the person is an added bonus. Just the fact that you can stop somebody can give you an openning. BTW, throwing a knife into someone's neck??? isnt that a rather small target? Wouldnt you be better off trying for the body? A larger, more accessible target should be taken advantage of, i.e. the body. As for the nonmetallic knife...how many times do you go into a court room or an airport and need a weapon. The only place i can even imagine needing one is a night club where they have metal detecting wands. Sorry you wont buy anything made from Israel. They make quality stuff and are cheap. Albiet my tax dollars paid for their factories. A simple piece of delrin or other non metallic material in rod form with a tip on the end can also be used as a jabbing weapon. A slingshot that launches spikes? Why? What ever happen to a nice ball bearing flying super fast, aerodynamically and being able to hit someone from a long distance and causing a massive amout of shock value. Why change what works? Are crossbows illegal in Australia also?

kingspaz

March 17th, 2004, 06:41 PM

Dave the Rave, tell me, if you were a serious attacker and got stabbed by a 1.5inch blade (not 6-7) in the forearm can you seriously say you wouldn't be distracted? no, nobody can nomatter how 'hard' they think they are. say you have an arm of radius 3inches, thats 6inches diameter, then a 1.5inch blade is going to get half the way to the bone. thats going to do some serious muscle damage and severly hinder an arms operation, all this from a 1.5inch blade. also, a quick note on slingshots. it takes alot of practice to be reasonably accurate at aiming, or maybe i'm just shit. they can do some impressive damage and have good impact properties. the one i have atleast is quite capable of punching through both sides of a beer can with an entry hole the width of the can and a small exit hole. this is a real 500ml steel can, not the little ally ones the US guys have. dave does however raise some good points - impact, don't ever say 'please don't ban me'. this is not a forum for whining beggers.

berkut

March 17th, 2004, 08:14 PM

Impact, I believe that it was an good post, but please, don´t beg ! [...] your idea before. It is common in my country, but it is illegal, used in gangwars. I tried e-mailing through the nick, but it wont work okay i wont inssist for e-mail address, Again i will try to post my weapon plan,some other time. Impact, I didnt Say "change the slingshot" but my plan is an option for the slingshot. I also use slingshot and very competent in using it, we use it in hitting birds, either in a wire or in a tree. ---------------------Don't quote whole posts! Rhadon

Jacks Complete

March 17th, 2004, 08:56 PM

berkut, Don't block quote like that, or you will get a telling off! You could have easily edited it down to the last two paras!

nbk2000

March 18th, 2004, 03:59 AM

People have been hit with shotgun slugs, buckshot, .44 magnum hollowpoints, 30-06, etc. at point-blank range, and still killed their killer. Not to mention guys trailing their intestines after being eviscerated by artillery shrapnel, and other horrific injuries, during war Not every weapon works every time, and if shock weapons like firearms and artillery can't do it every time, then what's a

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

pissant little blade thrown by you going to do to someone intent on killing you? Not a whole hell of a lot really. And an arm isn't an immediately lethal injury, and you've just provided them with a very effective bladed weapon for them to use to sever your head from your body, while simultaneously disarming yourself...:rolleyes:

berkut

March 18th, 2004, 05:02 AM

Indian pana is a lethal weapon, depends on where you hit the target. The arrow cannot easily be dislodged from the wound because of the hook on the arrowhead. it needs surgery, thus avoiding your quarry to use it against you. You can easily reload it for the second shot, speed on using it can be improved through practice.Plus ,you just can throw away the slingshot after using it. what make it more lethal is it is like an ice pick, it can make your blood clot inside the wound and you can make the arrow bigger than a 7 inch nail.

Dave the Rave

March 18th, 2004, 10:09 AM

Kingspaz, NBK Said enough ! If you´re matching an serious atacker with your neigbourhood´s tough brat, then you´re on troubles... An serious atacker is someone who WILL kill you as soon as he catch you, and nothing will stop him. I´ve seen people on drugs that can be shooted several times, on the chest, by the B&W and even be able to take down one or two of the cops... BTW, when my family was of the penitentiary service, I saw an inmate who was pierced seventie and two times with several homemade blades and he can make his way to the hospital, alive, and he´s still alive today ! His name is "marcinho VP" do an google search and you´ll found his history. Impact, don´t "yawn" to your elders !!! It´s an bad habit and can bring you troubles. Think a bit, to throw an knife, you must face your enemy. After you´ve thrown your weapon, you´re disarmed and must turn your body to run away. IF your enemy is away from you, the fact that you´ve thrown him your weapon don´t distract him, but instead let him know that you´re helpless. IF your enemy is next to you, you can, maybe, hit him with the knife or maybe miss him. Either hand you can´t run, as he will grab you and can´t atack him, as you´re without your blade. Enough. Berkut, did you ever heard about The Grintch ? Is on your Country any legend about man-eating monsters ? Because you´re on the path of an such legend... Your elder, JC already said you to not quote the entire post, just the relevant line, and your last post have not relation with the line you´ve quoted. Anyway, I was quite enjoying your presence, but alas, what can I do ?

