How the fuck do people design guns?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The same way engineers design anything else that's a thousand times more complicated than a gun.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      and that would be?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Various processes, tools and stages. Usually involves a lot of boring meetings initially, depending on who's designing it.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          any links or should I just look it up on youtube?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            As a newbie without experience: read a lot, then start screwing up. Buy books like Hatcher's Notebook and some basic mechanical engineering stuff, read them. Get a lathe and a mill, learn how to use them, find some plans online, start working from there. For any new gun: first figure out what it's supposed to do, that's probably the most important. Then cost, because that will determine how it's going to be made.

            at first I was thinking something with 3d printing but that's less designing something and more giving it a neat case

            3D-printing isn't just FDM, there's a couple dozen processes that are all capable of producing a firearm to varying degrees.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              thanks I'll look for technical manuals maybe I might get a start with those

              >take a bullet
              >design the rest of the fucking gun
              but memes aside that's pretty much it,

              I'm probably going to stick to small cheap cartridges like 22 so I might have more flexibility to try something weird

      • 2 months ago
        stoner

        Dynamics
        Statics
        Machine Design
        Mechanics of materials
        Throw those words into libgen and read those text books for being able to engineer a machine. Also get hands on experiance building guns and machining

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >all that undergrad shit
          The real answer is hiring a contractor overseas to mesh up and run (in the flavor of the month solver, which is always bankrupting your company) whatever a local bubba made in CAD.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        first you come up with a basic mechanism of operation and then you flesh out the details.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        If you think a gun is the most complicated machine I think you might faint if you looked under the hood of your car...

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Watching anime. Specifically genres like hentai.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >idea
        >concept sketch
        >market research
        >business development plan
        >capital investment by management
        >refinement
        >dimensional/shop drawings
        >prototyping, testing
        >refinement
        >finished design
        >process planning/manufacturability review
        >refinement
        >begin mass pro
        That's a very simplified idea of how it goes.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Literally clocks and watches are 1000x more complicated than guns.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You should take a look at a 777 some time.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >make a big, fat, ugly, inefficient proof of concept prototype
        >slowly make more and more prototypes until it goes to the size, cos, and efficiency that you want it

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      any links or should I just look it up on youtube?

      ?t=3017

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        he's really good at explaining things

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Generally in engineering:
      >get problem / task /brief I.e : design automatic gun
      >turn those into design requirements
      > Break up system into subsystems and sub subsystems
      >develop inferface requirements between systems so that they work together and fit
      >for each subsystem, use either a existing design to preform said task and optimise / adjust to meet specs or design a completely new subsystem from fundamentals.
      Engineering heavily relies on the work other people have done in the past, you don’t have to design your own spring or bearing and then calculate its resistance or friction coefficient. Those designs agave already been made with technical specifications freely available. More often then not the same goes for mechanisms

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      what i find amzing is it took them so long to make a breach loading rifle or a magize fed semi automatic guns. I would understand if it was a few decade but it was until hundreds of years they developed bolt action then semi automatic guns eventually making automatic guns. I know they had semi automatic muskuts but still why so long

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        iirc semi-auto requires better powder, so it took leaving Black Powder for non-Gatling Machine Guns. That being said, I completely agree with the breach loader feeling like it came a bit later than it should have.

        >semi-automatic muskuts[sic]
        please elucidate for me? Google gives me the Belton Flintlock which we apparently have no evidence for beyond some correspondence between Franklin, Washington and Belton himself.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Designing a gun isn't something you really just learn to do through a YouTube video or some reading. That's an extremely complex question to answer.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I wanted to try my hand at it but oddly enough finding where to start seems to be harder then I thought

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >I wanted to try my hand at it but oddly enough finding where to start seems to be harder then I thought
        Not an engineer or a gunsmith, but if you watch enough GunYouTubers you'll eventually see this sponsor pop up :
        >Sonoran Desert Institute
        >https://www.sdi.edu/

        I don't know how good they are, but enrolling in studies that teach you gun design might be the best kind of first step you want to take in the gunsmithing / guntech world.
        I don't know if you need to be american to enroll, but it looks legit.
        Good luck

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It was proven many times that designing a gun is not hard, but creating a gun that can be produced efficiently and making machine tools for it, very much is.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      at first I was thinking something with 3d printing but that's less designing something and more giving it a neat case

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        That really depends on what exactly you're doing. You don't have to just "give it a neat case", you can design mechanisms and prototypes. You're not going to contain pressure with a 3D-printed barrel any time soon, but you can certainly make a mold for investment casting a receiver (if you want a stress-bearing receiver). You can also use a 3D printer as a bargain-basement CNC router to cut parts out of aluminum plates or, possibly, even steel.

        There are half a dozen different 3D printed designs that are nice little functional handguns, mostly in .22LR. Songbird single-shot, Washbear revolver, that one with the weird ring-style magazines that the guy never released, a bunch of AR pistols to build around those Ciener kits, and so on.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >take a bullet
    >design the rest of the fucking gun
    but memes aside that's pretty much it,

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Eugene Stoner himself said that "the people who can visualize a system and put it onto the drawing board don't typically come from higher education"

    So, that results in 2 scenarios.

    A) a prodigy is spotted by a manager and fast-tracked into useful positions until the prodigy can exercise the full extent of their skills.

    B) a team of people pool together already accumulated knowledge and remix it into a new package, with maybe a handful of new ideas.

    Take the development of the AR-10/15 andcompare it to the M14.

    While the people at Springfield took 20 years to inbreed the M1 Garand and BAR, Eugene Stoner used his noggin to think of a completely new operating mechanism optimized for recoil control.

    But, since option B is always made up of pre-established institutions, they typically try and squash new talent to avoid being put out of business.

    The end result was the M14 being adopted, proven to be garbage, and Springfield collapsing due to a number of issues which were made worse by the M24 being absolute garbage.

    Meanwhile the downsized variant of the AR-10 meant to test the brand-new 5.56 cartridge got adopted, and stuck around ever since.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Also hot damn I made a lotta typos.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's fine I fuck up typing all the time, that's my problem I can visualize the basic mechanisms but putting them down is hard, I suck at art so trying to make detailed plans is very hard

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Get graph paper and do very basic 2D drawings of a basic operating mechanism.

          Try copying the basic mechanism of the SCAR, as that seems to be the easiest to translate to a super-simple format, and probably why the hacks at FN made the damn thing.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            cool will do, because im going to work with 22 I was also thinking about copying the 10/22 system

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You could learn cad instead. Cad programs usually have a drawing system that takes your 3D parts and turns them i to drawings after.

          With a 3D printer you could print the whole gun as plastic and see how it fits together and if everything moves properly before moving to metal.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            JMB also carved his gun designs out of wood while he was working on them, for similar reasons.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You copy paste design from older gun and modify shit.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You have a cartridge, you need to create a mechanism that will hold the explosion and somehow reject the shell, sending the next cartridge. At the beginning of the 20th century, there were many options for how to do this, currently, there are only ~3 effective ones left

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      what would those be?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Gas-operated action and blowback-operated action. Each of them has options for implementation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(firearms)

        But on the basic level, you need a hammer that will hit the cartridge primer and a bolt that will hold the explosion and then remove a shell.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          wouldn't gas be more efficient as you're just using the explosion of the bullet to cycle the gun?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            not the anon but its more reliable but also more complicated

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              yeah just on intuition it seems like it

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            It definitely is, but at the same time designing a gas tube and dealing with pressures is much more complex and risky, specially on bigger calibers, yet for these is also more rewarding making it usually easier to handle recoil. Blowback on the other hand is very simple to do and more versatile, you just need a bolt that is resistant enough and some springs to absorb the shock movement of it, and if you can develop a dual spring system like some HK guns have, you get closer to the benefits of a gas system, but also having more moving parts means more points of failure. Both systems have their pros and cons indeed.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Play with other peoples' guns, disassemble then, see how they tick.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I've been looking for an app that would help be see all the little parts

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        World of Guns: Disassembly

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    White men are smart

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Genuine questions by a noguns gay:
    1. Why are really old guns still in use? Like the Browning M2, it is fucking 90 years old!
    Our cars look very different to pre WW2, why aren't modern gun designs just way superior? I get that the basic principles haven't changed but surely since we now have computer assited design it should be poasible to improve the M2 by cutting weight in parts with unnecessary strain for example.

    2. Why are african countries not just building their own AKs instead of buying them... I mean just take one apart and reproduce the parts... metal and wood.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Why are really old guns still in use? Like the Browning M2, it is fucking 90 years old!
      Because logistical inertia, and because the things were made to work for over a century. The parts that actually wear are designed to be wear items, easily replacable.
      > surely since we now have computer assited design it should be poasible to improve the M2 by cutting weight in parts with unnecessary strain for example.
      Not really, because computers just help with calculations that used to be done by hand - and those calculations are pretty simple for an M2-shaped box, so they were done back then too. Then there's safety factor and life expectancy, which will add bulk no matter how you calculate them (unless you skimp on them), and the fact you still need to make the thing. Generative design/topology optimisation will make beautiful, strong shapes that are a PITA to produce on conventional machinery and take excessive time on CNC. Meanwhile, you just bolt/rivet/weld four plates together and you have an M2 receiver-shaped box. The US tried replacing the M2 with a lighter model, but the hassle of replacing the M2 isn't worth it: an unproven lighter design will never significantly reduce the combat load of an M2. Why? Because the ammo is so damn heavy. Even if you cut the weight of an M2 in half, nobody cares because it has to be vehicle or stationary mounted anyways, because of that ammo weight. Very little reason to change, very large risks if you change, so no go.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Topology optimization is still useful: it can at least be interpreted to put beads or doublers in the right places to downguage the whole thing and save material.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Why are really old guns still in use? Like the Browning M2, it is fucking 90 years old!
      Because logistical inertia, and because the things were made to work for over a century. The parts that actually wear are designed to be wear items, easily replacable.
      > surely since we now have computer assited design it should be poasible to improve the M2 by cutting weight in parts with unnecessary strain for example.
      Not really, because computers just help with calculations that used to be done by hand - and those calculations are pretty simple for an M2-shaped box, so they were done back then too. Then there's safety factor and life expectancy, which will add bulk no matter how you calculate them (unless you skimp on them), and the fact you still need to make the thing. Generative design/topology optimisation will make beautiful, strong shapes that are a PITA to produce on conventional machinery and take excessive time on CNC. Meanwhile, you just bolt/rivet/weld four plates together and you have an M2 receiver-shaped box. The US tried replacing the M2 with a lighter model, but the hassle of replacing the M2 isn't worth it: an unproven lighter design will never significantly reduce the combat load of an M2. Why? Because the ammo is so damn heavy. Even if you cut the weight of an M2 in half, nobody cares because it has to be vehicle or stationary mounted anyways, because of that ammo weight. Very little reason to change, very large risks if you change, so no go.

      >Why are african countries not just building their own AKs instead of buying them... I mean just take one apart and reproduce the parts... metal and wood.
      Because AK's are not simple to produce. They might appear simple, but they are not. The Soviets found this out the hard way, it took them the better part of a decade to make stamped steel AKs the way they were intended and had to make do with expensive, time-consuming milled AKs in the meantime. So an African country would have to re-engineer the entire stamped steel construction.
      Then there's the forging for the trunnions, which you can skimp on by casting, but on an army scale you start encountering so many defects it's not worth it. You could try billet, but that's ridiculously expensive. Hell, the startup cost of trunnion forgings is too expensive. Then there's precision stamping for the magazines and of course barrel manufacturing. The wood is the easy part, actually.
      So again, very little reason to change (we have cheap AKs, why bother?), very large, expensive risks if you do change, so no go.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Why are really old guns still in use? Like the Browning M2, it is fucking 90 years old!
        Because logistical inertia, and because the things were made to work for over a century. The parts that actually wear are designed to be wear items, easily replacable.
        > surely since we now have computer assited design it should be poasible to improve the M2 by cutting weight in parts with unnecessary strain for example.
        Not really, because computers just help with calculations that used to be done by hand - and those calculations are pretty simple for an M2-shaped box, so they were done back then too. Then there's safety factor and life expectancy, which will add bulk no matter how you calculate them (unless you skimp on them), and the fact you still need to make the thing. Generative design/topology optimisation will make beautiful, strong shapes that are a PITA to produce on conventional machinery and take excessive time on CNC. Meanwhile, you just bolt/rivet/weld four plates together and you have an M2 receiver-shaped box. The US tried replacing the M2 with a lighter model, but the hassle of replacing the M2 isn't worth it: an unproven lighter design will never significantly reduce the combat load of an M2. Why? Because the ammo is so damn heavy. Even if you cut the weight of an M2 in half, nobody cares because it has to be vehicle or stationary mounted anyways, because of that ammo weight. Very little reason to change, very large risks if you change, so no go.

        Thanks anon, very interesting.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >2. Why are african countries not just building their own AKs instead of buying them... I mean just take one apart and reproduce the parts... metal and wood.
      Because Africans are incompetent sub 80IQ individuals. And also because it is economically more efficient to buy something from a well saturated market than trying to make it yourself.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I was going to type something like this but you said it so well.

        [...]
        >Why are african countries not just building their own AKs instead of buying them... I mean just take one apart and reproduce the parts... metal and wood.
        Because AK's are not simple to produce. They might appear simple, but they are not. The Soviets found this out the hard way, it took them the better part of a decade to make stamped steel AKs the way they were intended and had to make do with expensive, time-consuming milled AKs in the meantime. So an African country would have to re-engineer the entire stamped steel construction.
        Then there's the forging for the trunnions, which you can skimp on by casting, but on an army scale you start encountering so many defects it's not worth it. You could try billet, but that's ridiculously expensive. Hell, the startup cost of trunnion forgings is too expensive. Then there's precision stamping for the magazines and of course barrel manufacturing. The wood is the easy part, actually.
        So again, very little reason to change (we have cheap AKs, why bother?), very large, expensive risks if you do change, so no go.

        >Because AK's are not simple to produce
        Seriously, making a gun factory might be "hard" but let's face reality, if they put the effort into doing that, then it would be good training for doing other manufacturing as well. But they're too fucking lazy and stupid and greedy and violent to bother building something and learning how to do it right.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >1. Why are really old guns still in use? Like the Browning M2, it is fucking 90 years old!
      Why? Because they work, they are efficient at their job and usually the potential upgrade is not worth the investment.
      Some inventions humans make are already optimized for. For example :
      >Wouldn't you love to buy this new Chair design. It's a Chair, but twith a new design"
      It's just a fucking chair. How can you really improve on the design of something so simple as a chair?
      Same thing for a door. We can invent wacky door designs, but a door is a door, and the most efficient way to make them is with hinges.
      You can invent a new way to make doors open, but no one is going to adopt it, because we've already found what the most efficient design for it is, and have for almost thousands of years.
      Similarly, guns designed after 1920 are still close enough to today's gun to be effective in their use.
      The typical Shotgun has not changed much over the last 2 centuries.

      >2. Why are african countries not just building their own AKs instead of buying them...
      Efficiency mostly and lackof infrastructure.
      Back in the days of the USSR, they would open AK factories in allied communist countries, eastern block.
      So Eastern Europe had quite a few AK factories, China, North Korea, Vietnam, almost all had their own AK factory, and with slight variations to accomodate for different expectations.

      >I mean just take one apart and reproduce the parts... metal and wood.
      You just said yourself :
      >"metal and wood"
      What isthe metal and where doesit come from?
      It's steel. It's quality metal metal made in steel mills.
      - Africa has very little in the way of producing high quality metals.
      - They don't have the engineers trained and ready to go to work on all the technical problems
      - They don't have the infrastructure, the machine tools, capable workers that can be easily trained
      - What would happen isafter time, money and effort spent a Warlord would take over the factory

      Would never work.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      1. Guns are pretty basic designs in terms of engineering , so the design of basic firearms matured a long time ago. Any further advances come from optimisation and new materials. The gap between a gun from the 50s and a gun from the 2020s is nowhere near as wide when compared to fighters for example. And if the gun is still in shape and there’s still ammo available then why replace it.
      2. Guns are relatively simple to design and manufacture , but they are still require a country to have basic machine parts and manufacturing, dirt poor countries don’t have that and surplus Aks or Ak copies are cheap and available enough to make it not worth trying to manufacture domestically

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >2. Why are african countries not just building their own AKs instead of buying them... I mean just take one apart and reproduce the parts... metal and wood.

      Swear I saw a documentary about an AK manufacturing foundry somewhere like Afghanistan or someplace like that, using pretty gnarly traditional methods. So they probably do exist.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Khyber Pass Pakistan
        >Pakistan has pretty shit gun laws, mainly shotguns, and no 'military' calibres so if you want an AK a pistol or even a traditional SMLE or Martini, you have to smuggle one in or buy a handmade local copy
        Some copies are shit, others are so good theyre almost unable to pick from originals - depends on craftsmanship and price.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Khyber Pass Pakistan
          Yeah that was it, after I posted I remembered it was Pakistan

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Guns are just machines. Once you know the basics of how a gun works, all it takes is some engineering and tinkering and you can make your own fairly simply. It's really not much more complex than a car engine. In fact, car engines are arguably more complex.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    How?
    Study and get engineering qualifications, plus specialised weapon design training, plus practical gunsmithing training and end-user requirements experience.
    Some guys come from related disciplines like aeronautical engineering for the manufacturing design experiences, but they usually also need direct weapons experience to make something that the customer can realistically use.
    Simples

