Laser ignition primers

>>31824445
>fixing something that doesn't need to be fixed with something that can easily break and requires batteries

>>31824445
The very definition of "a solution to a problem no one asked or ever will ask"

>>31824445
>require special primer

they never get the lesson don't they ....

they have to create a laser than can be used with normal primers, at this point this is only for the competition shooter and reloader on the civilian market, you can take this exemple from Colt when they made the XM148 for the M16A1
>make a neat grenade launcher
>don't use NATO 40mm ammo
>US use the M203 instead

also this thing must run with batteries right ?
>my gun can't shoot because it ran out of batteries

i'll be laffin'

>>31824445
No.

Remington did the electrically ignites etronx series primers. I briefly owned a 700 in 22-250 that used it. The only upside was that they talked about how great the lock time was, which while true, was not worth the tradeoffs or difficulty of finding components or ammo.

>>31824551
What if they make it a laser that is powerful enough to ignite regular primers (by heating the metal up enough to ignite the primer) but can also be switched over to a conventional firing system effortlessly.

For example:
If you have enough charge, the laser will work. It will light and ignite the primers in conventional ammunition.

If the battery is too low to work, it automatically switches back to regular operation. In this case, the bolt works like normal. Perhaps the lense of the laser can be hard enough to bang into the primer and ignite the primers traditionally.

But I don't see why we want lasers to ignite the primers anyway, what does that help with exactly? I guess you won't ever worry about your firing pin breaking, but then you have to worry about batteries. If your firing pin breaks, it might still work. If your batteries die, the laser definitely won't work.

>>31824928
How complicated you want this shit man? You expect every dumbass 11b to be able to manage this shit? It's Infantry we're talking about.

>>31824551
The XM148 wasn't adopted because it had a lot of little parts that were easy to lose, and was easy to accidentally fire because it had no trigger guard, not because it used proprietary grenades, as it used the standard 40mm

>>31824928
unreliable and inconsistant dischage

File: 1476420346434.png (691KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

691KB, 1600x900px

>>31824445
No. Funding for alternative chemical propellant ignition methods petered out in the late-80s to early-90s when the RnD money for MBT gun improvements dried up and all the pulsed power funding went towards lasers and railguns.

The expected performance gains were marginal compared to the quickly ballooning research and expected unit costs. I believe the most optimistic forecasts for a mature system were expecting something like 20-30% increased muzzle velocity with a unit cost that was somewhere north of 200% more than existing methods. The primary problems were in consistent powder ignition from round to round, because when the energy arc is moving through the powder, where the powder actually catches is kind of inconsistent, so this means inconsistent muzzle velocity, so you have to use multiple igniters so you guarantee the thing goes off within a consistent range which further increases unit cost and complexity. Also problems with the increased pressures involved (because the powder is burning faster), so current ammo usually isn't viable, and current weapons aren't designed to safely handle the increased pressure.

So in the end you get 20% more effective range, but your weapon costs 3x as much.

>>31824445
ITT: OP has opinions on science he doesn't have an understanding of to solve a problem that nobody has

>>31825906
? i never offered an opinion you queer

>>31824445
>because I want guns to require batteries

It's a fucking stupid idea for small arms on many, many levels.

>>31824928
I'll tell you right now, as an actual fucking engineer, you're clinically retarded.

Can you fucking imagine how fucking complex such a system would be? For a fucking firearm no less, which needs to be as simple as possible with but a few exceptions.

>>31824445
Idea is pretty fucking interesting though.

I could see this becoming an actual thing with the LSAT, because their caseless munitions had the issue where the chem primers would detonate at high, normal operation temps.

Usings a system that is completely gasless, has an open chamber for cool off and high temp chem primers, throw in one of those TiO batteries coming out of Singapore that is essentially Titanium ore dirt and water, you could make some pretty stupidly simple triggers and rifle systems.

This shit would be great for 3D printing too. Because now you don't even need wear resistant trigger systems, just a good laser.

I'd definitely be worried about longevity on the laser itself though.

Interesting technology, needs to develop further before prototyping is even considered on a level where it'd be something more than just a gimick.

>>31826357
>I'll tell you right now, as an actual fucking engineer, you're clinically retarded.

Well you must be a shit engineer because I can envision exactly what I'm talking about.

It's a drop in kit which replaces the firing pin with a very tough glass firing pin. Like tempered glass or something that's really strong. Or crystal like a big sapphire or something. Anyway, the kit drops in and some computer thing goes on the outside with the battery pack.

Now, the gun is converted to use a later device which fits into the firing pin channel and in laser mode, the firing pin never extends further than the bolt face. The large crystal is used as a lens to focus the beam right at the tip of the primer and heat it up so that the cartridge can fire.

Now, when the computer detects the battery is too low to use the laser, some sort of servo will release and allow the firing pin to operate freely as it would in a regular firearm.

Of course, more modifications might be needed like a new bolt and maybe other new parts, but there's no reason it couldn't work. Would it be a good idea? No, probably not, but it could exist.

>>31826579
Impacts will fuck with your lens. The heat transfer will not be instant with regular primers and that gets rid of most of the advantage. Moving parts also defeats the purpose of a laser.
Your idea is retarded and you should feel ashamed.