Portable General Electric XM214 Minigun, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 29-3-2006 @ 05:41 PM by Dyno25000
Just a thought or two...Im no expert on this particular system, just thought I'd chip in. Please do not flame me if this is a stupid post. There are so many eminently intelligent folks in this forum, and I have a lot of respect, but it seems every time I open my mouth around here what I get is, "that's one dumb idea".

1) The rate of fire of a weapon of this type compared to the weight of ammunition needed for any practical area-suppression mission would necessarily dictate a cartridge smaller and lighter than 5.56mm, logistics notwithstanding. If this is accepted as a "given", the concept is still very much viable. I suggest the .22 WMR (magnum rimfire). As a one-shot knockdown cartridge, probably not; as an area suppression round at 3000 rpms, you bet. Spray at a rate of 3000 rounds per minute of even this small cartridge downrange in a ten-second burst, and your boys could probably do bounding-overwatch for a good ways until the minigunner relocated to his next firing position.

2) I'd thought about a return to Richard Gatling's original method of powering the weapon - manually, with an ammo-bearer/loader/spotter turning a crank attached to the weapon by a flexible steel "worm"...this is impractical for several reasons which I'm sure you can imagine. Now, if the weapon could be made blowback- or gas-operated, that's a whole 'nother can of beans. On the other hand, a rotary-barreled weapon of this smaller caliber would require less battery power, and smaller batteries, than the full-sized 5.56mm. It may be feasible to design a half-blowback-or-gas, half-electrical drive system to reduce battery power need even further.

This concept seems valuable for area-suppression; if one accepted it'd be crew-served, it's feasible in my opinion. As a single-soldier weapon it'd fly with a smaller cartridge and blowback/gas operation augmented by lighter batteries than are required for the (already-developed) 5.56mm minigun. The "recoilless" ammunition idea is also very good, but would make the weapon more bulky, what with a blast tube or sheath at the back of it to keep the gunner from frying his own leg off from the backblast.

I am very pleased to post here in this august forum. Thank you.

[edit on 29-3-2006 by Dyno25000]


reply posted on 30-3-2006 @ 02:02 AM by Lonestar24
Originally posted by jazz_psyker
Oh what a goody too shoes.....

I agree somewhat, but ummmm chain-guns are cool : )

Anyway, about the weight problem as rounds get fired (due to the fast rate of fire) less will have to be carryed. So one problem solves the other.


Just to be exact, the term "chaingun" indicates that the weapon is externally driven. It still can have only one barrel. The thread however is about multibarrel cannons/MGs, which do not necessarily need an external motor.

Of course the more rounds are fired, the lighter the load will be. This is however absolutely theoretical since on a majority of patrols not a single shot is fired, and even on deployments with enemy contact 99% of the whole time there wont be any shooting. The gunner still has to carry the ammo load around.

Originally posted by Dyno25000
...There are so many eminently intelligent folks in this forum, and I have a lot of respect, but it seems every time I open my mouth around here what I get is, "that's one dumb idea".


Well, as long as you try to add to the discussion respectfully and with a somewhat backed opinion, noone is justified to attack you. You can however be disproven, and sadly thats what I´m gonna do

1) The rate of fire of a weapon of this type compared to the weight of ammunition needed for any practical area-suppression mission would necessarily dictate a cartridge smaller and lighter than 5.56mm, logistics notwithstanding. If this is accepted as a "given", the concept is still very much viable. I suggest the .22 WMR (magnum rimfire). As a one-shot knockdown cartridge, probably not; as an area suppression round at 3000 rpms, you bet. Spray at a rate of 3000 rounds per minute of even this small cartridge downrange in a ten-second burst, ...


Problem is: even when we solely look at the issue of area suppression, ROF is not the only important factor. Lets say you we build your .22 WMR minigun. Trouble is: those small, low-energy bullets have horrible ballistics on larger distances, and even IF you hit, they might not retain enough energy to even penetrate the target effectively. .22WMR for example has lost half of its velocity on less than 150m. So you cant engage any enemy farther away, and a disciplined enemy wont be impressed for too long once he realizes that you are basically trying to snipe him with an automatic birdshot shotgun

Next situation: The enemy is within a reasonable effective range of the .22 minigun. Problem is: he sees you and hides behind some cover, lets say a hut of sheet steel. How long would you have to shoot at that cover to penetrate? Is it even possible to penetrate normal 4mm steel with a .22WMR, even at 3000 RPM (eventually, of course)? In that situation you would be more effective with a single, reliable 7.62mm Nato, even a 5.56mm might do the job.

Two essential situations of infantry combat, and in both situations the .22WMR minigun would fail - all the fancy equipment and compromises to have the man-portable mingun with 3000RPM would basically turn into an useless letter weight. You cannot replace the effect of one large caliber with 10 small caliber round.

2)...Now, if the weapon could be made blowback- or gas-operated, that's a whole 'nother can of beans. On the other hand, a rotary-barreled weapon of this smaller caliber would require less battery power, and smaller batteries, than the full-sized 5.56mm. It may be feasible to design a half-blowback-or-gas, half-electrical drive system to reduce battery power need even further.


