It CAN be done

Vern

Vern

Morethan1waytoskinacat
I have thought and said for years though contradicted by many ..... That
We should be able to build a rail gun that does not need to recoil.

I watched a show tonight where they were having a boomer shoot.
One of the rifles was set up on a custom made tripod.
The tripod was similar to one that surveyors would use, with a couple of diff.
It had a foot print that was larger but keep in mind it only has 3 points touching the ground.
It was made from stainless steel the front rest portion was solid with no bag and had an anti-cant device and the windage and elevation were on the rear part of the rest and the rifle was strapped down to it.
They were using a Nightforce scope.
While interviewing the owner he stated that when fired there was no movement of the gun and you could see the target strike/miss.
He was shooting a rather large 30 cal but I didnt catch what it was.
The rifle was a wood/lam stocked bolt action. Didnt catch the action or stock maker.

Based on this I reassert that we should be able to build an rail gun without having recoil. Seems like my challenge for my first rail gun.
 
Well OK...... I too have bolted guns down and fired them while looking through the scope. I even have a big vise on a rolling 500lb table with locking feet.

But how does this apply to rail guns?

al
 
Vern said:
We should be able to build a rail gun that does not need to recoil.
Click to expand...

You could be on to something. Sliding/rolling contact is not conducive to perfectly repeatable motion. Absorbing the recoil in flexing of posts between the rifle and the base (which the tripod that you described may be doing) has potential advantages. You could also configure the posts to control muzzle motion and possibly achieve tuning. Including some damping to limit the vibration to one back and forth cycle would be good. I say go for it!

Cheers,
Keith
 
I am certainly not opposed to new ideas, but the real truth is in results.

Right now, I can take my Rail Gun, and if the tune is on, put 10 shots in about a .150 group, without ever looking through the scope. Now, if this system can do that, and fall within the guidelines of the IBS and NBRSA, build it, and try it. It's that simple.

The evolution of the modern "return to batterry" platform is no accident. It has reached it's current design because of one reason, it works.
 
jackie schmidt said:
I am certainly not opposed to new ideas, but the real truth is in results.

Right now, I can take my Rail Gun, and if the tune is on, put 10 shots in about a .150 group, without ever looking through the scope. Now, if this system can do that, and fall within the guidelines of the IBS and NBRSA, build it, and try it. It's that simple.

The evolution of the modern "return to batterry" platform is no accident. It has reached it's current design because of one reason, it works.
Click to expand...

Jackie,
I respect your experience. Heck, I have never even seen a rail gun in person. But let's think about what might take to move rail gun performance to the next level. Doing a little trigonometry, 0.001" tolerance in the vertical position of either the front or rear supports (assumed 24" apart) calculates to 0.150" of dispersion at 100 yards. (By coincidence the number came out exactly the same as your group size.) Your rail must be returning much better than this to allow for the other sources of dispersion. Wind, temperature, humidity, etc., are challenging factors to control, but the recoil system of a rail gun is a mechanical thing that we can easily control. Even a 0.0001" speck of dust under the contact point in a sliding/rolling system would throw a shot 0.015." If there was a way to eliminate this potential error, couldn't it be worth pursuing? 0.0135" instead of 0.150?

Cheers,
Keith
 
Nothing new.....The goverment has spent millions (maybe billions) on weapon systems. Crane NSWC small arms and special weapons department is reguarded as one of the best in the world. I really like to talk to the engineers there while they are testing. According to them, using the same barrel/action/trigger in different setups, to include absolutly fixed non-recoil platforms, a weapon that recoils fairly consistantly always outshoots those that are fixed. They kind of refer to it like a kid.....it's better to control it than to let it control itself (recoil).

There was a interesting thread on the 1000yd forum some time ago and this very thing was somewhat discussed and the best accuracy in a heavy gun was found to be somewhere in the range of 45-60 lbs (if I remember right). Once they reached in the area of 80 lbs on up....accuracy suffered. Hope some of them chime in.

One thing for sure, I sure would hate to lug around something as heavy as it would have to be to stop recoil.

Hovis
 
Had a friend decided to lock his 1200 yard gun in a solid rest to test ultimate accuracy. The barrel whapped the scope bell & the stock channel that had maybe ¼" clearance.

Be prepared for the recoil you inhibit overall to act where maybe you don't want it to.
 
HovisKM said:
There was a interesting thread on the 1000yd forum some time ago and this very thing was somewhat discussed and the best accuracy in a heavy gun was found to be somewhere in the range of 45-60 lbs (if I remember right). Once they reached in the area of 80 lbs on up....accuracy suffered. Hope some of them chime in.Hovis
Click to expand...

