IMHO , it makes very little sense for any alleged Chinese plot to steal any aspect of metal storm tech by direct larceny , and certainly not “
kidnapping directors “ – that is just pure hyperbole
As for the “ US general “ and his comments – it it is so dammed good , why are the US not developing it ???????????????????
I believe that if the Chinese desired to purloin metal storm tech – they would start by buying examples of the handgun , via front companies and
middle men to discover , by reverse engineering such details as :
Propellant composition and grain / structure
Bullet design – especially wadding and sealing rings
Barrel construction [ especially primer pocket drillings ] and general metallurgy / wall construction .
Metal Storm : an apes guide
I drew this graphic from ` guestimates ` of how metal storm works , base only on text descriptions – but I believe it to be pretty accurate
And Chinese weapon system designers would do a hell of a better job – only
using their guestimates
Despite the hype metal storm is not rocket science – it is merely the clever fusion of off the shelf technology
Starting from scratch , all you need to develop is the following technology – paying particular attention to the issues raised .
barrel : thinwall , hi strengh , ultra precise drillings for primer
Propellant : high thermal and mechanical shock resistance
Bullet : adequate sealing , front face must not mushroom / deform when subject to previous rounds propellant ignition
Primer / primer pocket : Stable , reliable .
Sequential controller : high speed signal generator , reliable
Electrical bus : low volume , hi reliability .
In short – the existence of viable metal storm prototypes PROOVES that it can be done – so producing a facsimile is hardly rocker science
Once you have a single barrel – stacking them in a chassis is just a matter of coordinating firing circuits .
The best analogy is the “ copying “ of IBM’s PC bios system by a rival , they simply set a team who had never seen the IBM bios a challenge to
build a new bios which did exactly what the IBM one did
It is that simple :