Chemical propulsion has been with us a long time since it's possible to store a fair amount of energy in a small space.

Battery technology is rapidly advancing, and will change the world in many ways.

It's possible to store a very large amount of electrical energy in a small space now with LiPo batteries, and while a great advancement (witness the modern hobby drone) is hardly the last word in battery technology.

I envision a practical electro-magnetic small arm in the not too distant future.

The sensible design would seem to be a cartridge arm with high energy battery and capacitor contained in the cartridge, although many systems will likely be tried.

Think we'll see this in our lifetimes? We've come from Maxwell Smart's shoe phone gag to the IPhone 7 or whatever it is now in a scant 50 years...

Why mess with gunpowder when we can shoot with energy from the sun?

Where the hell have you been? Roger Barlow wrote in the April of 1975 American Rifleman about the SMFM "Electrique" he had purchased in St. Etienne, and used on quail in the Shenandoah valley when he got home. I doubt one can get the special primers for the gun, today, and some of the ammunition for the Remington electric 700s is getting priced very high since Remington had to relearn that lesson.

I hunt to get away from things like batteries.

Feel free, however.

Best,
Ted

The ignition on your vehicle is electric too, but it's not the thing that makes it go.

This will also change.

What? You don't drive a Tesla!!

I just learned that Tesla cars use AC induction motors.

Now I understand the name.

Perhaps our electric gun company could be called Faraday?

Not for me. I hunt to get away from that crap. No watches, no phones, no nothing electric or electronic.

It gets light, I hunt. It gets dark, I don't.



This is what I use now for waterfowl from Sept through February. A 12 gauge Model 12 built in 1927 with a 28 inch barrel and modified choke. I just upland game hunt one day a year now.

I want an electric gun even less than I want an electric vehicle!

The energy might come from the sun, but it'll probably come from coal, just like it does for the current plug-ins. Maybe, the new eco coal plants can burn surplus smokeless that gets banned? I can't wait, line up to take a shot, and gun flashes a sit tight message, updating to enhance your experience. Congratulations, you've successfully downloaded the red ryder package.

I know a little about batteries and capacitors, and understand the energy that they can store, but I cannot visualize how that energy could by itself be converted into a propulsive force.

Now, if you placed hydrogen and oxygen tanks in the buttstock of your shotgun, and fed the gasses into a mixing chamber, then your battery and capacitor could provide the spark to ignite the gas mixture.

You would still have to insert the shot charges somehow, which could be contained in capsules in the forearm magazine tube.

The beauty of this would be that there would be no shell or case to eject, so you could theoretically improve on lock time. You would not have the bolt slamming back and forth either. Might come up with a smooth operating automatic.

This being a double gun forum, where autos are not allowed, and pumps only grudgingly, I doubt that there would be much interest here.

Happy Trails,

HHH

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Best,
Ted

The 35mm camera wasn't broke either.

HH, take a look at 'rail guns'.

You convert electricity to a propulsive force each time you actuate a relay. All it takes is a coil and something ferrous. Think automotive starter solenoid. It's as simple a concept as that, just that a practical projectile launcher would use a tad more energy. You are building what amounts to an open frame motor.

Military will get first dibs, but technology that works will hardly be ignored by the market.

Amen to that. I am developing a phobia towards most electric screened devices. Notice that kids nowadays are literally addicted to gawping at screens, tablets, phones, computers. When i was a kid, we read these things called books, an antiquated device, now nearly obsolete.

Especially books about John Rigby!!!!

https://www.johnrigbyandco.com/guns/the-london-best/

There's just something about the lethality of a good bolt action rifle.

Some of the appropriate technology is already out there, in construction nail guns. The Hitachi/Paslode guns use a battery to ignite the gas fuel charge, but most of the big manufacturers (Dewalt, Milwaukee, Ridgid, Ryobi, etc.) are selling cordless nailers in various configurations that actually work on bateries alone. They are heavy and expensive and slower than their pneumatic counterparts, but they work. That technology could be scaled to work in our guns at some point. But I still don't want or need one.

