Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aseaheru]

Another problem with caseless rounds is that the propellant comes into direct contact with the weapon, causing overheating when it fires, particularly for automatic weapons.

Yep, but this is the game with super alloy, and thats what the guns are made of (along with ceramic, which may actually be what the breach is made of...)

[TheBronzePickle]

Gyrojets and other rocket-propelled or recoilless projectiles could possibly be considered 'caseless', in that the casing is usually fused to the projectile.

As for more 'conventional' caseless weapons, I'd be willing to bet we have the technology now to make one that worked despite a lot of the flaws. It's usually just a matter of cost.

[Adragis]

No, I mean, caseless SHOT?
As in, pellets?
Isn't that impossible?

[TheBronzePickle]

No. It's called a blunderbuss.

More seriously, that would actually be way easier than bullets. All you need to do is set the pellets in wax and glue it to a solid propellant charge.

As long as it didn't destroy itself in a pump- or lever-action, it would probably work about the same as normal. If you have a break-action, it would be perfect.

[gimlet]

Why is it "impossible"?  Just as a quick first thought, why couldn't they be held  together magnetically?   Or with a light adhesive substance that would break apart from the heat/shock of firing?

ED:  There's no *major* advantage to it though, because the shotgun shot casing/wadding is fired out the barrel like the projectile(s), so as long as it's light and low volume, who cares.  Plus, in current caseless ammuntion, the projectile is already embedded in the propellant, seems relatively simple to do it for multiple projectiles/something that will split into multiple projectiles...

[Adragis]

Oh whoop
forgot alternatives hr

[n9103]

Why is it "impossible"?  Just as a quick first thought, why couldn't they be held  together magnetically?   Or with a light adhesive substance that would break apart from the heat/shock of firing?

Magnetically, ok... Not only would the ammo be quite a bit more expensive, but now you have a nightmare of filings to deal with.
Other than a sabot-style round, I don't see how the adhesive idea would be feasible for caseless ammo, since if they fall apart upon detonation, you're likely to have pellets remain in the barrel, and that's a nightmare for rapid firing. Rapid firing is one of the intended advantages of caseless, so there goes that.

No. It's called a blunderbuss.
More seriously, that would actually be way easier than bullets. All you need to do is set the pellets in wax and glue it to a solid propellant charge.

This is basically a wax slug, which doesn't behave at all like shot, negating the reason for asking the question in the first place.

[gimlet]

Cost?  Who cares about cost?  It's not like a lot of the other Rivtech guns appear to have budget in mind.  Unless you have a cheap source of refined plutonium...

[MasterFancyPants]

You know these theories could be tested IRL. Just get some shells and fill them with wax, magnets, etc. Your shotgun will be fine, through maybe in need of cleaning.

[n9103]

You know these theories could be tested IRL. Just get some shells and fill them with wax, magnets, etc. Your shotgun will be fine, through maybe in need of cleaning.

They have been. Extensively.
Not hard to turn up many videos on it.

[MasterFancyPants]

"Other than a sabot-style round, I don't see how the adhesive idea would be feasible for caseless ammo, since if they fall apart upon detonation, you're likely to have pellets remain in the barrel, and that's a nightmare for rapid firing. Rapid firing is one of the intended advantages of caseless, so there goes that." (On phone, sorry)
Unlikely that anything would stay in the barrel useless it's coming off the following round, in which case It wouldn't matter. When that round fired it would push any loose pellets out. The largest problem I see with adhesive/wax is that it may stick to the inside of the barrel, then make it's way into the firing mechanisms.

[n9103]

If the shot were small enough, I'd agree that consecutive shots would keep the barrel relatively clear, but anything that is larger than say, 1/3 the diameter, would present a severe risk of damage if one were left behind. Again, unlikely as you said, but much more possible than other shot rounds that have a cup or other barrel-sealing backing.

[Darkmere]

You'd still use compressed wadding to clear the barrel on firing. It's integral to the shell to keep the pressurized gas contained enough to push the shot out of the barrel.

[i2amroy]

It's integral to the shell to keep the pressurized gas contained enough to push the shot out of the barrel.

This right here is the main reason that we use sabots instead of just loose pellets. If you don't have a proper seal (like you wouldn't with loose pellets, or magnetic pellets, or something similar) then you are going to take huge range and speed (and therefore damage) hits.

[n9103]

My whole point has been that actual caseless ammo doesn't use wads or shotcups.
Suppose it's more of a technical issue than anything. Considering the thread, I see nothing unusual about that.