autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3213
    MEMBERS
  • 182477
    MESSAGES
  • 3
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

barrel wear with subcalibers   Small Arms <20mm

Started 22-Dec by smg762; 2488 views.
In reply toRe: msg 1
EmericD

From: EmericD

22-Dec

What is the L/D ratio of the bullet you want to launch?

smg762

From: smg762

22-Dec

Diameter matches the MP7 round...4.65.

Length would.be around 25mm like the russian 545 or 224 valkyrie.

I dont think the l/d ratio would be related to barrel wear....other than bearing surface amount.

In reply toRe: msg 3
Red7272

From: Red7272

23-Dec

Well there is no reason to change unless the round does something special and no reason to go that small unless the reason is velocity.

One of Emeric's old copper projectiles was 6.5 mm and 6.8 grams for a BV of .235. Scaled down to 4.7 of so that gives us a BC of  .164 and a mass of just over 2 grams.  Now in a case like the .224 Valkyrie that gives scope for around 1200 mps though barrels will need to be a bit longer than the current fashion. No AP to speak of but it will be much flatter and with a shorter time of flight out to 800 metres or so. The only question is barrel wear.

smg762

From: smg762

23-Dec

Right. My energy requirement was 1100lbs (21 inch barrel approx)

With that energy, a 6.5mm projo would have awful performance. (or even a .22)

I did wonder how 4.6mm would fare compared to .20 or .19 cal, but the real thing i was wondering was about the barrel wear being reduced with advanced materials.

In reply toRe: msg 3
EmericD

From: EmericD

23-Dec

smg762 said:

I dont think the l/d ratio would be related to barrel wear....other than bearing surface amount.

You're right that there is no direct relationship between a bullet L/D and barrel wear, but if you want to use a projectile with a ~5.4 L/D, then saboted bullet are simply not an option.

smg762

From: smg762

23-Dec

ok. I wasnt too keen on sabots anyway...but i heard they actually allow a longer l/d bullet than normal rifling.

In reply toRe: msg 7
Red7272

From: Red7272

23-Dec

smg762 said:

ok. I wasnt too keen on sabots anyway...but i heard they actually allow a longer l/d bullet than normal rifling.

Nope, they have a negative impact not a positive one. Unless you have a sintered tool steel projectile which is coke bottle shaped and VLD, there is no point. 

Even then a crimped on copper sleeve would be more accurate and practical.

In reply toRe: msg 7
RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

23-Dec

Sabots allow a fin stabilised projectile which means you can have a higher L/D ratio.

Technically you can have fins on the tail of a full-bore projectile, but needs a longer tail/bigger fins to be effective. Or you go for deploying fins, which are a nuisance in large calibre and probably impractical in small ones

smg762

From: smg762

23-Dec

Perhaps perfect sabot açcuracy (in small arms) could be achieved if you tried to take the exact proportions of a tank APFDS, (projectile weight versus muzzle energy).....

..and EXACTLY scale them down.

Tank flechette penetrators are 4.5kg each....sabot is roughly 3kg...

I dunno the energies though. Perhaps someone who knows could then do the math and work out how much a rifle projo would weigh.

Clearly more than 10grains as used in the ACR trials

Problem is tanks have no weight targets to reach....everythings very heavy

To match those proportions would probably mean a package weighing similar to 308 battle rifles

RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

23-Dec

smg762 said...

Perhaps perfect sabot açcuracy (in small arms) could be achieved if you tried to take the exact proportions of a tank APFDS, (projectile weight versus muzzle energy).....

..and EXACTLY scale them down.

If you could scale the tolerance as well? It would still be around 0.3 mrad ballistic dispersion, assuming that the aerodynamics scales too, which it probably doesn’t.

smg762 said...

Tank flechette penetrators are 4.5kg each....sabot is roughly 3kg...

I dunno the energies though. Perhaps someone who knows could then do the math and work out how much a rifle projo would weigh.

Clearly more than 10grains as used in the ACR trials

If it is pure scaling and you are using the same materials (Tungsten heavy alloy or depleted uranium in small arms ammunition?) then it will be the cube of the ratio of calibre. So 120mm to 5mm would result in 4.5kg to 0.3g (about 5grains).

Of course if you are scaling to achieve a 5mm diameter projectile it would be different.

On a related note, my understanding is that “sub-calibre” is where the projectile is smaller than the bore. If you refer to a small calibre then it’s small calibre. Not too sure if there is a standard definition on where the break point is.

smg762 said...

Problem is tanks have no weight targets to reach....everythings very heavy

Don’t kid yourself that tanks have no weight limits. Quite apart from everything adding up to gross vehicle weight which affects mobility and transportability, the ammunition needs to be something that the crew can lift.

TOP