Even if we assume that a half electrical - half blowback/gas system would be technically sound and added no weight penalty, it would solve nothing. The idea behind the electric drive is to have the full energy of the cartridge reliably on target, but increases weight a lot. The idea behind the gas/blowback operated rotary gun is to get rid of unnecessary secondary systems (the battery and/or motor), to simplify the system and reduce weight - yet it comes at the penalty of possible failures and that a certain amount of cartridge energy is lost to cycle the system.

So a combination would still leave you with the penaly from the electric motor and with the reduction of bullet energy. In any case I dont even know wether a .22WMR could offer enough working pressure to cycle the system.

[edit on 30/3/2006 by Lonestar24]


reply posted on 30-3-2006 @ 09:45 AM by Dyno25000
"Well, as long as you try to add to the discussion respectfully and with a somewhat backed opinion..." (Lonestar24)

Gee, I did try, I tried real hard...

"You can however be disproven, and sadly thats what I´m gonna do." (Lonestar24)

Aw, that's OK, man! It's plain you don't think much of the idea of a manpacked rotary cannon (er, call it a "rifle"...cannons are usually 20mm and larger), and approached the subject with a determination to prove it was not feasible. That's what you do. I myself approached it with a curiosity concerning how it might be made to work, and threw out some ideas...and somehow I just don't feel like I've been disproven yet.

I said a smaller cartridge would help make this concept viable, if it can be made viable; and I suggested the .22 WMR. I didn't dictate the .22 WMR, I merely suggested it. Now consider the .17 Remington of the field; it toils not, but it sure does spin. It fires a 25 grain projectile (which is less than half the weight of that of the 5.56mm) at 4040 feet per second muzzle velocity, and retains 388 foot-pounds of energy at 200 yards. As you know, most firefights take place at less than 300 yards ("meters" I think they call them these days), and I'd say this would be enough to pierce a piece of thin roofing tin at this distance...as if convenient pieces of roofing tin were available for the enemy to hide behind in the field. While not as light a cartridge as the .22 WMR, the .17 Remington would give a substantial weight savings in packed ammunition, mechanism size of the minigun, and power needed to drive the mechanism (compared to 5.56mm), and it has excellent ballistics.

As you know, a projectile gains some 90% of it's velocity even before it leaves the case mouth; and parasitic gas operation taps a negligible amount of bullet energy to power the mechanism. I feel this is not a factor. Same thing for recoil-operated weapons...the amount of energy used to operate the mechanism has a negligible effect on bullet velocity. Matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken, on recoil- or gas-operated weapons the bullet has already left the barrel before the mechanism starts to move.

"In any case I dont even know wether a .22WMR could offer enough working pressure to cycle the system." (Lonestar24)

Again, I didn't dictate the .22 WMR, I suggested it. And a recoil- or gas-operated system in this configuration would weigh much less than a battery pack and associated chain-drive electric motor...you are correct that stoppages are a potential problem. That'd be an engineering point to consider, i.e., immediate-action clearing of dud rounds in a mechanism as complicated as this. Maybe it could be done.

And for sure, "one shot one kill" is a fine dictum; but that's not what we're discussing here. One cannot provide suppressive fire with one shot.

[edit on 30-3-2006 by Dyno25000]

[edit on 30-3-2006 by Dyno25000]


reply posted on 30-3-2006 @ 10:39 AM by Browno
I dont really think Miniguns could be hand held outside the movies but would be cool if it could.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Jesse Venturas Minigun in 'Predator' had to be loaded with reduced power blanks since the recoil of it and there was also a power cable hidden under his trousers to power the thing.

Anyone seen the film 'Doom' starring 'The Rock'?

Becouse there is a three barreled Minigun carried by one member in his squad, Looked even more bulky than the ones in Predator and
Terminator 2.


reply posted on 7-8-2006 @ 05:04 PM by newtron25
Support system for portable video camera

Go here to see what I was talking about in my previous post. Couldn't find a picture right off, but I'll see what I can have the search engines dig up...

Newtron


reply posted on 7-8-2006 @ 05:09 PM by newtron25
Possible Harness for Minigun

Use your imagination here: Adapt some of the parts with carbon fiber materials for weight and add additional pnematics, springs or actuators to handle the recoil. Not sure if someone hasn't already tried it - it just seemed obvious to me.
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Nano Drones Flying in Formation
  Posted 12 days ago with 15 member flags
FPS RUSSIA
  Posted 17 days ago with 7 member flags
British nuclear weapons tests, carried out in Australia.
  Posted 0 days ago with 7 member flags
Spinel Thin Transparent Ceramic Armor defeats Barrett .50 Cal BMG
  Posted 16 days ago with 6 member flags
Defective Ammunition Warning
  Posted 5 days ago with 6 member flags
Self-steering Bullet Researched
  Posted 13 days ago with 5 member flags
Shockrounds take out three of your five senses.
  Posted 5 days ago with 5 member flags
Taking the Crowd Out of Firing 155mm Artillery.
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags