Would you like a pistol that shoots telescoped 5.56?

Holy shit suddenly pic related would make sense.

Attached: korobov-assault-rifles-4.jpg (550x411, 84K)

Now you're getting it. See this changes everything in gun design, and looking at it from a perspective of conventional design is a waste.

Yet I still wonder how we'd fit same amount of gun powder in telescopic 556.
Also, mags would have to be wider.

>comfortable pistol grip magazine.
>comfortable
No.
Also pistols usually don't have stocks, which is the only thing that makes the concept even approach feasibility. Even with stocks, it and the conceptually similar MKS both tanked.
Anything that large is essentially a PDW anyway.

Attached: interdynamics_mks.jpg (500x292, 15K)

I would love a case telescoped single action. They could print out a case that has a little rim in there to headspace it or do it at the mouth/top of the case.
Think of how short the cylinder could be.

How do you change magazines without completely rearranging your grip?

>At range
>No brass
>Brass jew stabs me
>Die

Classic extractor will not be able to work with these. How's mechanism works?

can you reload it? If not, then its worthless.

Good gunim.

Attached: 1555517072996.png (1080x1440, 522K)

Generally push through extraction and a moving chamber. Round is cylindrical, so the chamber swings/rotates/slides out of alignment with the barrel, and the next round pushes the old one out.
Apparently it tends to be more reliable than traditional extraction.
Militaries don't tend to reload, user.
Also out of curiosity how many times do you reload a given case? Brass is more expensive than the polymer they used, and mass manufacturing should be cheaper too. What fraction of the cost of brass would they need to drop the poly case to make it cheaper overall?

It depends on the case and how hot I load them but about 10 reloads for standard loadings and about 4-5 reloads for H O T loads. Also even if it is cheaper to buy poly, that seems pretty bad for the environment (excluding all the lead in berms).

Also, if they want this ammo to have any shot at the civilian market, it has to be reloadable. Remington even knew this when making the etronx. Nobody was gonna buy that shit if they couldn't reload for it (nobody bought it anyway but still).

The target market is the military. They benefit most from CT's advantages and they don't need a civilian market to adopt it.
If it is adopted, it'll find a civilian market because its essentially subsidized, they know ammunition will be available (risk to early adopters is the biggest issue with introducing new ammunition), and people will want it just because its what the military has.
>reloading
I think you're overestimating what percentage of the market reloads, and for those that don't, cheaper ammo is attractive. As it is plenty of people shoot steel case, and this would be cheaper still, less hard on the rifle and with other benefits as well.
>Also even if it is cheaper to buy poly, that seems pretty bad for the environment
Nobody seems to care about shotgun shells. That said, I wonder if they're recyclable?

Sounds like a job for additive manufacturing and either "grow" your own cases (if/when SLA machines get cheap enough) or buy empty ones by the truckload for pennies.

No I’m a man so I’ll just shoot .44

Not necessarily, you could always mold some kind of rim into the case

Grab the front with your left hand and and remove the mag with the right hand, if youre right handed. If youre left handed then you might accidentally kill yourself

No, 5.56 is incredibly picky about barrel lengths for some reason.

A 5.56 CT P90 makes me rock sold and I would do terrible things to good people to get it.

Attached: 2AAA4454-01A1-4448-B160-0621906C77C3.jpg (3024x4032, 2.78M)

>did a lot of research on this

light weight, fast, small caliber = not good for short barrels
>heavy, slow, high-grain = good for short barrels

in other words I'd only use longslide with the necked down derivatives.
>otherwise you get a fireball

10mm and .357 have same muzzle energy.
>10mm performs MUCH better out of short barrels, its physics of volume/area

however, getting to high m.e. with a small but fast projectile has less recoil
>so you can have higher m.e.

So what is the goal?
>More power?
>Common cartridge?

Human hands are good up to about 1k ft lbs... so telescoped is not needed
if you want a short barrel

2/2

If you ran suppressed pistol to quell the fireball, you could pack it with the whatever telescoped rifle cartridge you had, then you've a common caratridge that has some benefit

If you ran say 6.5 G or C in a shorter action rifle, that would lighten it up a bit, reduce recoil and length with shorter springs
>telescoped 9mm or 10mm? pointless unless lighter/cheaper.
If you ran say 6.5 in both rifle and pistol, that's nice, but it would need to be supressed because you'd hvae a lot of wasted powder turning to fireball
>so mass goes up in wasted powder, but overall in the loadout you maybe can lose a magazine and pouch, so its worth it.

The better bet with pistols is to go 65ksi, not 30ksi
>75% more energy in a full-width, non-necked, cartridge.
>so you could get 10mm power out of 9mm.
>still good to be at pistol = short barrel, m.e. limited = telescoped benefit is cheaper?
>rifle = long barrel, m.e. not limited = telescoped benefit is shorter action

more benefit in a rifle, no need for pistol telescoped because grip strength is limiting factor, not length

my deagle is 2.3 inches front to rear on the grip, shortest part
>its comfy
>but very rounded
>could maybe get up to 2" and still be double stack, or 1.6" triple wide

>A 5.56 CT P90 makes me rock sold
best reason, short and no taper
>solves ejection issue on bullpups
>RDB didn't really solve it, its 6" too long

Would need to design a new magazine though, because the P90 magazine's design is made for a tapered cartridge.

>Nah, 1.6" is too long for a comfortable pistol grip magazine
Same as 5.7x28, and while that's certainly no 5th-to-95th-percentile fit, lots of people seem to find them comfortable enough.

