Here Is the Soviet Union's Secret Space Cannon
4 Dec 2015 14:56:32 UTC
Topic 198333
(moderation:
Lisa Pathfinder might be Cool But ......
It doesn't have a cannon and interceptor missiles
like this Soviet spacecraft : )
Here Is the Soviet Union's Secret Space Cannon
)
Is that the one that saves Earth when the machines come alive and start killing us all?
David
Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.
LOL ! I think so ....
)
LOL ! I think so ....
I wonder how it is shock
)
I wonder how it is shock mounted and how the compensate for recoil. You know, "For every action there is ....". After 3 rounds out the craft could be heading towards ....
RE: I wonder how it is
)
Exactly. Can't cheat on that one. So it's use would depend upon the mass of what it was attached to, whether that craft could adjust for any induced delta_vee etc. I reckon you'd go with rocket propelled munitions.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: I reckon you'd go with
)
The recoilless rifle is an old trick to get around the need for a heavy carriage with recoil absorption provisions. The basic trick is to balance the momentum transfer required to get the projectile moving forward by jetting hot gas backward. The launching device (or person) need only absorb the delta between the two.
Yes, rockets would serve, also. Both pose mounting challenges in this application, as you've got to manage the rearward escaping gas without ruining your space station. Possibly the Soviets thought this through, and decided they would rather let the station manage the orbital disturbance by subsequently burning some of the station keeping fuel rather than working through the escaped jet disturbance/destruction.
Or possibly the whole thing was a case of malicious compliance, with the ordnance guys delivering what some party hack said was required, knowing it to be useless.
Later than this thing, Soviet--later Russian--crew apparently had access to a TP-82 pistol, just in case their capsule came down in a place where they needed to subdue local wildlife or other opposition
TP-82 details
RE: RE: I reckon you'd
)
That "survival solution" reminds me of a piece the US Air Force used for pilots. No 38 special for their guys but a nice 22 hornet over a 410 gauge. The stock was a "coat hanger" frame. We the Navy/Marine side got to fam fire it. After the allocated number of shots there was a call to fire off the remaining ammunition. Nobody stepped forward. The piece was too light, especially for the 410 load. Logistically it was a pain. Not one type of ammo but two. One guy broke his collar bone because he failed to "keep the stock tight against your shoulder".
[EDIT] The 106 recoilless might provide a solution, but even its rear compensating pressure bleed off might not completely neutralize the forward component. Also it would be a bit of an overkill not to mention a logisticcal nightmare.
Yesterday, I went to see the
)
Yesterday, I went to see the new Star Wars movie. Then I came home and watched Star Trek: Into Darkness on TV. In one or the other of them, I was a bit nonplussed to see someone firing a rifle-style energy weapon and having the barrel rise about 30 degrees after each shot like a projectile weapon (a gun as we currently know it). I would not expect a pure energy weapon to recoil. I thought this was either poor acting or poor directing.
David
Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.
RE: Yesterday, I went to
)
Star Trek weapons seem to be getting 'wimpier' and more politically correct with each passing decade. Back in the 60's - if you got hit by a handheld phaser,
you were most likely completely vaporized ! The latest ones seem to have approximately the same power as a .22LR round .
The 'Norelco Shaver' type phasers carried by the Next Generation crew were still pretty powerful but - only if they cranked them up to Level 15 or so )
I did read somewhere that the handheld phasers from the 1960's would have to have some sort of miniaturized 'fusion reactor' built in to be 'That' powerful : )
Bill
RE: RE: Yesterday, I went
)
Next Generations's phasers reminded me more of a "dustbuster" then a weapon. Claeanup on isle 3...
RE: Next Generations's
)
Lol ! agreed )
BTW: Rob, I had one of those Air Force survival guns years ago ! Mine had a .22LR barrel on top and .410 shotgun underneath. It was made by Springfield arms.
Wish I still had it.
Bill
PS: Way to go Space X !