I'm going to make my own caseless ammo

same reason people here don't just buy an ar15 and a glock and never think about guns again.
>fun

private companies and governments made them work....
>bolt action

they made them work, yet still use cased ammo for a reason.

Just build a fucking Gauss rifle

Attached: 1527028571866.jpg (599x566, 49K)

firing rate... that's why they used cased, its just an overheating issue.
plenty of caseless designs, plenty of electronic ignition guns.

Presumably you could make a water cooled gun, but I just want to try making caseless ammo, it will be a fun project.

>people here make guns from wood... and are critical of electronic ignition.

What kind of action do you have in mind? Going modern chassepot or full kraut space magic?

They are not too difficult to make they way they are made on youtube... just like a series of solenoids with optical triggers. I'm not an EE, but I have a friend who made one in high school.

However, if you wanted to make one appropriately you would need each stator to be custom tuned to the predicted velocity of the projectile based on the acceleration, friction, and magnetic field strength as is changes dynamically as the projectile moves through it. I don't even think there are any softwares that can do this. You would have to do all the math by hand, or dumb it down to "max field strength as projectile enters"... which is just like doing what the amateurs do for the first coil which they copy down the line... but you do it for each coil and include predicted speeds. Then you could get efficiency up maybe to double digits, and get maybe 10 lethal shots from a heavy handheld rifle.
>tldr: low energy density, I'd put them at airgun status, in terms of lethal shots per kilogram, due to battery tech where it is.
>with really insane math nobody has ever done, you could maybe get 50% efficiency, and then you're looking at a reasonable rifle... but you would still have to charge it every dozen shots, which could take a literal minute or two, depending on capacitor/battery chemistry.
>railguns are easy math, basically just a circuit and flux calculation to size things appropriately.
>if you have infinite mass and energy to work with, potential to put projectiles in space... so much better than combustion projectile weapons. I heard they're going to trial railguns on navy boats next year.

bolt action 308
modified bolt
custom barrel
custom made cartridge
>that's it.

So you want to make caseless ammo yet you posted a picture of ammo with a case?

How about you do some research.

Read up on the Chassepot, see where they succeeded and where they failed and start from there.

I suggest you explore paper cased needle rifles like the Dryse and the Chassepot, which are about the only caseless rifles adopted for military service. Since you own a machine shop, make a testbed rifle and explore the different combustable materials needed in order to make a 95% combustable case. You will need conventional primers, one of the important improvements to gunpowder over the years has been in making it hard to ignite with electrical sparks. In the Chassepot, the primer shoots out the front with the bullet.

youtube.com/watch?v=feODS1bcvwc
youtube.com/watch?v=Xi47hIRi3b0
Chassepot case construction

youtube.com/watch?v=-QtrHC4L_8A
On the rifle itself.

uhh user
there's no case there. that's what caseless ammo looks like.

no, you're just delusional

What if you eject the primer out the front, like some bullpup do? I wonder if its possible.

>compressed powder around bullet
>simple striker ignition, like a lighter
There, no primer or case.

Use an electric system as a spark for the powder

>how about just don't? caseless ammo is shit and your gun will get hot as shit in no time flat.
Thats not why caseless cooks off, user. It cooks off because it has no case to equalise transfer (and so nothing to deal with hotspots that can ignite the propellant even when it's not hot enough on average) and insulate the heat from the hot chamber. The heat the case takes away is negligible.
With compressed powders you're going to have cook off under any moderate rate of fire and water resistance will be terrible. Try it for shits and giggles but you're probably not going to get very far.
Its not that impossible, he's just more likely to run into legal issues or cost over run before brute force experiments return a success. Technically nothing in the production process couldn't be done on small scale, even if he tried to replicate the HMX based propellants from the G11.

>water cooled
WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE TRENCHES BOYS

The brown bit is the propellant user. Don't be retarded.
>overheating
JFC do your fucking research. Caseless doesn't have an overheating issue, it had a temperature sensitivity issue. Nothing in the gun fails, the ammo was just was to sensitive to heat. RDX propellant fixed that problem with the ammo but the guns were always fine.
>inb4 the case take out heat
It takes out single digit percentages under ideal circumstances. You can safely fire a constant stream of rounds from a caseless gun just as long as cased one.

Honestly i gotta say that trying to make the cartridge so that nothing needs to be ejected is a fools errand. The main advantage of caseless ammunition is their weight, not being able to make a gun with no ejection port that will get fucked up the first time it doesn't go boom because you have no way to extract the round.
My own thought on possible caseless rounds is as follows, make everything else the usual caseless stuff but leave in a brass nub at the back, this way you have a place where you can put the primer and a way to seal the chamber, this design might, with minimal modifications, work in conventional guns as well while providing 90% of the benefits caseless rounds offer.

