Firearms of note and ridicule

[rmgill]

Here's a general Firearms thread for objects of note.

 

Seen on the High Road.org:

 

 

Visiting here to let folks know about our latest

big wildcat cartridge.First it was developed by Rob,John

and I over on AR big bore forum.It is a long brass case

made from bmg brass that we put a 12ga size rim on.Rob and

John used a Borchardt falling block action and I used a

Savage 210 bolt action shotgun that I put heavy barrel and

and stock on..In testing I got a 730 gr Dixie hard lead slug

out at 2700 fps.Got a 3/4 oz barnes sabot out at 3900.

Here is picture of our case next to a plastic 12ga shell,

which can also be fired in our chambers.Ed.

[Typhoid Maxx]

...sometimes a cigar is a cigar...and sometimes, some guys are making up for something...and by "something", I mean either a small penis or impotency.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat

 

Chauchat = possibly the worst industrial production...not only of machine gun specifically, or even fire arms in general...thing that I could possibly think off.

 

Legendary even today in how utterly awful it was, which is the only impressive thing about...seeing as its a WWI "weapon" though I use the term loosely.

[shep854]

OK, somebody's gotta do it, so here goes...

.

.

.

.

Glock.

 

Edited September 26, 2011 by shep854

[mnm]

I offer the Puckle Gun. Square bullets for the Turk and all (maybe it's best feature)

 

 

Also the same google image search provided this pearl:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-barreled_cannon

 

 

Concept

In 1862 John Gilleland, dentist, builder and mechanic, designed the only known double-barreled cannon in existence. It was cast in Athens, Georgia, for a cost of $350. The two barrels have a divergence of 3 degrees, and the cannon was designed to shoot simultaneously two cannon balls connected with a chain to "mow the enemy down like scythe cuts wheat". Shooting cannon balls connected with a chain was commonly done in naval warfare, but these chain-shots were fired from a single barrel and were designed to cut down the enemy ship's masts and rigging.

 

Execution

Gilleland's invention was a failure. On 22 April 1862, the cannon was tested for the first time. The cannon was aimed at a target of two upright poles, but uneven detonation of the powder and casting imperfections in the barrels gave the connected balls a spinning movement in an off-center direction, destroying a cornfield and damaging some trees before the chain broke and one ball damaged a chimney and the other one killed a cow. It was reported that "the observers scattered as though the entire Yankee Army had been turned loose in that vicinity".

[Doug Kibbey]

OK, somebody's gotta do it, so here goes...

.

.

.

.

Glock.

 

 

 

Good man!

 

 

My nominee is anything designed by David Dardick, and more precisely, the "tround" guns.

 

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/10/21/versatile-gun/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardick_tround

Edited September 26, 2011 by Doug Kibbey

[shep854]

The Webley-Fosbery Self-Cocking Automatic Revolver is a charming example of British firearms nuttiness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webley-Fosbery_Automatic_Revolver

----

Nambu Type 94, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambu_Type_94_pistol

Edited September 26, 2011 by shep854

[X-Files]

The Webley-Fosbery Self-Cocking Automatic Revolver is a charming example of British firearms nuttiness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webley-Fosbery_Automatic_Revolver

----

 

How dare you insult BP's hero!

 

 

Chauchat = possibly the worst industrial production...not only of machine gun specifically, or even fire arms in general...thing that I could possibly think off.

 

 

Actually, modern day range tests w/ decent 8mm ammo point to possible industrial sabotage - those with properly reamed barrel chambers run well.

The .30-06 ones ... meh.

 

Source, please - http://www.booktrail.com/Guns_MilitMach/HonourBound.aspg]

 

I'll give you a suck ass weapon

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M85_machine_gun

Edited September 26, 2011 by X-Files

[Doug Kibbey]

 

 

I'll give you a suck ass weapon

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M85_machine_gun

 

 

Bad as it was, the M73/219 was worse.

[Mike Steele]

...

 

http://en.wikipedia....M85_machine_gun

 

 

Bad as it was, the M73/219 was worse.

 

Oh ye of little faith. Sad that you had a bad experience of The weapons of Uncle Sam at your end. I must have been the only GI that had a working M85 and a working M73. Strange

 

Agree on the 219

[Archie Pellagio]

Also the same google image search provided this pearl:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-barreled_cannon

 

 

 

 

 

Bah! Wussies!

 

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8qDP032vyY4/SH1imOXykDI/AAAAAAAAA5Q/Q1xYBofcJeM/s400/Double+Barrel+Cannon.JPG

Edited September 27, 2011 by Luke Y

[Colin]

The Webley-Fosbery Self-Cocking Automatic Revolver is a charming example of British firearms nuttiness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webley-Fosbery_Automatic_Revolver

----

Nambu Type 94, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambu_Type_94_pistol

Actually a very good weapon for other than field use.

[thekirk]

Good man!

 

 

My nominee is anything designed by David Dardick, and more precisely, the "tround" guns.

