Remind me again why we can't have bullets where the entire bullet is shot?>make the entire bullet jacket the same length as the case+projectile>pour led into the tip>fill with gunpowder>cap with a priming compoundIt would be like rocket ball ammunitions of the past, but more powerful
>>64505801>why we can't have bullets where the entire bullet is shotYou need to kill yourself
>>64505801We had caseless before smokeless powder. Turns out metallic cases are good for keeping ammunition fireable and working in automatic actions.
>>64505801because its not conducive of a modern infantry weaponyou wouldn't just be firing the bullet, but the whole weight of the case tooand if you make it lighter, then you're just killing the projectiles momentum or some other tradeoff additionally, reliability is horribleits always going to deposit fouling where you -really- don't want there to be any, and its not going to be easy to just clean out either
>>64505801>Dardick style mag fed revolver>Caseless/rocket ball ammunitionImagine
>>64505825It would work just fine in a revolver
>>645058019mm AUPO, VAG-73, and Russian 40mm grenades are all examples of modern internal caseless rounds. As with all caseless ammo, the only real design challenge is obturation (sealing the space between the barrel extension and the boltface), which isn't too difficult. Other than that, by far the biggest barrier to their adoption is institutional inertia. A government must buy them for the technology to become mainstream, and governments don't give a flying shit about small arms.>>64505812Not really.>>64505825Internal propellant caseless ammunition is better for large-diameter handgun and SMG rounds. >you wouldn't just be firing the bullet, but the whole weight of the case tooWhich is an advantage, since the weight of the "case" goes towards increasing the sectional density of your projectile instead of being uselessly ejected out the side.>additionally, reliability is horribleCaseless ammunition negates the need for an ejection cycle, eliminating the risk of failures to eject.>its always going to deposit fouling where you -really- don't want there to be any, and its not going to be easy to just clean out eitherThat's true, but may easily be fixed with reduced fouling propellants and weapon design. Fouling isn't a big deal to begin with.
>>64505866It's very possible with handgun ammunition. The old rocket ball used 6 grains of black powder, which was very weak. However 6 grains of smokeless is enough for a modern pistol round like 9mm.One complication is figuring out how to be able to check clear and remove duds when the gun isn't designed to eject. That's not insurmountable but it is something that needs attention.
>>64505834imagerelated>>64505866you make a good point on it being good as an PDW, but reliability is still an issue on account of foulingthe amount of gas deposits that are going to be blasted into every little nook & cranny kills the idea, literally the same pressures as the bullet being shot are injecting themselves though the breech face its just the G11 problem all over againthe only way to attempt to fix the idea would probably be electric ignition (as much as i hate that meme), yet sealing the breech is still going to be a pain in the assmaybe a tilting / sliding bolt could do, but theres still going to have to be some form of obturation done
>>64505901>a cap and ball revolver where you don't need to manually pour gunpowder down the cylinders
>>64505905oh ye of little faith, take your cigarette paper & make do
>>64505866you will always need some form of ejection cycle, otherwise you're in a state where to make the weapon "safe" you have to discharge it. another anon noted duds etc.caseless weapons still have ejection ports for these reasons. Is this a chatGPT response?
>>64505890The Benelli CB-M2 used a small hook, like an inverted extractor, that indexed on a groove on the inside of the cartridge. >>64505901Internal propellant caseless is different. The cartridge is much stronger, so you can use a conventional action. You would only have to seal the space between the bolt face and the barrel extension with a gasket, which is exactly what the Benelli CB-M2 did, along with a sideways firing pin that's part of the receiver. Higher pressure rounds might necessitate something like a threaded bolt. Also, the G11 only seriously leaked gas very early in the pressure curve, before it could develop enough pressure to spread the two-part chamber apart. It wouldn't be an issue if the G11 weren't a completely sealed system, which is the only reason the gases could accumulate.
>>64505901>electric ignitionI hate that too, but it could be used here. If the induction principle was used to heat a tiny bit of metal at the back of the cartridge then there would be no gaps that could admit fouling, no contacts to short-circuit, etc, though I suspect a gun like that would have significant lock time.
>>64505936Forgot pic>>64505929Manual ejection and inspection doesn't have to be part of the firing cycle.
>>64505801they have free joints inside?
>>64505958thanks for the pic, i didn't find anything on a glancesimilar to that, i could actually see the gasket being right behind the cartridge on the breech face, and every cycle a cartridge just shoves it out of the way & leaves another in turn
>>64505801it's aerodynamically inefficient, you want to have an ogive bullet with boat tailcaseless rounds work but they suck in some aspects
>>64505801That's exactly how I've been thinking they should do it, except ditch the primer and use piezoelectricity
>>64505801Powder going off inside the bullet-case is going to put a lot of outward pressure on the case walls expanding it and pushing it into the rifling, this is likely to ripoff the case walls and slow the bullet or even wedge it into the barrelby setting off the powder behind the bullet instead of inside it you make sure that all the pressure is pushing the bullet in the right direction and is unlikely to damage the bullet
>>64505978Could be a fun way of sealing the rear of the cartridge against the elements, but I don't think it would be strong enough for a good gas seal unfortunately. Also, I don't think the piece would stick to the breechface like that, or at least not consistently. The G11's plastic endcap and spent primer left the gun through the barrel.
>>64505866>Not really.Yes, really.>Which is an advantage, since the weight of the "case" goes towards increasing the sectional density of your projectile instead of being uselessly ejected out the side.Except not, becuase that shit's gonna rattle around and throw your projectile off course.>Caseless ammunition negates the need for an ejection cycle, eliminating the risk of failures to eject.And instead it rapidly shits up and overheats your chamber.>That's true, but may easily be fixed with reduced fouling propellants and weapon design. Fouling isn't a big deal to begin with.If it#s so easy and fouling isn't such a big deal anyway, why aren't you inventing a weapon doing this right now? If it was such a great revolution in design with so little drawbacks, you'd be making millions.
>>64506104>becuase that shit's gonna rattle around and throw your projectile off course.It's one solid piece. There isn't a lot of data about the ballistics of nose-heavy projectiles, but I don't think it would behave differently.>And instead it rapidly shits up and overheats your chamber.Overheating isn't as big of a concern for pistol and SMG ammunition. You seem to think we're still in the black powder area, but modern guns can easily shoot tens of thousands of rounds or more before requiring cleaning. Even fouling the gun twice as much would make it need cleaning every ~5,000 rounds or so at worst. It's irrelevant.>that shit at the endGo get a GED.