Attached: semi caseless.png (686x703, 9K)

>not being able to make a gun with no ejection port
Caseless guns still have ejection ports and can eject unfired rounds.
>design
Trying to eject a dud round and you're going to leave most of the round in there. Also prevents you from using push through chambering/ejection and puts a lot more stress on the propellant block on chambering. Not to mention how flimsy that little brass bit is going to be.
You might have saved weight, but you've also combined some of worst aspects of both. At that point just go polymer cased.

>Caseless guns still have ejection ports and can eject unfired rounds.
yeah that's what i'm talking about, there no use in making fully combustible cases since you've still gotta have an ejection port.
>Trying to eject a dud round and you're going to leave most of the round in there
not if the propellant block does not break off of the nub which imho might not be as common as you might think, because think about it, the block is not touching the chamber walls and therefore there is nothing really keeping it in the chamber when you go to eject, it is completely free to come out of there.
>Also prevents you from using push through chambering/ejection and puts a lot more stress on the propellant block on chambering.
true enough
>Not to mention how flimsy that little brass bit is going to be.
it's not gonna be flimsy at all
>You might have saved weight, but you've also combined some of worst aspects of both. At that point just go polymer cased.
yeah but the thing with polymer is that you can't make rims out of polymer, it just wont hold, so that would necessitate push through extraction and the main point with that design was that it could be used with ordinary firearms.

My dick

>yeah that's what i'm talking about, there no use in making fully combustible cases since you've still gotta have an ejection port.
Except for the weight, price, compactness and all the actual reasons people use caseless. People don't want caseless because it means they don't need to have an ejection port.
Even if they did its a dumb argument anyway, because unlike a cased firearm, you can have the port only open when you're extract a dud round.
>not if the propellant block does not break off of the nub which imho might not be as common as you might think, because think about it, the block is not touching the chamber walls and therefore there is nothing really keeping it in the chamber when you go to eject, it is completely free to come out of there.
If its not touching the walls, then you're going to shear the propellant block when you chamber the round or you're going to need to pay ridiculous prices per rifle to make sure the round is perfectly centered every time it chambers. And you'd cutting into the propellant block to mount the case end and introducing a failure point even regular caseless doesn't have. Chambering a round, and military operations in general, aren't easy on ammo anyway and you've introduced a very weak spot and are pulling on it. Push through is used for a reason.
>yeah but the thing with polymer is that you can't make rims out of polymer, it just wont hold, so that would necessitate push through extraction and the main point with that design was that it could be used with ordinary firearms.
You can put metal rims on polymer cases for one. Thats entirely why people want to use polymer cased, because it is compatible with current firearms.
>it's not gonna be flimsy at all
Ever stood on an empty brass case? What bit bends?

Attached: polymer cased ammo with steel rim.png (598x598, 776K)

>Except for the weight, price, compactness and all the actual reasons people use caseless
Can u please actually read my post, this is basically what i said, people dont want caseless because there is absolutely nothing ejected but because they offer all these other benefits like weight etc.
>If its not touching the walls, then you're going to shear the propellant block when you chamber the round or you're going to need to pay ridiculous prices per rifle to make sure the round is perfectly centered every time it chambers.
what do you mean? it would chamber just like normal and when it reaches the end it will lift off of the walls and be supported by the nub.
>And you'd cutting into the propellant block to mount the case end and introducing a failure point even regular caseless doesn't have.
dude this is a completely incoherent argument, there isn't even a requirement to cut into the propellant block or anything, just have the brass nut have a slight taper on the inside and then mold the propellant block to fit that, it wont come off and there is no "weakpoint" or whatever.
>Ever stood on an empty brass case? What bit bends?
the walls where it is thinnest? Idk what your point here is.

>an u please actually read my post, this is basically what i said, people dont want caseless because there is absolutely nothing ejected but because they offer all these other benefits like weight etc.
Then explain the part I quoted. Why were you going on about there being no point in combustible cases if you still have an ejection port?
IF you're just using the fact that caseless still has an ejection port to justify having a semi-caseless design, why pretend like caseless designs ever don't have one in the first place?
>dude this is a completely incoherent argument, there isn't even a requirement to cut into the propellant block or anything
The brass case sticks into the propellant block where I've circled. This reduces the thickness of the propellant block there, and the shapes of the propellant and the brass introduce a very large stress concentration in a brittle material. This is basic engineering stuff m80.
Now when you chamber a round, the front can slide along the edge of the chamber until the round is in position. This means its being supported from the back only, with a stress being applied from the front. Easiest way to snap a stick is bending from both ends, and you've put a huge stress riser and less material right where that stress is concentrated.
As I said, caseless propellants are brittle. Outside of politics and the cost of changing over, this is the reason they didn't get adopted. Heat, water is BS, their problem is fragility. And if they are damaged at all by chambering or just day to day life in the military, you're going to have to pull it out of the chamber by the section thats by definition attached right where its weakest and already most likely to have a preexisting fracture.

