This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 9th, 2018 at 00:00 and is filed under Disruptive Tech. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Trey Knight Asks You to Change His Mind
What’s that say? CASE – TELESCOPIC?
Yes
Thanks. I can’t argue against that case 🙂
Wow – i completely misunderstood the message. On another forum, we’ve been talking about red dots vs. LPVOs, and while still in that frame of mind, I misread Trey’s sign to mean something like “Case for discussion: telescopic sights are the future – discuss’.
Boy, did I miss the mark, lol.
It can be the future in some applications, but in most, no.
You can theoretically make CT ammo a bit shorter than conventional cases but you still have about the same ammo volume/bulk.
The bullet is protected.
One study shows a slight increase in precision.
Because of their shape, the feeding should be more precise, that leads to feeding issue.
So, with CT, you end up with a shorter less reliable action.
In my mind, sabot bullet, compacted powder/propellant and aluminum case is the future.
You can shorten the case because :
-you need less powder for the same muzzle speed
-you have a neckless design
-you use compacted powder
You have less weight because :
-you need less powder/shorter case
-you’re using aluminum case
But, you decrease accuracy.
For CT, the longer the bullet is, the more you gain to shorten the cartridge over conventional ones.
caseless is the future change my mind
How do you correct a malfunction on a CT rifle?
Depends on the malfunction. When the pusher goes through the base of the cartridge, which seams to happen, you tear the gun apart.
Since we’re not talking about the LSAT but CT in general, you can have the same type of extraction than non telescopic ones.
NATO.