Impact

March 18th, 2004, 01:42 PM

:yawn: Happy Dave? Considering you think that if i throw a knife at you, you wont be stunned or flinch. I guess you can bypass 100,000 years of evolution in survival reactions. The simple fact is, when an object is comming towards you, such as a knife...elders like yourself, and i laugh at that thought, will flinch just like everyone else. If i have to run after that i will. Better to run from a stuation I may not be able to win. And always remember, I can run faster scared than you can mad. I can not believe that people actually think they are tough. If someone shoots at me, I will duck. Its human nature. If you throw something at someone, they will shield their body and flinch. Its HUMAN NATURE!!! As for the shooting a person a dozen times and they still live, people are resillent creatures. Anything can be killed with a .22lr. Teddy Rosevelt killed a bull elephant in africa with a 22lr. A man can fight as long as he has the capacity to. And as for my "please don't ban me" quote, it was actually suppose to be a joke due to the fact that i read the rules, try to live and die by the rules, and yet dont want to offend anyone! But its all good, ream the new guy. -----------------If you don't want to insult other members, than don't do it! I don't like the tone you have here. Since this already is your second warning, you're banned for three weeks from now on. Rhadon

Jacks Complete

March 18th, 2004, 05:12 PM

I think a weapon like a slingshot is very effective, if you are able to stay calm and actually use it like you would in practise. I have seen a .44 steel ball-bearing put through quite a bit of stuff - you can do more damage to a light target frame made of wood than you will with a .44 Magnum, as the slower moving ball won't break through, but will transmit more shock to the wood. However, I would never confuse this with the power of a .44! I wouldn't like to get hit with an accurate shot to the face or kneecap, but odds are it would just sting a lot as it hit my stomach or whatever, mere inches off target. Then I reserve the right to shove the rubber band down your throat. As for firing a barbed hook or arrow, you should probably make a speargun, as that leaves you far less likely to screw up under pressure, and will generally be more repeatable and accurate. Certainly you are likely to hit yourself in the forearm or hand under duress with a normal slingshot and an arrow. You could, of course, find a poison arrow frog or something, and tip the arrow in that. (One idiot I know claimed to be a super knife fighter, and told people he had all his knives tipped with powdered Chloroform!!) There are all sorts of issues with that, though, such as knock-down times, legal repercussions, mental state of the target, etc. These are discussed elsewhere on the boards.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter As for throwing knives, yes, I would say it was a useful skill for showing off, but don't throw your knife if you can't afford to lose it! Also, don't practise throwing into dirt, as it will take the edge off it. Best reason for throwing a knife? So when you miss, the guy smirks, picks it up, and you shoot him dead, in self-defence.

berkut

March 18th, 2004, 07:25 PM

[Berkut, did you ever heard about The Grintch ? Is on your Country any legend about man-eating monsters ? Because you´re on the path of an such legend... Dave the Rave, Im just trying to contribute to this thread, man, what im saying is true, indian pana is a proven weapon. Ahh mebbe, you never heard about my country. I cant blame you, but I can't rectify that impression until I posted my weapon plan. So here it is, I converted it into jpeg file (4 files) then zip it. Just unzip it into jpeg format.

Dave the Rave

March 19th, 2004, 10:44 AM

No Berkut, I´m not misinformed, in fact I´ve triped to your Country some times. Please understand, I can realize that you´re trying to contribute, but again, you´re quoting without the need for it. What´s the point of quote my text if what you say after that don´t is direct connected with the above quote ? That´s my point ! People can be very pissed if your text become full of quotations. You must limit your quotes to the minimum necessary, and must stick to only quote something direct related to the subject you´ll write about.