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I was going to do this with a mech degree and a minor in material science, but I got depressed halfway through school and never graduated. Now im a loser

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Any tips? I’m in my second year of mechanical engineering. I want to try and get into the aerospace industry afterwards though

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Neat Master's degree. How useless is it, considering Australia has no small arms industry?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Straya has about 6 major local rifle makers plus heavy weapons makers
        >Wedgetail
        >Southern Cross
        >Warwick
        >Oceania Precision
        >ICE Engineering
        >Small Arms Factory Lithgow (the current ADF manufacturer plus commercial rifles and shotguns)
        >NIOA is building a new rifle factory for the SIG rifles etc it's selling to ADF
        >Rheinmettal is building up to 30mm cannons for IFVs in Maryborough
        >Hanwha is building 155mm SPGs in Geelong
        Plus its also for explosive ordnance design

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >commercial rifles and shotguns
          That's where you guys build the super scary fully semi-auto single shot guns?

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    First, you find a function that you want it to do. Let's say "shoot bullet". That means you need a barrel, locking mechanism, and trigger.

    The barrel and bolt are easy enough; put two things together that will resist opposing forces. You can do it yourself with a couple pieces of pipe and a nail. The trigger only requires a spring or two and some way to hold tension until you decide to release it.

    Want it to extract? That's only a slight revision to the bolt. Want it to feed? Again, only slight adjustments. Magazine gets tricky, but a bit of trial and error can see that working too. Getting into autoloading is where you start needing to seriously brainstorm ideas, but a simple falling block or manual action can be made through evolution of "make gun shoot bullet". The hardest part was developing the metallic cartridge, and someone else has already done that for you.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >The hardest part was developing the metallic cartridge, and someone else has already done that for you
      figuring out how to press your own casing in home conditions is till a headache atleast for me

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you're doing it right, you design your gun to con money out of credulous investors and then leverage your capital to buy righty politicians who send you gibs.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://learn2gun.info/
    might help

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      interesting site, thanks anon

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    seeing how an automatic transmission works convinced me that autism is necessary for the technological progress of humanity.
    there's just no possible way someone that designs something like that has a neruotypical brain.
    the only possible way they would be able to design mechanisms like that is with the help of the hyper focus autism affords

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically one of the best threads on here as of late, alongside the tomcat one.

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    john moses browning was the youngest of like 20 kids from a polygamist mormon family
    that means that without joseph smith pulling the long con we likely wouldn't have some of the most elegant, iconic, and influential small arms designs of all time, and world history likely would have moved in several drastically different directions

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Tfw no GI .45ACP Luger or C96 timeline

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    google the engineering design process numbnuts. that all it is and it starts with a board of people who want a solution and their specific design criteria.
    I want a rifle that will allow troops to slot 15% more of the enemy in combat, we want it to be an improvement over what we currently have by metrics x y and z with this specific criteria to integrate with existing logistics and tactics.
    So they get to work and the engineers get to use their creativity to fill in the blanks and start pitching designs for the prototype stage before testing. Good designs are made by engineers with extensive knowledge of existing manufacturing processes and tooling, how they are going to make it all work, etc.
    Going further, consider that something like a rifle can usually be done by a single team of people or even just a couple dudes in a shed if its simple enough, but the some process is cyclical and scaled indefinitely given that the project is well coordinated enough. Rifles are designed by men, airplanes by large companies and ships by entire design bureaus.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Well you learn the basic mechanics related to it and then you make a design based on your understanding of those fields of design and things that have come before.
    It used to be one person would do it all because technology was primitive enough that one guy could just come up with a design(or several) that revolutionize the world of firearms but now its complicated enough that most new developments are team efforts.
    So you might work for Heckler and Koch designing new machine guns and while your personal knowledge will likely include several parts of the process you're going to be working in teams where you make the design for the mechanics of the firing mechanism and the barrel and stuff and then another subgroup of the project will check that to make sure that everything works out with the metallurgy(i.e will this gun explode) and then another subgroup will be responsible for actually manufacturing prototypes that you test.
    You take the prototypes and test them and get as much data from that as you need and then figure out if the design is good enough to go ahead with full production or if you need to go back to the drawing board and fix a couple things. If you're working on behalf of a military you might just be redesigning an existing gun to meet their military doctrine.
    Basically all design processes come down to collaborate - design - troubleshoot - test - troubleshoot - repeat or begin production.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *