Metal Storm

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.
User avatar
lav_coyote25
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3434
Joined: 08 Aug 2006, 23:18

Re: Metal Storm

Post by lav_coyote25 » 05 Apr 2007, 00:50

ok - here it is - the way i remember seeing it... back then.  Friday, June 27, 2003 Posted: 3:22 PM EDT (1922 GMT)

http://www.cnn.com/2003/BUSINESS/06/26/ ... etalstorm/


Published in the September 2001 issue.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... 81426.html

and from a reliable source...

http://www.defensereview.com/article718.html

and finally...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Storm

do the google your own selfs for more...

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=met ... arch&meta=
‎"to prepare for disaster is to invite it, to not prepare for disaster is a fools choice" -me (kim-lav_coyote25-metcalfe) - it used to be attributed to unknown - but adding the last bit , it now makes sense.

Hectichermit
Greenhorn
Posts: 13
Joined: 01 Apr 2007, 02:54

Re: Metal Storm

Post by Hectichermit » 06 Apr 2007, 01:47

hmm well let see I know that as time passes on nuclear weapons and technology in general is getting smaller and smaller...eventually I think we will be able to power vechicles...this could solve power problems on vehical based metal storm systems...but I think humanity in warzone that is, had enough of its share of nuclear weapons, I was thinking why is nuclear technology not in warzone? and if it is the player cant use it..so far as I know..hmm I mean the  first player to master nuclear power in warzone would have a serious production advantage......

Kyor
Trained
Trained
Posts: 73
Joined: 03 Apr 2007, 15:28

Re: Metal Storm

Post by Kyor » 06 Apr 2007, 04:52

Historically, is hard for the project to domain the nukes technology, because the collapsed destroyed everything, and suposelly detonated all the nuclear silos in the world, except the nexus' ones.

User avatar
kage
Regular
Regular
Posts: 751
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 21:45

Re: Metal Storm

Post by kage » 06 Apr 2007, 16:00

if metalstorm can truly fire 1 million rounds per minute, and can be equipped with an ammunition store that large, then if we assume that each round costs about $0.01 USD (which is probably quite low for something that, even in large bursts, claims to be capable of subverting armor), then firing for one whole minute at the maximum rate of fire would have expended $10,000 USD worth of ammo, which certainly isn't cheap.

User avatar
Hatsjoe
Trained
Trained
Posts: 285
Joined: 20 Feb 2007, 19:57

Re: Metal Storm

Post by Hatsjoe » 06 Apr 2007, 16:31

i ve been looking deeper into it and the bllet's are not being propelled by a magnetic field. Instead a small electric charge triggers a propellant which gives the round it's speed. the speaker says in one of the movies that the operating temperatures remùain low because of the use of multiple barrels and because every barrel only shoots a few times per second. So Metal Storm is actually nothing more than a lot barrels filled with bullets packed together. From a technical POV it's really not such a big deal. And i don't know how many projectiles a barrel could contain but i'm pretty sure it will not be able to fire for a whole minute. btw: you cannnot simple recharge by putting new ammunition in the barrel, you actually have to replace the empty barrel with a full one. So actually the only big difference is the fire mechanism.
Image

User avatar
kage
Regular
Regular
Posts: 751
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 21:45

Re: Metal Storm

Post by kage » 06 Apr 2007, 17:35

i think i'm getting it confused with another recent weapon system that does use electromagnetism to propel what are pretty much over-sized ball bearings through some sort of centrifuge type thing.

genxghost
New user
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 00:03

Re: Metal Storm

Post by genxghost » 07 Apr 2007, 00:10

metalstorm is not actualy expected to be an accurate weapon. after wind interference the rounds are actually likley to land else where than their actual targets.
For the Technology of Peace! PEACE THROUGH POWER!!!

User avatar
lav_coyote25
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3434
Joined: 08 Aug 2006, 23:18

Re: Metal Storm

Post by lav_coyote25 » 07 Apr 2007, 01:37

there was a bit on the future weapons on discovery channel...  if thats not an accurate weapon system...give me at least 1000 units... then it dont matter... you'll hit something. ;D
‎"to prepare for disaster is to invite it, to not prepare for disaster is a fools choice" -me (kim-lav_coyote25-metcalfe) - it used to be attributed to unknown - but adding the last bit , it now makes sense.

Solitaire
Trained
Trained
Posts: 32
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 22:47

Re: Metal Storm

Post by Solitaire » 09 Apr 2007, 23:44

MStorm is just a fancy new firing mechanism - and that really expensive quad-barrel handgun is useless after it shoots its load... not a very practical system really... its heavily over-hyped at this point.

I was thinking of some usage of low-caliber types in T3 *cough*NEXUS*cough* but by T3 the emphasis on high-caliber short/mid-range stuff is replacing explosive and hydraulic firing mechanisms with gauss and explosive missile loads with fissionable/plasma warheads as conventional small-arms and explosives aren't really cutting it at that point... in that respect its somewhat overlooked as an upgrade for arty/AT. Instead MStorm only fits very well with CSP-HEAP machinegun/light AAA derivatives - ones firing reduced-caliber caseless rounds running on solid propellant (which is 'ignited' by the piezo firing).

Azraiel
Trained
Trained
Posts: 56
Joined: 05 Apr 2007, 14:09

Re: Metal Storm

Post by Azraiel » 10 Apr 2007, 06:44

To clarify, Metalstorm is a gun that has multiple barrels. Each barrel is preloaded with a number of bullets that are hollow on one end. This cavity is filled with an electrically conductive propellant charge. A current is fed through the barrels which ignites the propellant and fires them out. It is the multiple barrels and multiple bullets in each barrel going off at the same time that it is able to achieve such high rate of fire. If you apply such a thing to a single bullet, single barrel system, the Rate of fire will decrease dramatically. However, it still has good use I think, if it were converted to a conventional weapon system, IE, single barrel that is fed through a magazine. It is a much simpler system to construct, since you do not need mechanisms to discharge spent casings, and your weapon will no longer jam. However, it also has downfalls. You now need a battery capable of producing the necessary voltage to ignite the charge, which also increases weapon weight. And if your battery fails and you do not have a replacement, your firearm is now worthless.

In terms of use today, it is being looked at as anti-missile weapon as far as I know.

Post Reply