posted March 06, 2000 01:43 AM            

I don't know what you're referring to by "propelled cannon" but it isn't these rockets.

------------------
"The knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them."

posted March 06, 2000 05:58 PM            

It doesn't matter how long or short the combustion takes place, or if it takes place in the barrel. What matters is where the combustion takes place, inside or outside of the projectile.

posted March 07, 2000 12:23 AM         

It IS POSSIBLE to reproduce the shell on a smaller scale since it only have to stand 50000psi, which is only about 2X the pressure of a .22 LR.

Take a thicker(than a bigbore rifle barrel) steel tube, make a shell and get it cryo'd, you bet it will stand 50000psi. For the detailed part, a small machine shop can handle it more than adequate.

posted March 07, 2000 02:54 AM            

"Typical such materials are high strength resin matrix graphite and glass fiber composites, 6-4 titanium alloy, 17-4 PH precipitation hardening steel or 300 grade maraging steel. The graphite and fiberglass composites are, however, preferred because the resulting motor case will weigh less for the same chamber pressure."

Titanium alloys and graphite composites are NOT common, easily obtained, inexpensive materials to use. Not something the home experimenter can fuck with. Not without a LOT of money. I suppose you could use steel that's been cryoed, but would it still be light enough to fly?

And the .22 comparison is silly. The .22 casing doesn't have to withstand the pressure since it's supported by the gun barrel. The rocket has to not only withstand the pressure, but also the heat of the burning propellant, force of acceleration, and still be light enough to fly.

The acceleration of the rocket may be 20,000 G, but artillery shells do that all the time. Explosive warheads are useable. But with tolerances beyond the average pyro.

Oh, one last thing. This isn't a "propelled cannon" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to be), it's a rocket. Look at the patents title. Enough said.

posted March 07, 2000 06:03 PM         

You are just too used to deter people from doing things you haven't think of or things you don't have knowledge to talk about (painful eh?), that you don't use common sense to really evaluate the possibility to
really do it.

BTW in your precious patend, it said the shell is relatively inexpensive to make.

For the name, if it makes you feel bad or anything just say it, the patend of Glock pistol didn't say it's a "Glock" in the patend neither.

You do believe artilleries have a initial
burst of 10000fps don't you? If an artillary shell can already do that all the time, why invent a cannon rocket that is the same speed, but with less accuracy?

10000~fps=3.3~km/s, and the minimal velocity
for a wave to have detonation property is 1km/s, I WOULD prefer solid metal warheads.

posted March 07, 2000 07:57 PM            

I said "The .22 casing doesn't have to withstand the pressure since it's supported by the gun barrel."

To use your own words "you are more silly to think that anyone will use ".22 case" to stand 20000psi.(what is the chamber
for? barbeque?)" Same thing as I said only twisted. What a fool.

BTW, if you read the whole patent, you might realize that "relatively inexpensive" is being used when comparing the cost to $50,000 ATGMs. If it cost $1,000 per rocket, that is "relatively inexpensive" in military terms, but could YOU afford it? And that's in mass manufactured quantities.

And your right, the Glock Patent doesn't call it a Glock, it calls it an "Automatic Pistol", which is exactly what it is, just like the rocket patent calls it a "High velocity impulse rocket".

As for the warheads, "The payload may be any one of a variety of payloads, such as a kinetic energy penetrator, an explosive warhead, an electronics package, a debilitating gas warhead or a chemical/bacteriological warhead, or in some applications, no warhead at all."

Another example of your word twisting; "You do believe artilleries have a initial
burst of 10000fps don't you?", I said "The acceleration of the rocket may be 20,000 G, but artillery shells do that all the time.".

When you've finished grade school and finally gotten into high school, you may learn that velocity and g-forces are not the same thing.

Why would somone want a rocket instead of a cannon? When's the last time you carried a cannon on your back? DUUUHHHH(slack jaw with drool).

You have this habit of throwing out red herrings to try and distract from your lack of facts. Very annoying. Like a mosquito buzzing about.

Finally, "patend (your spelling)" is correctly spelt as "patent". Please make a note of that.

posted March 08, 2000 05:28 PM         

For the old .22 thing, NBK, I know guns more than you do, which you should already admit.
(You don't even have the "gun room etiquette" to discuss guns with people.)
If I didn't twist my word which is originally
untwisted, yet the untwisted word sounds like
twisted in someones word, guess who is twisting the word, the one who didn't twist the untwisted or the one that declares the untwisted twisted? Shan't the untwisted remain untwisted and the twisted be declared twisted? An untwisted mind is necessary to untwist the twisted. You are twisted now NBK,
putting a rocket like that on you back might leave your website "unattended" forever.
(THHHUUUUUDDDDD, recoil backward, brain smashed)

You are the one who dances around to avoid facts that are not on the pro side of things you mentioned. If I am an annoying mosquito,
then you are the bug bomb whose reek still
haunt after long gone, and I use to be your victim.

Don't feel bad, it's not your patenf after all. Don't distract yourself, O twisted one.

posted March 08, 2000 06:47 PM            

"You are twisted now NBK". Wrong. I've always been twisted, but not when it comes to facts.

"...a rocket like ...., recoil backward,..." Did someone forget the 3rd law, you know "equal but opposite"? Rockets don't have recoil. If you can't get even that simple fact straight, what hope is there for the rest of your "facts"?

"...this shell due to the short range and lack of maneuverability." Again, read the patent. It's not intended as a guided missle.

The rocket travels so fast that wind doesn't have time to affect the flight to any significant degree. As for accuracy, that's a matter of tolerances and reproducability of design.

And short range? Did you miss the mention of orbital insertion? Obviously someone hasn't bothered to read the patent before spouting off at the mouth.

And in yet another example of word twisting you say that "..you'll know that the accleration is directly related to force..". I said "..velocity and g-forces are not the same thing.". Please learn the simple fact that Velocity and Acceleration are two different things.

Both of our statements are correct, but your infering that mine is wrong just because it's different. Look up the definitions (although I already know you won't) of "Velocity", "Acceleration", and "G-force".
Dictionaries are your friend, don't be afraid to use them.

posted March 08, 2000 07:00 PM            

------------------
-Knowledge is power, power leads to corruption, corruption is a crime, crime doesn't pay. So if you know to much you will go broke!!!

http://members.xoom.com/Splynncryth

posted March 09, 2000 02:33 AM         

The shell can be produced without Hi-Tech machine/material. Cryo'ed steel can be used as shell hulls due to enhenced strength.

No explosive initiated warheads are to be carried by this shell. The sudden force provided such acceleration will cause detonation.

Winds affect objects traveling at high speed especially.

The recoil IS opposite to the direction of traveling and gas jet from the shell can knock down the launching person at the rear of its nozzle.(if the 3rd law is EQUAL and OPPOSITE, then the recoil are suppose to be
STRONG and in BACKWARDS.)

posted March 09, 2000 07:16 AM            

------------------
-Knowledge is power, power leads to corruption, corruption is a crime, crime doesn't pay. So if you know to much you will go broke!!!

http://members.xoom.com/Splynncryth