>5.56 with 9mm sabot and 8" barrel
>should perform the same as a (changing the powder burn rate)
>5.56 and 20" barrel
Why don't guns use sabots to shorten barrels?
>5.56 with 9mm sabot and 8" barrel
>should perform the same as a (changing the powder burn rate)
>5.56 and 20" barrel
Sabot is expensive and inaccurate
Spin could be imparted by the sabot so why would it be innacurate?
Don't ask me, the general consensus is sabot is innacurate either with 50 cal or 300wm
it works with tank cannon
Okay so?
so I want some APFSDS in a smoothbore derivative of 350 legend or 45-70 or whatever
and many tank canons are smoothbore too
you gonna turn your .308 into a smoothbore now?
you'd use straightwall cartridges for this, but yes
>Spin could be imparted by the sabot
Have you seen an APFSDS projectile from a tank? What the one most important detail of those shells that you don't find on any shell?
Hint; It's part of the name.
You're right! It's the fins for stabilizing it! How do the fins stabilize it? By imparting rotation!
Man, where did you learn all of these things? You're so smart!
fins stabilize mainly by drag, not spin.
>FS
That's for smooth bore (iirc LRP works better if they don't spin fast). APDS use a different design without fins needs a rifled barrel.
No. Peak pressure would be lower (with a slight efficiency penalty) if the gunpowder is the same.
anon, I just want to take a moment to celebrate the fact you completely btfo that fin moron and yet replied in a completely polite and positive way.
you the real mvp this thread
>How do the fins stabilize it? By imparting rotation!
No. By imparting drag. The fins aren't angled.
The fins are angled, extremely gently, something like half a degree. Compared to a projectile with no spin at all, one with at least a little spin tends to average out any production imbalances and provides better accuracy overall without running into concerns like the Magnus effect.
You are a retard. APFSDS uses fins because the projectile is too long to be stabalized via spin. There is no reason that a more conventionally proportioned projectile (like the one in OPs pic) couldn't be spin stabalized.
This is either incredible bait or peak Dunning Krueger bullshit. You know non-APFSDS sabot rounds exist, right? Like SLAP? Or every tank gun that used sabot before ~1960? And that APFSDS actively don't want to spin, and rifled barrels firing APFSDS do so with slip rings to minimize the effect of rifling on the projectile?
Of course not, you're a big dumb fat gorilla nagger. Fuck you.
damn i thought the pointy tip was part of the DU penetrator
Nah, pointy tips at that velocity just snap off and are wasted energy. You want a strong tip so that the armour gets crushed out of the way rather than the tip of the penetrator.
have you heard of APDS?
Spin stabilized sabots are extremely common.
They're used all the time in rifled shotguns, and are as accurate as rifles within 100 yards (where all shotguns lose accuracy).
Your smugposting is just annoying.
>Spin could be imparted by the sabot
Yes.
> so why would it be innacurate?
The sabot itself is adding a variable to the equation. It isn't perfectly made, it doesn't release perfectly either.
What this guy said
But it can be done, like with the 6.5 cbj. That was considerably more expensive to manufacture at the time. Now, it's probably not as bad
Most inaccuracy comes during moment of separation when projectile gets kick to the side.
You'd need to figure out the twist rate for Sabot projectiles. For some reason, sabots don't work right with rifled barrels, possibly because they don't follow Greenhill Formula as we know it or because the sabot twists free of the bullet. we ran into this problem in WW2 with sabot rounds for the 76mm not being able to hit the broadside of a barn.
> they don't follow Greenhill Formula
They do afaik, the problem with flechettes is the impossibly high twist rate required for a long-rod. My idea is about conventional bullets with sabot.
>sabots don't work right with rifled barrels
>WW2 with sabot rounds for the 76mm
Flower sabots are hard and I don't think that would be useful with a small caliber gun after seeing the failures of SPIW, ACR, etc.
Shot in the dark here. But I'd bet the answer is a combination of cost, and the seething hatred for all things new in the weapons industry
Because it's cheaper and easier and faster to just crimp the neck of the casing
My boomer conworker gave me an ~80s .30-30 sabot round with a .223 soft point as the projectile. Believe he said it was called a velocitor or something similar, might try to find it.
Those are notoriously innacurate beyond like 70yd, light speed velocities though
Well, we’re in east Texas so the distance makes sense.
Found it. He was actually trying to find sabots to reload these lol, he was based.