Uh, I don't remember the tread, nor do I agree. I've known of too many heavy (150-pound) rifles that shot well at 1K. The Cass brothers each had a 6mm/06 that weighted about 150 pounds. For a 10-shot group, they'd shoot it 5 times, push it all the way back forward, and shoot 5 more. They won a lot. Then there was Charles Bailey's 100+ pound "Blue Gun," which he shot when he won Shooter of the Year.

Etc.

They do recoil, just not as much.
 
Best thing I can tell you is look on the outdoor channel for the shooting shows and look for the one showing boomer shoot in the description.
The interview and gun is toward the last 1/4 of the show. Then you can see for yourself.

They say the original stealth fighter was not suppose to be able to fly either but it seems to have done a pretty good job at the time.
 
If you were ever in the Army back in the 60's, maybe 70's you can remember the "106 Recoiless Rifle". They would hang it from a rope cradle, and fire it. It would barley move.

I may be missing the point here. Are we talking about a Rifle that exibits no recoil, or one that, even though it does have recoil, features a true return to battery capability, such as a typical Rail Gun?
 
I think that what we're all thinking about is accuracy whereas Vern is talking about something called a "boomer shoot"........

Vern, the difference here is that the gun in the show wouldn't place LAST in a BR competition and all the guys here are thinking in terms of competitive accuracy.

hth

al
 
Al did you watch the show?
Because you are missing my point and that is not what I am saying.

Jackie the rifle would recoil except it is restrained in such a way as it can not, ie weight and straps.
The owner they were interviewing stated as I remember that at 600 yards when pulling the trigger and the gun firing that the cross hairs did not move.

So yes Al I am speaking about accuracy that is using our type of guns and a different attitude in trying to figure something new.

I know a lot of the prarie dog shooters talk about how they use the .20 so they can watch the dog blow up with little recoil.

I also know you can put a gun into a lead sled and tie everything down and the gun (while not accurate to start with) doesnt move much but will split the stock eventually


In short what I am saying is that using our barrels, actions and so forth it is possible to create an unlimited gun that could eliminate all the need for the return to battery and all of the other costs and issues that go with it.
Innovative thinking like Shelley and his tinkertoy was before his passing.

I dont mean to offend anyone just trying to loosen up the old gears and maybe think in a new direction.
 
I still think a unlimited built as a blow-back would be interesting. About a 20-pound breach block for a 6-PPC? Actually, 20 pounds might be good for a .30BR. The breach assembly would be the only thing that moves . . .
 
Vern said:
...
In short what I am saying is that using our barrels, actions and so forth it is possible to create an unlimited gun that could eliminate all the need for the return to battery and all of the other costs and issues that go with it.
Innovative thinking like Shelley and his tinkertoy was before his passing.

I dont mean to offend anyone just trying to loosen up the old gears and maybe think in a new direction.
Click to expand...

Vern,
A design that might work would be to replace the sliding bearings with vertical spring steel plates around 1/16" thick by 2" wide by 8" tall. The size of the plates could be adjusted to get the desired recoil motion. These would be firmly clamped into the base at the bottom and the rifle at the top at three locations similar to current rails. When the rifle recoils, the plates bend backward, then return to their original positions. Damping should be added to keep the rifle from vibrating too long. Ideally it should be critically damped, that is, return to its original position without overshooting. Graphite pistons in glass cylinders make nice dampers and are commercially available. By angling the front plates forward and/or the back plate backward, the muzzle would rise as the rifle recoils. The angles could be adjusted to tune the muzzle rise.

Cheers,
Keith
 
mks said:
Vern,
A design that might work would be to replace the sliding bearings with vertical spring steel plates around 1/16" thick by 2" wide by 8" tall. The size of the plates could be adjusted to get the desired recoil motion. These would be firmly clamped into the base at the bottom and the rifle at the top at three locations similar to current rails. When the rifle recoils, the plates bend backward, then return to their original positions. Damping should be added to keep the rifle from vibrating too long. Ideally it should be critically damped, that is, return to its original position without overshooting. Graphite pistons in glass cylinders make nice dampers and are commercially available. By angling the front plates forward and/or the back plate backward, the muzzle would rise as the rifle recoils. The angles could be adjusted to tune the muzzle rise.

Cheers,
Keith
Click to expand...

this is essentially what Harold Vaughn did in Rifle Accuracy Facts.

interesting read

al
 
alinwa said:
this is essentially what Harold Vaughn did in Rifle Accuracy Facts.

interesting read

al
Click to expand...

Yes, the same idea. The rail gun may be a better application for his gizmo, since you have more room to allow more motion of the rifle, which makes tunable muzzle rise and tunable damping easier to implement. And the heavy base on the rail gun would provide a more solid base to control the motion.

Keith
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top