You type like a fag
>and your shit's all retarded

>trading GRAINS for FPS requires a long barrel
No, it requires a faster powder; a given cartridge loaded as hot as practical will still plateau at the same barrel length.
Take a look at the graphs on ballisticsbytheinch. If what you say were true (and I used to believe it, too), you'd see heavy bullets plateauing sooner, while lighter bullets need more bullet length. Instead, for comparable loadings (e.g. Cor-Bon loads in various bullet weights, as opposed to comparing +P to standard or full-house 10mm to FBI loads), the curves seem to have the same shape.

>trade all that for the heat extracted by brass case.
That's bullshit, though. Guns actually run cooler with plastic-cased ammo.

Attached: 10mm.png (1016x526, 113K)

I actually already feel bad that I shoot lead into the ground and can't pick up all my brass.

Is it really bad for the environment? Also what about shotgun shells? I pick them up too when I can

>I actually already feel bad that I shoot lead into the ground
Where do you think that lead came from in the first place?

That would be like if I dumped a lot of uranium into a river because its natural anyway

Thats not the point mate. Its all about degrees and levels. In the field I shoot at there is a Creek nearby as well. I just hate consuming resources in general, and also burning up powder and releasing it into the air, shooting guns in general is just expensive and consuming. I love it though I just dont do it as much as I wish I could.

>light weight, fast, small caliber = not good for short barrels
>heavy, slow, high-grain = good for short barrels
Now this seems like it might be future fuddlore, but I thought one of the reasons for the telescoped round is that the front "cap" on the round is undersized for the bullet, meaning that the round builds pressure to blow through the front of the case and all the powder is ignited before the bullet even leaves the chamber. Hence the ludicrous chamber pressures advertised for the NGSAR.

>Where do you think that lead came from in the first place?
Barren wasteland deserts thousands of miles away from where he's shooting..

lol handlet
bet you hate the original XBox controller, too

>pic unrelated
Not him but are you really arguing that the Deagle Brand Deagle is a practically sized pistol and that you can shoot it as well as something wonder 9 sized?
>tapered
No its not. 5.7 is bottlenecked but its straight wall. That's a large part of how the magazine works as it does.
You would need to modify the magazine somehow though, as the bottleneck is what stops the fake follower rounds feeding into the action. Is that what you meant?

Attached: FB_IMG_1545190820644.jpg (1080x720, 38K)

Only of the barrel is 10 inches long, with a compensator, and its automatic.

Attached: 800px-TulaStateArmsMuseum2013-09.jpg (800x521, 96K)

my understanding is that the pressure is largely limited by the powder, which is limited due to brass, but certainly you could build something like a 6" thick pressure vessel that is completely sealed and measure maximum pressure achieved with various powders.
>I would assume NGSAR uses a different powder and you don't have to worry about polymer cases cracking
>pressure is good if your bolt lugs can handle it (designing an AR is all about overall loadout mass)

I'm referring to diameter, talking about designing from scratch, because that's what's relevant to CT, not charge grains, not weights for same cartridge, i was not clear.
>choose strongest case
>choose fastest powder
>max pressure
>that essentially gives you an energy or max m.e. whether you achieve it with a hypothetical 12 guage slug or a necked-down slug, that difference being the necked version will not exhaust the energy of the charge due to smaller expansion volume, and energy is not going to back of piston (bullet) in as great an impulse, so your barrel needs to be longer
>doesn't matter if we're talking about burning wood, or airsoft, or hydraulics, or guns,

I don't know what real life cartridges to compare, but say for 2 cartridges of equal powder and pressure, the one which is necked down to a smaller diameter and achieves its m.e. largely through fps rather than mass, will require a relatively longer barrel to achieve the equal m.e. to the one which is not necked down.

CT case is largely beneficial in volume
>maybe its higher pressure
>maybe its different powder
>maybe its cheaper
>maybe its not tapered, so you can push it out the front of a chamber
>maybe its not tapered, so you can p90 stack it
>maybe its any number of things
>but with regard to the fact that its telescoped, you're not going to telescope a cartridge that has a bullet as wide as the base of the case, which is what you want in a pistol, which is OP's question... and rilfes aren't volume constrained.

in other words, to get maximum energy for a given barrel length, powder, and pressure, go with a large caliber bullet... large caliber bullets don't benefit from telescoping, because they don't get shorter from telescoping, because you can't pack powder around the bullet, because the bullet is large caliber...
>a small diameter necked cartridge with lots of powder designed for high BC, then we're talking about shortening actions, and increasing powder, decreasing weight substantively.

the real question
>polymer and/or non-tapered cases is the interesting question, not telescoping
>I've done a lot of research into non-tapered brass, and understand some polymer physics
>but the real benefit is faster, higher energy powders like hmx or adn derivatives, then you can cut the mass of the cartridges and barrel length both

Yeah while your at it I'd also like a machine that makes cupcakes and gives blowjobs

Great, more fucking plastic for animals to choke on

CT revolvers are going to be fun.

>my understanding is that the pressure is largely limited by the powder, which is limited due to brass, but certainly you could build something like a 6" thick pressure vessel that is completely sealed and measure maximum pressure achieved with various powders.
In a traditional case, the bullet is traveling down the barrel while pressure is still building, so the length of the barrel can absolutely affect the chamber pressure.
If the telescoped case works the way it seems to, the barrel length would affect the pressure (and therefore muzzle velocity) less than it would with a traditional case.

Not much different than you choking on silicone, fag.

Can they make them from biodegradable polymer? Last thing we need is more plastic fucking up the environment.

the magazine wouldnt have to be curved as shit either.