>velocitor
Remington Accelerator. Long out of production, though you can still buy the sabots; they must have made a shitton of sabots thinking they were going to be a runaway success instead of a company-sinking failure.
To have a similar velocity with faster burn rate means higher peak pressure, which means higher stress for pressure bearing parts. Which in turn means more material thickness needed in barrel and bolt lugs, or stronger, more expensive material.
>means higher peak pressure,
No. Pressure is the same if not lower. However the area of the base of the sabot for the pressure to act upon is increased compared to the smallbore.
>send less mass down range thus leading to a decrease in cavity and chance of disintergrating in the target and lesser supression shockwave for 10x the price. Just use tungsten AP retard.
1. The sabot is ~10% of the bullet weight
2. Just extract more energy from the gases... With a 9mm 10" barrel (vs 8") and sabot you end up getting the same muzzle energy as a 5.56mm 20" barrel.
3. A 9mm barrel with sabots allows you shoot any bullet caliber up to 9mm.
Sabots tumble and move to unpredictable trajectories after separation which could possibly injury friendlies in front of you who are not necessarily in line of fire
>friendlies
not applicable for civilian applications
I want to put a dart through two cars, an armor plate and a cop before it embeds itself in an orphanage
fifty eight thousands psi
or
four thousand atmospheres
of hot burning gas
should be a sufficient answer to your question
not an argument
>footfag
lost the argument
I'm not inventing anything (pic rel) although I thought of some small improvements.
Unlike current commercial sub caliber ammo the purpose of it would be a very short, no bullpup gun and without losing muzzle velocity.
you're retarded, instead of making current capabilities shorter you could instead be reaching for new heights
smoothbore means extended barrel life (no rifling/throat to erode) and improved velocities (let's target 4000 fps for shits and giggles)
it also means it's an AOW and can be as short as you like, like that meme smooth bore carbine from a few years back that fired solid copper nerf footballs
Nta but of you go smoothbore don't you also need fin stabilised darts? This was talking about firing regular bullets from shorter barrels at the same velocities.
The idea was something as close as possible to current things. But yeah, smoothbore could be interesting as next step.
>t a-smoothbore-20mm-autocannon-that-will-replace-the-M2 anon
>a-smoothbore-20mm-autocannon-that-will-replace-the-M2
r u an dubs nostradamus
Remember when Kriss (I think it was Kriss) said they could halve the weight of the M2 and reduce its recoil by 90% and then nothing ever came of it.
straight wall becomes a problem at those pressures, gas will escape to the bolt face, causing all sorts of issues
you can use the same pressures as current guns
yesssssss
this increases manufacturing complexity dramatically but hunters and precisionfags are already tolerant of some pretty horseshit prices
and I told that anon he was a fag and should dream bigger
yeah
The newest rifle the US army adopted is ~100k PSI.
Plastic sabots would probably gum up the rifling too much at high accelerations like you're talking about.
They're fine for smooth bores and shotguns and can tolerate slow accelerations like the M2s, but I think in your case, it'd be problematic.
You aren't the first person to think of this, or even the thousandth. The answer is that accuracy sucks donkey balls, unless you're willing to spend a few thousand dollars per sabot and restrict yourself to a single-shot firearm.
This is my bet on future small arms development as well. What needs to watch out are:
High velocity lighter bullet lose energy rapidly.
It prefers large caliber gun and barely necked down to expand more gas volume per inch barrel length, but those shoots proportionally stubby bullets thus have insufficient twist for long bullet of small caliber.
As projectile goes lighter and acceleration increase for the same pressure curve, with more twist rate for slender projectile, the rotational acceleration would exceed sabot material's ability to grab the rifling.
Sabot needs to be and stay concentric, has slots for spin, maintain mouth tension or be crimped so that it won't be tucked in while feeding, and blend with the subcaliber so it feeds with the ramp. Pieces or fingers needs to peel off uniformly.
Lastly make it work with muzzle devices without fluke.
If these are done, besides more energy developed/barrel length, the ability to change bullet caliber and weight while using the same barrel and twist rate would allow it to tailoring to heavier LMG/autofile/marksman rifle to preserve long range energy while a light recoil fast load for carbine while still being able fire mismatched cartridge without spin stabilization issue.
I'm thinking you can just load it like a wadcutter
>https:// www thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/10/29/level-iv-unbeatable-armor-caliber-problem-tungsten/
Really, no one linked this yet? It's a good read on the subject.
In the US it's because it's banned.
Sabots gave poor accuracy, hazard for shooter and surroundings and cost more.