And all of its pointless. Because its still basically just as fragile as caseless, and its not going to be that much lighter than polymer cased if at all because that small brass band has to obturate and seal as well as the entire case.

Attached: weakspot.png (302x454, 4K)

All i said was this
>trying to make the cartridge so that nothing needs to be ejected is a fools errand
and it was in response to op trying to make a combustible primer which is a fools errand in my opinions.
>The brass case sticks into the propellant block where I've circled.
again, you didn't read my post, really tiring to have to say things twice, the picture i posted was merely one way to solve the problem of attaching the propellant to the nub, there are other ways, possibly better ones, like making the insides of the nub slightly tapered, which i did indeed mention in my post.
>Now when you chamber a round, the front can slide along the edge of the chamber until the round is in position. This means its being supported from the back only, with a stress being applied from the front. Easiest way to snap a stick is bending from both ends, and you've put a huge stress riser and less material right where that stress is concentrated.
what you're saying here is making absolutely no sense, there is no significant force being exerted on the front part of the cartridge when chambering.
>And all of its pointless. Because its still basically just as fragile as caseless
it's not pointless, you are basically getting 90% of the weights savings of a caseless round but you can use it in ordinary firearms with only minimal modification.
> and its not going to be that much lighter than polymer cased if at all because that small brass band has to obturate and seal as well as the entire case.
what are you talking about? it does not take a lot of brass to seal that small crack between the chamber and the bolt.

Attached: semi caseless 2.png (1114x703, 10K)

Fuck dude thats even worse. Caseless propellants are fucking weak, they fracture and break when you treat them nice with a soft push through chambering and extraction sometimes rips the rims off brass cases. This is a stupid fucking idea. No method of attaching the brass to the propellant is going to fix that. This latest one would be lucky to hold the propellant into the case at all.
Polymer cases are strictly superior to this bullshit.

how bad would it be to have a 2nd magazine of only primers?

imagine a magazine that holds bullets in the front half, primers in the rear half.

Attached: caseless concept.png (567x461, 12K)

>reverse engineer G11 off of old army tech manuals
(findable on the internet)
>reverse engineer G11 rounds using dimensions and chemical formulas prescribed by government manuals concerning propellant specification

if you can figure out what the technical designator of G11 rounds were, you can look it up in old explosive safety or transportation manuals and figure out what kind of chemicals were in it

Attached: 1506912833295.jpg (576x577, 47K)

you could just send it to a lab, they can reverse engineer anything these days

Attached: kraut space magic ejection.jpg (1046x913, 128K)

You don't need to be a Harvard grad to get shit done. If user has the gumption to try, which is more than most people on this board have, then let him try.

you are missing a point op, you do not reduce the length of the ammo, wich is the point of the caseless ammo

>It takes out single digit percentages under ideal circumstances.
Thats a lot

Attached: 64.jpg (950x636, 62K)

Pointless.

Just do polymer cases with telescoped ammo.

ctmuzzleloaders.com/ctml_experiments.html

I'd suggest a highly worthwhile use of your time, in a related area, and which might be better suited to your self-described skills and experience, would be replicating and building on this gentlemans work with non-fixed ammunition (as opposed to molded-propellant-cased ammunition).

forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Caseless-Ammunition-Small-Arms.pdf

This is a useful introduction and collection of research leads on caseless technology.

books.google.com/books?id=pdMDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=RA1-PA120

This article is the source for the common mechanism depictions of the Daisy VL caseless rifle, which had an interesting ignition mechanism it might be worth looking into.

Ignore the faggot nay-sayers in this thread. Jow Forums is full of angry bitter fudds and noguns with stocholm syndrome for the artificial small arm tech stasis enforced by mama fed. The idea of small-arms tech being 'perfected' into a permanent and final plateau is a religion here.

Good luck and godspeed.

Attached: plink_king_rifle_entire_labeled.jpg (1920x1080, 359K)

how bout you help me make that 100tube,40mm truckbed mounted Grad launcher I've been dreamin about.

Shut the fuck up with your popsci babble

thermo electric