Check out what the Navy is doing with Rail Guns to replace conventional, on ship, guns

Howdy SJ,

Yes, I know a little about rail guns, but I was assuming that we were talking about a shotgun of about 7 pounds that we could carry into the field and shoot either lead or other soft non-tox shot.

I still cannot imagine packing enough energy in a 7# all-electric shotgun to propel a shot charge out to 50 yards with enough force to take down a pheasant.

Now, a rail gun mounted on a Jeep to go out in the pasture and slaughter hogs is an idea that could get my attention. In that instance, weight is not much of a consideration and there is plenty of power in the engine to charge a big battery and supercapacitor.

HHH

Being a relatively new contributor here Mr. Hipshot, you apparently haven't seen all of the off-topic crap posted by guys like Jagermeister, who doesn't even own one lousy double gun.



And yes, this is a little ridiculous. Thank you for bringing it up Mr. Hipshot. The subject of experimental rail guns firing large ultra-high velocity artillery projectiles is fascinating... but it has no more relevance here than frequent discussions of politics in the Canadian Maritime provinces, hockey, or pulp-wood clear-cutting in Nova Scotia. And we are so far away from practical hand-held rail guns that it would be better discussed in Popular Science magazine. However, an endless parade of totally off-topic threads does often open the door to offering other off topic information such as the anti-2nd Amendment rhetoric and dogma of certain contributors and trolls here.

Actually, it's not hard to figure out if the energy need is practically met. It turns out it is, and rather easily.

A one ounce load at 1150 fps has a kinetic energy of approximately 1740 Joules.

A Lithium ion battery has an energy density of 460,000 Joules per Kg. This means a one ounce Li ion battery has in theory enough energy to fire about 8 shots.

In fact a size AA carbon zinc battery has the energy to fire one shot if we could somehow convert the electrical potential to kinetic energy.

The trick of course is to release ALL the energy over a few milliseconds. Can this be done with capacitors and coils?

I believe that it CAN be done, today, using current (pardon the pun) technology.

The switching power supply in your computer handles some large energy potentials and fields just to eliminate the need for a heavy iron transformer. It's not much of a stretch to projectile acceleration.

Someone will do it.

The next guy will hang two together and we will have an electromagnetic doublegun.

keith you should celebrate. How are they going to 'control' electric guns? Round up all the batteries, switches, and capacitors?

If it could be done, today, the military would already be doing it. If you know something they don't, you are wasting precious time here... time that would be better spent developing and patenting your process, and becoming fabulously wealthy.

I guess it could be my actual experience with linear motors (DC, stepper, linear actuators, and AC induction types) that makes me skeptical. Very heavy and very expensive are just the tip of the technological iceberg. The switching power supply in your computer doesn't "handle some large energy potentials and fields". It still uses transformers, and it simply provides an opto-isolated secondary low voltage DC from the typically 110 VAC input. Actually there is quite a large stretch between that and acceleration of a projectile (projectiles) for a shotgun... especially one that won't require a heavy extension cord to power a round of skeet. Wasn't it about 25 years ago that they told us room temperature superconductors were on the horizon? The military isn't even working on Jeep size rail guns yet, let alone shoulder fired versions. It may one day be done, but not with the technology we have now. And it still won't be any more relevant to the subject matter of this particular forum than hockey is.

Your final thought about "control" of the components for future electric guns is thought provoking though. I'd say the control aspect would be doable by using the exact same process being used and developed by the Liberal Left Democrats today. You would simply continue to promote the radical and insane idea that the Constitution is a "Living Document" that must change over time to accommodate the "Will of the Majority". Then you would promulgate a false narrative about the dangers of this new technology, and tell the masses that these aren't the kind of guns the Framers envisioned when they wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You would point out similar controls being enacted in other countries that never enjoyed the same kind of Constitutional Rights. Is any of this sounding familiar so far? Then you would simply infringe upon the Civil and Constitutional Rights of the law abiding for "the good of the people"... "if it will only save one life", and pass laws which violate both the 2nd Amendment and the 4th Amendment, and imprison anyone caught with electronic contraband. Of course, you would never stop those with criminal intent and no respect for the law, but you would eventually kill it for the law abiding citizen, and thus make it easier to control him in order to advance Socialism. Of course, in this futuristic world, you would have the progeny of our current crop of anti-gun trolls coming here and promoting the new laws and supporting the anti-electronic gunners... and denying that there is any anti-electronic gun sentiment being expressed here.

