Comically Absurd Rifles & Bullets

[kerick]

The Soviets were big users of AT rifles right through to the end of WWII and some of those were massive. Either that or all the lads carrying them in photos were 5 foot or under. I've often wondered if these were used for harassing fire sort of thing. Make tank crews stay buttoned up ? Can't imagine them being effective on late war armour

The Soviets used them against the flanks and rear of the AFVs they faced in German hands.  They tended to be quite effective apparently at either penetrating the lower hull armour (often about 10-25mm in thickness) or in killing the AFV's crew if they were fighting heads out.

My father who fired the Boys during WWII always said it "had a kick like a Mule!"   As he was a fairly slight man, I wouldn't be surprised if he was telling the truth.  The US Marines used Boys, especially flown across the Pacific to them, in their raider units as anti-Materiale' and personnel rifles, during the early part of the Pacific War.

My understanding was that the Germans attached the plate armor to the sides of their tanks to defend against the anti tank rifle. I had always though that it was protection against shaped charge warheads but I guess not.

[NARSES2]

The Soviets used them against the flanks and rear of the AFVs they faced in German hands.  They tended to be quite effective apparently at either penetrating the lower hull armour (often about 10-25mm in thickness) or in killing the AFV's crew if they were fighting heads out.

Cheers. I suppose quite a lot of German late war AFV's were based on early war chassis and thus had relatively thin armour.

[pyro-manic]

Probably useful against the myriad half tracks, armoured cars and self-propelled guns as well, which had lighter or incomplete armour protection..?

[rickshaw]

The Soviets used them against the flanks and rear of the AFVs they faced in German hands.  They tended to be quite effective apparently at either penetrating the lower hull armour (often about 10-25mm in thickness) or in killing the AFV's crew if they were fighting heads out.

Cheers. I suppose quite a lot of German late war AFV's were based on early war chassis and thus had relatively thin armour.

Most of their Self-Propelled Guns were.  However, it's also a case that AFVs put the most armour where the designer thinks they are most likely going to be hit, with the result that tanks tend to have thinner armour on the lower sides, rear and bottom than they do on their upper sides and front primarily.

Probably useful against the myriad half tracks, armoured cars and self-propelled guns as well, which had lighter or incomplete armour protection..?

Most light AFVs had a maximum of about 1-2 inches of armour on them.

[KJ_Lesnick]

Weaver

IIRC there's an absolute limit on how fast any chemically propelled projectile can go, which is set by the rate at which the propellant gas can expand.

Good point, I still figured drag of the bullet played some role in the penetrating power and stability in flight (i.e. range).

High velocity tank guns are pretty much at this limit now, which means the figure must about 1,750 m/s.

Could someone design a rifle to have characteristics of a tank gun in terms of expansion velocity?


Rheged

Yeah, the idea was to use the square ones to cause more damage and pain to non-christians figuring it would be an incentive to convert.  Battering people isn't a good conversion strategy.


pyro-manic

Two-stage gas guns are used to generate stupid velocities for research.

The explosive charge is separate from the bullet which makes the means for rapid fire difficult; the fact that the rupture disk ruptures means you'd probably have to overhaul it between firing rounds.

[Captain Canada]

When I was at the USAF Armament Museum they had a training aid that was an enlarged version of _____. I wish I would have taken a pic of it !

[KJ_Lesnick]

Captain Canada

Just to be clear, you intended to draw a bunch of lines?

[perttime]

Good point, I still figured drag of the bullet played some role in the penetrating power and stability in flight (i.e. range).

Obviously, a bullet slows down during flight. So penetration, too, gets worse. Also the accuracy of an unguided projectile depends on distance and how well you can account for the movement of the target, wind, mirage, and probably other things.

Could someone design a rifle to have characteristics of a tank gun in terms of expansion velocity?

Difficult. I think .223 Winchester Super Short Magnum has the highest muzzle velocity among current cartridges, topping out at 4,600 feet per second (1,402 meters per second) with a light bullet. And it is pretty hard on barrels. You need to get several things working in balance, to get speed out of bullets: bullet weight, barrel length, rifling twist, burning rates, amount of powder, pressure (enough but not too much), strength of the case, strength of barrel and action.

[pyro-manic]

The big question is, why do you want all that velocity? What purpose does it serve, and is it worth the tradeoff in terms of blast, recoil, barrel life, rifle design and weight, etc? I struggle to think of a compelling reason.

[PR19_Kit]

Longer range? Flatter trajectory?

[Steel Penguin]

powered armour  dosnt worry with the weight and kick, but you need something powerful to stop it 

[KJ_Lesnick]

perttime

Obviously, a bullet slows down during flight. So penetration, too, gets worse.

Yes, but the faster it comes out of the barrel, it will go further

Also the accuracy of an unguided projectile depends on distance and how well you can account for the movement of the target, wind, mirage, and probably other things.

I'm glad you pointed out mirage, few people notice that... however other variables would include

• Bullet drop
  
• Spin-drift
  
• Temperature
  
• Barometric Pressure
  
• Humidity
  
• Coriolis Effect
  

The way you squeeze the trigger, when firing multiple rounds the barrel may move slightly which can throw off accuracy, the barrel will also heat up so the velocity of the rounds will change after several rounds are fired, your own pulse can screw you up (it's best to take a few deep breaths, and fire right between the pulse).

Difficult.

Why?

You need to get several things working in balance, to get speed out of bullets: bullet weight, barrel length, rifling twist, burning rates, amount of powder, pressure (enough but not too much), strength of the case, strength of barrel and action.

So, let's discuss the simplest part of the equation: Bullet weight, burning rates, and powder quantity...


pyro-manic

The big question is, why do you want all that velocity?

Longer range, flatter trajectory...

[PR19_Kit]

(it's best to take a few deep breaths, and fire right between the pulse).

It's best not to breathe at all if you can avoid it, otherwise breathe easily and fire after you've breathed out as the weapon comes down unto the aim.

[pyro-manic]

If you want that extra range and stopping power, then just use a .50BMG! It'll go further and hit harder than a .30 class bullet ever will, and will be affected less by wind as it's much heavier. Trying to push a small, light bullet at super high speed is not very practical for long ranges because of the windage. That's why long range rifles are mostly in heavier calibres. I keep mentioning the .338 Lapua Magnum - it seems to be an ideal halfway between the 7.62 ish "battle rifle" calibres and the heavy ~.50 types.

Realistically, no matter how good the rifle, atmospheric factors are the deciding factor at long ranges. There's no real way to overcome that, short of guided projectiles. Which are coming...

[KJ_Lesnick]

PR19_Kit

You sound like you hunted a lot as well


pyro-manic

1. You'll note the term comically absurd does apply
2. As for calibur: I did mention the Anzio 20mm rifle
3. Yeah, I've heard of a guided sniper-round: Smart-bomb merges with rifle-bullet -- I guess it was only a matter of time.
4. As for the gas-gun idea: I would assume the rupture disc would be permanently destroyed after every shot...
5. How's a combustion light-gas gun compared to the former