Corona

March 19th, 2004, 02:18 PM

Might be interested in taking a look here: http://www.quine.home.sonic.net/bbknife.html I find this way of knife throwing effective. Will I ever use it for self-defense? Hell no. For that, there are ball bearings... http://www.quine.home.sonic.net/bball.html Far, FAR more effective than knives. The larger ones will split a skull open without any effort. At least thats how they feel in your hand. You can get them as scrap.

berkut

March 20th, 2004, 09:59 PM

[No Berkut, I´m not misinformed, in fact I´ve triped to your Country some times. Please understand, I can realize that you´re trying to contribute, but again, you´re quoting without the need for it.} Okay! I admit at first I ignore to read the rules but now im enlightened, Thanks fro JC and you for the reminder, although yours is quite annoying. About you been to my place, in what place you been here. Ahh! mebbe to some beaches. what did you find out, what about man-eating monster, There some stories about it but i dont think thats true. just like in other counties they have urban legends. Mebbe you knew somebody from here, then why not asked them if what im saying about the pana is true. If that person denies, then they may have a reason or they ignorant on what is happening to some parts of this country. Just like me, I didnt knew what is happening to other place, because this place is composed of many islands as you may know it already.

berkut

March 20th, 2004, 10:29 PM

[No Berkut, I´m not misinformed, in fact I´ve triped to your Country some times. Please understand, I can realize that you´re trying to contribute, but again, you´re quoting without the need for it.}

Dave, Hmm im getting emotional, pardon me, hope you and the others is not mad. PEACE!! Ahh have you seen the plans I posted, hope it work for you. Oh-uh I forgot to tell you, heat the tip of the nail red-hot before hammering it, to make it more malleable (hope my word is right) and you may substitute the tying wire with the tab from soda can. Inform me if it work. I'll try to draw the plan for homemade speargun using rubber and spine from umbrella andsome scrap wood. one of my friend use it for hunting mudfish instead of airgun.

berkut

March 20th, 2004, 10:45 PM

I reviewed the files I posted and found out that the first slide, supposedly the drawing of the arrow is just like the other slide with the slingshot drawing. Again Im attaching the 1st slide. hope this will work now

Dave the Rave

March 22nd, 2004, 12:44 PM

Berkut, I´m not mad about anything, I am just trying to keep you intact. My insistence about you don´t quote an whole post is just to keep you alive. Now I must add another information, you can´t do 3 post in a row, on the same topic. Instead of it, you must EDIT your post, by clicking on the "edit post" button, and you have 2 days before the edit option become unavaliable. Please, if you can, edit all the information on one only post and delete the subsequent 2 posts. If you whant to discuss anything, please use my email and we can talk at will. BTW, the man eating moster is jus an figure of language, althroug I know of the "chupa-cabras", an urban legend also commom at my Country, the Brazil.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter berkut

March 22nd, 2004, 07:02 PM

[QUOTE=Dave the Rave]Berkut, I´m not mad about anything, I am just trying to keep you intact. Now I must add another information, you can´t do 3 post in a row. :) DAVE, Thanks man. 3 post in a row, yah. You were right, I didnt care to edit my first post. But the third one is just a correction for the plans, Anyway, im glad that the elders ( as you called them) are forgiving. Did you try the weapon? My interest is the back to the slingshot. I think Ill buy the one I just saw in a sports house. Ill try the lead used in fishing nets as bullet or plain glass marbles.

Cyclo_Knight

March 23rd, 2004, 12:39 PM

Some advice Berkut: If you buy a wrist-rocket type slingshot make sure that you buy the heaviest grade bands for it, Also try to buy the largest bearings you can find. The optimal size is about 1.5 cm diameter, or about the size of a paintball. My slingshot will put that bearing through 2 magazines and sometimes a third if they're spaced right :D However ive found that slightly smaller bearings will go through more magazines but will do much less damage to a 2x4. In short: smaller bearings, better penetration...larger bearings, more power and blunt trauma damage. If you want to kill, go with the larger ones, as a headshot would certainly fatally fracture the skull. :)

berkut

March 23rd, 2004, 08:21 PM

[smaller bearings, better penetration...larger bearings, more power and blunt trauma damage. If you want to kill, go with the larger ones] Cyclo Knight, Kill?? Nahh. just want to have something if somebody want trouble. he he :D . Ill go for a bigger band. the one like they use in hospitals, What a luck, just thinking of having the slingshot, a friend gave me a steel bearings he get it as a scrap part of the steering wheel of honda civic. I think it is big enough. Ill post for updates. :D

