SpudFiles

magnum9987 wrote:Does it honestly matter?

fail.

he used the 'eyes' ( ) which meant HE was being sarchastic to yes they are the right eyes.

oh
anyways on the subject of artillery, which propulsion method is better?
I favor combustion, it is faster to use after all.

magnum9987 wrote:I was tested for retardation and failed miserably, wait a minute. :roll

Not all tests need the recipient to pass the test for him to succeed.

anyways on the subject of artillery, which propulsion method is better?
I favor combustion, it is faster to use after all.

Personally, I'd use pneumatic. But that's because I've only ever been particularly interested in Pneumatics and Hybrids.

magnum9987 wrote:oh
anyways on the subject of artillery, which propulsion method is better?
I favor combustion, it is faster to use after all.

Best propulsion method?
DuPont…

Best legal propulsion method would be Pneumatics.
Reason:
Safer (at least in the field owners eyes)
More efficient
Faster if done right


EDIT:
Hybrid would be better if allowed.
reason:
MORE POWER!!!

I know! wait a minute......

Carlman wrote:

magnum9987 wrote:Does it honestly matter?

fail.

he used the 'eyes' ( ) which meant HE was being sarchastic to yes they are the right eyes.

Hahah
No, it doesn't matter magnum, I was being "obviously sarcastic".

Thanks for the LOL I had anyways, you (and Carlman) made my evening with this.


Back on topic:

Pneumatic can be faster then combustion if you've got a good compressor or maybe use a CO2 setup.
But when you're in the field, you don't want to lug around a compressor, so then combustion comes in.

Legality would depend on where you live though.

You should use the propulsion method you like the most, we all have different tastes, and on top of that, we are in different situations.
I have got an air compressor and combustions are illegal over here, so pneumatic would be my choice, but if you don't have one and they are legal, combustion would be good for you.
Hybrid may have the most power, but it will have one heck of a reloading time unless you use one with a piston.

If I played large-scale airsoft, this would be my ideal force setup, as far as heavy weapons and support weapons goes.

Squad-Based: Either 2 Nerf rocket launchers M79 style, or a shoulder- fired dixie cup RPG.

Mounted/Tripod: Modified version of a semi auto cannon (GB semi, my upcoming Autocannon) modified to shoot sabot rounds of my own design, about 20 BB's (most likely .80g 8mm steel bbs, if I could obtain them.) wrapped in tissue paper, held inside notebook paper so they don't rupture during loading.

Support: Howitzer or mortar-type artillery, depending on range. If playing paintball, ammo will be 3 squadbusters in a sabot. If airsoft, a modified nerf football with the front cut off and filled with bb's, and the nose is tied to the round to avoid loosing it. In either game, the ammo might even be custom foam or thin paper-mache filled with flour. That flour one seems like it could be interesting. Could someone try that? I can't really hit anything directly as it stands.

Heavy support weapons:

Tripod mounted 1919a4 .30 cal, M2hb .50 cal vortex, M60ED, BP 60mm mortar, RPK.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i110/ ... 60_rpk.jpg
Mobile CO2 81mm breech loading mortar.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i110/ ... 10_mk3.jpg
And for the vehicles.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i110/ ... 1a1_18.jpg
WIP: 4.2 Inch Chemical mortar completed, building the standard and baseplate now.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i110/ ... rtar_5.jpg

Ammunition: Tennis balls, Saboted Nerf's, Bee-hives and water balloons.
Radio a grid, I'll hit the target.

///ed///

Biged, would it be asking too much to get some more information on those?
‘Cause them guns is slick!:D

hey I just remembered one of my other experiments you all can play with the concept of catapulting bbs using a common contraction force (clothespin, rubberband) and a lever,
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/airsoft ... t8301.html

Hey I just did some testing with water balloons filled with bbs and air, they work and are probably fine for throwing, but with my cannon in a paper sabot the results were disappointing. I shot at a piece of plywood and I only a few of the bbs in the dirt, there were bbs a couple feet to the left and right, but no bbs more than a foot in front of the target, if a guy was in front of the blast it would have done nothing, there was simply not enough energy from the balloon popping, the bbs still have too much of the momentum from the launch so its more like a splash than a blast. when you see the real deal projectiles from cannons explode in a upward cone not a wave. in combat I'd find this annoying especially in taking out bunkers and enemies behind walls

maybe i missed it in the thread but what size barrel does your gun have and i have 2 suggestions. unless u tried this already, add water instead of air with the bb's, i think they would explode a little better with the weight of the water.
second how about shooting the bb's as buckshot up into the air, i know the distance would suck but it would be interesting to see how they landed.

I just have a 1.5", you just inflate it so its a little bigger than a golf ball, tied the knot closer to the bbs so the balloon is still streched, then use a paper sabot so the ballon won't touch the walls, and squeeze the ballon before you roll it in the paper so the balloon stretches to be longer and narrower, so basically sqeeze it to fit, and use paper