On 2009-02-04, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:28:29 -0600, Ignoramus14358
wrote:

No recoil while throwing a large number of bullets per second towards
enemy, sounds suspiciously like "supply side economics".

Just that claim alone makes me not too interested in the device, which
probably would face a lot of trouble (guide wear, fracture
possibilities etc) for other reasons.

i

All easily overcome by applied metalurgy.

Recoil cannot be overcome by metallurgy.

In fact...with some usage of superconductors, and the proper computer
connection...some really scary ballistic trajectories could be applied
to each sphere as it leaves the weapon. Tossing them in a curving low
to the right with a rise at x distance could be done.



Want to put it in a window and have it travel down the hall and break to
the right at the end? Possible.

Pitchers demonstrate that in every baseball game.

And the rounds could be explosive, spin armed fragmentation
grenades.....etc.

Select a new feed box, which automatically resets the computer to the
charectoristics of the selected ordnance.....nasty..really nasty....

I think that your optimism as to how many degrees of freedom you can
give to a spinning metal ball, is unfounded. I can see how you could
impart a curving trajectory to it, but I cannot see how you can manage
details of this trajectory so finely, and no that easily at the
typical speed of a flying bullet.

But, I always like progress in such military matters.

I am always especially interested in psychoactive weapons that would
make opposing forces **** their pants, discard their weapons and run
home, without doing any damage.

--
Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
more readers you will need to find a different means of
posting on Usenet.
http://improve-usenet.org/