Cyclo_Knight

March 23rd, 2004, 10:27 PM

With a slight amount of simple modification, a wrist-rocket could be outfitted with two sets of bands on a single pouch, All you need to do is add 2 more attachments for the bands; Some .25" solid steel rods should do the trick. Simply weld them to the existing attachments about 1.5" from the end, stick it in a vice, and cold-bend the rods to be parallel and 1/2 " above the lower ones The trick though would be to find some thick, tough leather which was also flexible for the custom pouch. Although instead of leather, I was thinking of 3 or 4 layers of kevlar quad-stiched together. That would be tough as hell, and silicone beading on the outside would make holding the cocked bearing much easier on the fingers. You could probably get a good 50 pound pull, and a bad mother like that would strike fear in the hearts of the neighborhood squirrels. I would guess you could be fairly accurate to 200 yards with a .6 in ball bearing. I would only reccomend very heave shot be used with his however,as firing lighter shot may not provide enough resistance and damage the slingshot.

Bigfoot

March 24th, 2004, 05:03 PM

Having been tech advisor to a group making wrist rockets by hand from .25" steel rod, accurately cold bending it is TOUGH! Better to heat the bend area first, until red, then bend while holding flame to steel, let cool, then weld. However, welding to the aluminum common in commercial wrist rockets would be difficult. Perhaps a better solution (for someone possessing welding gear) would be to custom-build the weapon from scratch. I seem to remember someone selling dual-band wrist rockets via mailorder, maybe US Cav, but it's been several years.I know I've seen it, though.

Jacks Complete

April 1st, 2004, 08:03 PM

Bigfoot, why do you say it is hard? I built a perfectly nice Black Widow substitute from a bit of rebar when I was a kid, using a hammer, a bending tube and a 3 ton vice. The power bands cost me all of £2-50 iirc! The wrist brace was a neat bit of wood that locked on with a half twist, and offered a good bit of support on the twisted iron handle. I didn't heat treat anything, not even knowing what it was at that age! A friend had a real black widow, and mine was just as good. As for buying the most powerful bands and what size projectile to use, I must say the choice should be made with care, by the person actually doing the shooting. I bought a set of the extra power Barnett bands, the black ones that are about 50% more power than the standard extra power ones (it was at a trade show, I don't recall exact details) but I have found that I am far less accurate than before, because when shooting a steel BB, I just don't have the grip strength for the smaller, faster balls. Also, the power that is left over from a .38 or even a .44 ball really has to go somewhere, and it goes back into your wrist and the top of your hand, which gets old really quick! I have some quite massive recycled BBs which are between .65 and 1 inch, and they are ok, but, of course, they are a bit heavy, and they are various masses, so they go a bit wild at beyond 15 yards. At 25 yards, I can hit a tin can with a good steel .44 and normal bands, but with the rather random old olds and the heavy bands, I can't get anything like that accuracy, rather hitting about 1/5 of the time at half the range. I will do some tests tomorrow if I can get my chrono to work indoors, regarding the mass versus velocity thing for the black bands I am using, and post them up. Cyclo_Knight,

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter

Made something like that with garden canes as a kid, like a giant crossbow. I can't see many people being able to get a good grip and a good release off a double banded system, not least because two bands will contract at different rates and do odd things to your trajectory. Perhaps in a crossbow design, but not hand-held... As for the knife throwing thing, that page above (http://www.quine.home.sonic.net/thrower.html) is great! I saw a chakra in the Leeds Royal Armoury, and have found that the blades off rip saws are quite a good cheap copy! Kind of like a giant shuriken. Much better than the cheap stars you get from French tourist traps! I must get round to actually making a proper chakra, though... I have read about arrow throwing, but, again, not got round to trying it yet. Does anyone have any experiance with any other throwing weapon?

Corona

April 2nd, 2004, 08:38 AM

I've learnt a lot of martial arts from my teachers here, but its all been "empty hands". They won't let me train with weapons, probably because they think I might kill myself or something... Whatever little weapons tricks I've learnt, are self taught. Anyway, in my opinion the most practical and effective throwing weapon is a "spike". Just a cheap, shiny, pretty, wrought-iron rod about 7, 8, or so inches long sharpened at both ends. God help the poor sap who catches one of these the wrong way, LOL. However, my favorite is the ball bearing. Practice throwing a few dozen times every other day with either hand. You really don't need martial arts training to become an expert at this thing. Plenty of people ask me, when I claim to know Karate, that "what are you going to do if attacked by 2 guys twice your size carrying baseball bats?" And I would have to say, "what makes you think I'll give them a chance to come near me?" LOL. Karate works best when it isn't used. And I don't think this chakra thing is worth the bother. Its an "exotic" weapon from the Indian Subcontinent. I live here too (Indian subcontinent, Karachi, Pakistan) but I've never heard any tales of bravery or desperation associated with the chakram. There's lots of better stuff around.

