Firearms

I intend to create a taxonomy, concerning firearms. My main focus in on action types, (keeping it to small arms) may branch out to include ignition systems, possibly feeding.

I have good enough understand of the basics of a firearm and a decent understanding of locked breach vs open breach, blow back vs delayed blow back (including the examples to display that I am not a novice when it comes to the taxonomy).

My problem is that there are terms such as bolt, bolt carrier group, breach face, headspace, trunion, camming surface etc. Terms that are specific but important and essential for getting a good understanding of the different actions. Are there any good websites that go into such details? Were can I (besides simply using a browser of my choiche) find such information?

Attached: 230px-Biological_classification_L_Pengo_vflip.svg.png (230x590, 63K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=GJzXG7MYX1c
babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015068098154&view=1up&seq=14
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Forgotten Weapons, despite the shitposting about it on this site,. He takes guns from many countries and time periods and takes them apart on camera, explaining the actions and history of the development.

This
The older guns are especially interesting to me because you see what ideas and designs didn't work. You look at modern handguns and they almost all use the same style action. There were all sorts of goofy mechanisms that didn't catch on.

It'll get very complicated if you go too much into the mechanics, as ideas are copied and adapted. But I like the idea of a taxonomy type setup.

Start with this video. Then, if you really want to become a gun expert, read Julian Hatcher's books. They go into detail about the physics behind guns.

youtube.com/watch?v=GJzXG7MYX1c

Interesting idea user.
Obviously your first split is manual (bolt, lever, pump, revolvers, etc) vs (semi)automatic action - And then gas vs recoil operated.
And then it gets complicated.

Read the Thermodynamics of Firearms. It will tell you everything you need to know about internal ballistics.

babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015068098154&view=1up&seq=14

I dont think this would be particularly useful. It works for flora and fauna and such because there is an overwhelming array of diversity between similar lifeforms so having a logical taxonomy makes sense. For guns there are literally millions of virtually identical examples out there and the established literature is quite good (compared to plants which come with none at all). In addition taxonomy is used to make distinctions about groups based on their realitive traits. A bolt gun with a scope is best described by saying what it is, not what it could be. Describing a firearm by its taxonomy would be less specific than just saying "colt ar15" or whatever.

Pretty sure OP is concerned with action types, not individual examples. I.E. push feed cock-on-close vs controlled feed cock-on-open.
Or striker-fired tilting barrel vs hammer-fired swinging link, etc.

But what is there to gain in saying something else rather than what you just said?

>not cartridge / non cartridge

>I am supremely educated
>therefore there is no reason for other people to be

I'm not the dude you replied to, but I don't understand either.

These terms already exist. Their definitions are easily looked up too. What, exactly, does this "taxonomy" project provide which does not already exist?

just because information exists doesn't mean it's easily accessible in one place with cross-referencing

what will your taxonomy project offer that, say, Jane's or wikipedia does not?

I'm not trying to be rude or rain on your parade so sorry if I'm coming across that way; I'm just honestly confused as to what the point of it is so I'm trying to understand the how-and-why.

I'm not OP, just what he's proposing sounds mildly interesting

ARES, firearms research and development is a company that is dedicating researches to this very task.

Look them up and send an email to their support saying you want to work on the project.
They will pay you some amount of money for your research and you'd be working to accomplish this goal.

Attached: Borchardt family tree.jpg (4500x3000, 492K)

Maybe he's doing it for fun

That's totally valid. If that's OP's motivation the he can simply say so.

I'm just curious as to what exactly this will offer that existing sources do not.

>not firearm / non-firearm
>not weapon / non-weapon
>not tool / non-tool
>not object / non-object
>not real / non-real

It probably offers you fuck all, but it could offer OP unique insight into how firearms developed.
Hunter S Thompson typed out The Great Gatsby word for word on an old typewriter. He developed a greater appreciation for the way the book was written, even though all he really ended up with was a copy of The Great Gatsby.

>>I want to know what gun terms mean
Dictionary, wikipedia, google

>>I want someone to explain how guns work
Forgotten Weapons

>>I want information about how specific guns are put together and how they work
Check out pic related. There is a whole series of these books, each one focused on a broad type of guns. There's one on revolvers, one on shotguns, one on bolt-action rifles, and so on. They show the complete mechanical workings of many guns.

Attached: 913nA8Qjy7L.jpg (1976x2560, 564K)