 

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/10/21/versatile-gun/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardick_tround

 

I'd have to disagree with you. The basic "tround" concept is workable, but it's a case where the materials technology just hasn't caught up with the basic design. Couple the Tround ammunition handling and rotary chamber with a caseless cartridge, and the helical magazine concept pioneered by Calico, and you might have a decent stab at an alternative to the HK G11. I have heard rumors that the initial design by HK for the G11 was highly derivative of this idea, and the only reason they went with the clockwork nightmare they eventually settled on was that the Dardick patents were held by a large US defense company that wanted way too much money for them. That, and the same thing that drove the downfall of the Wankel engines--Sealing the two sides of the "breech".

 

Problem is, Dardick was way ahead of his time, and the materials technology and chemistry just isn't there to enable his ideas to work. Yet. Give it another twenty years, and we may see some of his ideas in another format.

[Chris Werb]

Bah! Wussies!

 

http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/12/2/5c999daf-5be2-4124-821f-1f65bf3c9827.Full.jpg

 

I fear someone in that design bureau has been playing too much Command & Conquer.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Chris Werb

[bojan]

Experimental 3pdr model 1722:

 

Karelin's steam gun:

 

Early 1800's twin gun:

 

Schuvalov's "secret" howitzer:

[Archie Pellagio]

What is the possible advantage of square bullets and shells?

[Doug Kibbey]

I'd have to disagree with you. The basic "tround" concept is workable, but it's a case where the materials technology just hasn't caught up with the basic design. Couple the Tround ammunition handling and rotary chamber with a caseless cartridge, and the helical magazine concept pioneered by Calico, and you might have a decent stab at an alternative to the HK G11. I have heard rumors that the initial design by HK for the G11 was highly derivative of this idea, and the only reason they went with the clockwork nightmare they eventually settled on was that the Dardick patents were held by a large US defense company that wanted way too much money for them. That, and the same thing that drove the downfall of the Wankel engines--Sealing the two sides of the "breech".

 

Problem is, Dardick was way ahead of his time, and the materials technology and chemistry just isn't there to enable his ideas to work. Yet. Give it another twenty years, and we may see some of his ideas in another format.

 

 

Innovation is something that is either capitalized on by the developer, or taken to new heights by others at a later time. Later would be, well....now. It's been 50 years. There is nothing inherently virtuous about being "unique" in concept...there are many unique failures. I have unique plans for a square wheel and a ten-sided stop sign (plus I plan to charge about double existing prices), but they don't seem to be going anywhere. Dardick's design was an abject failure for numerous reasons and demand was zero. That = failure. If you have a personal admiration for Dardick's designs, that's on you. I don't see the visionary figure there.

[Marek Tucan]

What is the possible advantage of square bullets and shells?

 

Easier storage without all the empty space around?

[DougRichards]

Gyrojet

 

 

or perhaps the Kampfpistole - the first and only anti-tank pistol

[Richard Lindquist]

What is the possible advantage of square bullets and shells?

 

The idea was to have round bore barrels shooting round bullets when the weapon was used against Christian armies (making clean wounds) while using square bore barrels shooting square bullets when used against "Turks" (non-Christian) armies (making nastier wounds).

[Richard Lindquist]

Gyrojet

 

 

or perhaps the Kampfpistole - the first and only anti-tank pistol

 

The basic design of the Kampfpistole was the Leuchtpistole which was used to fire colored signal cartridges as well as a "whistling" cartridge for use as a gas alarm. Later, the bore was rifled and a sight provided to allow firing of a HE grenade and two smoke grenades. The Sturmpistole was a Kampfpistole with a folding stock and liner to permit firing a hollow charge grenade.

 

After entering Russia and meeting up with Russian armor, the Germans were trying to find AT rounds for every weapon in their inventory.

[Richard Lindquist]

Innovation is something that is either capitalized on by the developer, or taken to new heights by others at a later time. Later would be, well....now. It's been 50 years. There is nothing inherently virtuous about being "unique" in concept...there are many unique failures. I have unique plans for a square wheel and a ten-sided stop sign (plus I plan to charge about double existing prices), but they don't seem to be going anywhere. Dardick's design was an abject failure for numerous reasons and demand was zero. That = failure. If you have a personal admiration for Dardick's designs, that's on you. I don't see the visionary figure there.

 

Back in the second grade, I developed a design for a series of vehicles which ran on compressed air. As they rolled down the road being powered by compressed air, there was a crank on the axle which pumped the tanks full again. Algore would have loved it. It was as green as you could get.

[Chris Werb]

Back in the second grade, I developed a design for a series of vehicles which ran on compressed air. As they rolled down the road being powered by compressed air, there was a crank on the axle which pumped the tanks full again. Algore would have loved it. It was as green as you could get.

 

Isn't that a perpetual motion machine? I hope you patented it! :- )

[medicjim86]

Isn't that a perpetual motion machine? I hope you patented it! :- )

 

Maybe not... he did say "rolled DOWN the road"...he did not elaborate on what happened when the road went UP

[Steven P Allen]

Also the same google image search provided this pearl:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-barreled_cannon

 

 

Maybe a failure as intended, but I'd love to have it for canister rounds. "Battery! Two rounds, double canister. Load!"

[mnm]

Gyrojet

 

Say again?

 

And as for clusterbombs there is this.

Edited September 27, 2011 by mnm