Jacks Complete

April 2nd, 2004, 07:45 PM

Corona, I collect various interesting weapons - I have swords, knives, a parang/gulock, caltrops, all sorts - which I make or buy from about the place. A chakra would be a rather neat toy to play with. I am going to try the thing with the ball bearings as well. I have tried knife throwing, forging steel to make my own stuff, and so on. In other news, I completely forgot to do the thing with the chronograph today. I will need to weigh the ball bearings now I think about it, for firing them through the catapult. I can then work out the KE fairly easily.

Corona

April 3rd, 2004, 12:05 AM

Aha..you're a collector... Here's a page for you: http://www.himalayan-imports.com/faq/ In my opinion this is the most effective hand weapon to come out of the Subcontinent. The knife responsible for the most kills during wartime. As for the chakram, just don't depend on it in a street fight, LOL. As far as I know it was supposed to be used by the Sikh people from the Punjab, to hold their turbans in place. Their "kirpan" (double bladed knife) is a much better known weapon. One of the things that bothers me about a chakram is that, like a frisbee, you have to throw it back-hand. And back-handed frisbee throws don't have the power or accuracy that a thrown knife or spike will have behind it. Just a thought.

Jacks Complete

April 12th, 2004, 08:49 AM

That's an interesting page - I was lucky enough to find a rather old khukuri in a Nottingham shop about 6 months ago, which I very nearly "acquired". Turned out to be on sale for £15 so I just bought it! (It didn't look like it was for sale) It is probably a repro, but I don't know. Certainly the blade is quite old, and the tools that come with it are fairly poor, but the blade is good. The handle is too small for my hand, and shows no wear. The rings that are found on most khukuri handles are, in my opinion, a nusance, as they bite into the hand and cause a blister very quickly. They are very effective knives, however. I cut down a four inch thick pine tree the other day with mine, and it is certainly not something you would want to get hit by!

Bigfoot

April 12th, 2004, 11:04 AM

Jack's, Perhaps the steel used was different--we weren't using rebar, but some stock from the local farm store. Vise Grips and Channel-loks, because the one guy with a vise had a piece of crap suction model. Could have offered my own equipment, but they wouldn't have learned anything. Using a torch, propane or hotter, one can bend very easily, even 3/8" rod, tight radii, too. Proper equipment helps a ton.

This is not registered version of Total HTML Converter Corona

April 16th, 2004, 06:17 AM

You bought a kukri for 15 pounds? That would be 1,545 Rupees!!! You were robbed...;-) If the handle bites into your hand, I would improvise a cushioning grip using a bicycle inner tube. Thanks to "A Zaibatsu Release" on how to make your own knives, I'm in half a mood to make my own kukri.. a knife I've always wanted but never got.

nesler

April 17th, 2004, 06:31 AM

Reading what Corona was saying about throwing a ball bearing made me think a bit...I've noticed that when I take the time everyday to throw anything, whether it be playing a game of darts, chucking rocks, or just popping bits of garbage across the room into the garbage overhand, it has a huge improvement on knife-throwing ability. However...I do need to throw more with my right hand. Fucking worthless... :(

Corona

April 26th, 2004, 05:50 AM

Excellent point Nesler. The way martial arts is taught here, there is a mental aspect that is drilled from early on. They call it mind-body coordination, and one very good way to get better at that is to encourage all us martial arts students to be as ambidextrous as possible. For example spend ten minutes everyday trying to write with your left hand (in case you're right handed). In China, young kids are taught to use *both hands* when using the abacus. And a larger number of them than normal, grow up to become "lightning calculators" (a person who can do maths in his head, that would normally need a calculator). THEN watch your performance improve. I think you will be amazed.

compound

June 2nd, 2004, 08:38 AM

Why not make a ninja death star(i suppose you could do it with a throw knife). make a small hole on top of the blade add some cyanide or anything else that would work. All it has to do is stick in and then bam. The blade wont kill them but the cyanide would. If your not sure test it on a dog or cow, or anything big. vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.