Community Project Poll

This is the place to express thoughts about making the spudding community better.

<t>Choose a Community Project</t>

Poll ended at Mon Sep 21, 2009 3:04 pm

Community Project Idea #1
12
35%
Community Project Idea #2
7
21%
Community Project Idea #3
1
3%
Community Project Idea #4
11
32%
Community Project Idea #5
3
9%
 
Total votes: 34
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Captain
Captain
Posts: 5402
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

probably it would be...
but the question is really whether we want the guidelines to specify how we have to build it or what performance does it have to achieve and let contestants to choose whichever operating principle they want...

@JSR
flying brass is cool... but in order for this to be practical you need to focus on making the cartridges as simple to produce as possible
the "projectile seal" idea
have you considered crimping the copper tube?
Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Five Star General
Five Star General
Posts: 26219
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Has thanked: 581 times
Been thanked: 347 times

POLAND_SPUD wrote:flying brass is cool... but in order for this to be practical you need to focus on making the cartridges as simple to produce as possible
That's the crux of the matter, but with a bit of lateral thinking...
have you considered crimping the copper tube?
Hmmm... metal on metal won't guarantee a seal and it's not really reusable. I can easily envisage casting epoxy around a section of rubber or silicon tubing though.
airheadnoob
Private 4
Private 4
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:12 am

yeah it wouldn't be original so choice 4 then
User avatar
Ragnarok
Captain
Captain
Posts: 5401
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:23 am
Location: The UK

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:Valid points, however on the plus side...
I don't doubt that flying brass is cool, but when said brass is something that takes a lot of time and effort to prepare, it's less desirable to be spraying it everywhere.

Also, while you can do some serious damage to a target with 5 to 10 rounds, you can do a lot more damage than that with more - even potentially to the point of cutting things in half.

Not that I'm saying that the way I propose is the only way to go about it, but it does seem like a more plausible way of achieving sustained fire.
jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:The problem though in my opinion would be guaranteeing a correct fuel-air mix in the chamber.
The problem in my opinion is what happens if the fuel that will have no doubt leaked into the pilot volume gets ignited. With piston hybrids, the "pilot area" has to be kept vented to atmosphere.

Also, that particular design runs the risk of sparking on the outside of the cartridge (uselessly, of course).
Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Captain
Captain
Posts: 5402
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

it does seem like a more plausible way of achieving sustained fire
well yeah there is nothing else than just the coolness factor...

for the number of shots typical for a full auto/semi auto gun cartridges + launcher will weight more than launcher + projectiles...
Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Five Star General
Five Star General
Posts: 26219
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Has thanked: 581 times
Been thanked: 347 times

Ragnarok wrote:I don't doubt that flying brass is cool, but when said brass is something that takes a lot of time and effort to prepare, it's less desirable to be spraying it everywhere.
I really doubt cartridges would be lost or damaged, and once manufactured filling them should not be that much of a hassle.
Also, while you can do some serious damage to a target with 5 to 10 rounds, you can do a lot more damage than that with more - even potentially to the point of cutting things in half.
That's the BBMG approach, with the power potential of a hybrind you can do more with less ;)
Not that I'm saying that the way I propose is the only way to go about it, but it does seem like a more plausible way of achieving sustained fire.
Sustained (10 second bursts, that sort of thing) fire would be out of the question with homemade cartridges, if this is one of the design objectives then an on board fuel-air system is the way to go.
The problem in my opinion is what happens if the fuel that will have no doubt leaked into the pilot volume gets ignited. With piston hybrids, the "pilot area" has to be kept vented to atmosphere.

Also, that particular design runs the risk of sparking on the outside of the cartridge (uselessly, of course).
Details that can be worked on, as I proposed the projectile-seal approach is probably better.
for the number of shots typical for a full auto/semi auto gun cartridges + launcher will weight more than launcher + projectiles...
You have to factor in the weight of compressed air and fuel tanks which a cartridge launcher avoids.
User avatar
Hubb
First Sergeant 2
First Sergeant 2
Posts: 2390
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 8:39 am
Location: South Georgia
Contact:

You know, it's a shame No 3 didn't get any more votes than what it did. I didn't vote, but I was kinda hoping that would make it. I think the whole "4 stroke" thing may have confused a lot of people. Oh, well.

Anyway, I didn't read all of these replies, but I did read the one or two or three posts by Ragnarok concerning "what it's got to do, rather than how we have to do it." I agree 100%.

Since Idea #1 was selected by the majority, I am going to reword the thing in a way that reflects this.

Standy.
Post Reply

Create an account or sign in to join the discussion

You need to be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute

Register

Sign in

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post