Instead of just bashing and lying about the NRA, they would be bashing the National Electric Code (NEC) as well! Thanks for asking!

Nope. 'They' will control it with a user agreement, passwords and proprietary mandatory updates, that comply with all fed state-n-local regs, of course. I wonder what would happen if the little chip buried inside sends off a flag signal that the 'gun' passing through a school zone or stops at a grocery store on the way home from the range.

The big market will be in retrofitting, the packaging size is just about there. The first one will be for the A&D boxlock. Just gut it, swap in the new parts, and cut a window in the off side of the stock for the touch screen, wireless for convenient hook up.

They can have my Light Saber when they pry it from my cold dead fingers!

Some pioneers at work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAs9EHtKfVc

The capacitor is a hoot.

This is about 20x the energy needed for a practical shotgun, although these guys are a little short in the efficiency department.

Lookie this one keith:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KikIp_yAXvQ

A low voltage sequential coil gun.

Voltage x10, get the physical size of the coils down, and we have something that could be useful.

Tell me again how far away from practicality we are.

I can't stop laughing at the first one! A 250 lb. gun that self destructs on the first shot is priceless!

If you watch the rest of the series he improves the connections and makes some progress. Ver. 5 even has a ballistic gel test.

As primitive as that is, it's proof that people are working on the tech.

Future professional engineers. I love it.

Here's a link to a story about King's friend Dr. Gerald Bull, and his wacky and ill-conceived efforts to build a cannon that would fire a projectile to the moon:

http://www.astronautix.com/g/gun-launched.html

Proof that people are working on the tech doesn't mean it stands a snowball's chance in hell of ever working in a practical and economical manner. All we need is a gun and propellant that can fire a projectile at least 5.6 miles per second... and a projectile that won't burn up in the atmosphere at such velocities. Easy! I wonder why he had trouble getting funding for such valuable research?

Now for something even more deadly, and a technology that actually works, check out this:

https://k61.kn3.net/3/F/F/0/1/8/169.gif.webm

Non-rocket space launch hasn't been written off yet.

Ever think air guns would achieve the refinement they have?

People are pretty damn ingenious.

There are alternatives to pressure vessel guns, and I think we will see some pretty clever stuff in the not so distant future.

Nev'r shall such a shooting iron ent'r mine own caliver cubiculo.
I am only anon begineth the useth of powd'r not of the blacke.
such contrivances art of the foe.
Those gents bringeth a sure and c'tain destruction f'r et'rnity.
O.M

I know that non-rocket space launch hasn't been written off yet. There have always been fools who think they can defy simple physics and practical limitations of readily available materials. As I noted earlier, achieving escape velocity will require a muzzle velocity of at least 25,000 miles per hour. That's over 9 times the muzzle velocity of a .220 Swift. Of course, that is ignoring friction loss with the air... so unless your intrepid inventors intend to eliminate the atmosphere of the earth... or come up with a payload that won't immediately burn up... and also can withstand the G-forces of such extreme acceleration... then such an idea is sheer fantasy at best.

As far as the refinements we see in air rifles... it ain't all that much. In my lifetime, we've seen about a 300 ft. per second increase in velocity. The few people who buy those very expensive 1200+ fps models quickly find that they need to use ultra-light pellets to get that velocity. And then they also find that they need to use the heaviest pellets to stay under 1000 fps because of the instability and inaccuracy they encounter as they approach or cross the sound barrier.

We ain't talking a rejection of smokeless powder or other practical technologies here moses! But I have shot the vast majority of deer in my life with open sighted black powder flintlock guns. Hey, did you guys happen to buy one of those Gyrojet rocket pistols? If you can even find a box of ammo for them today, it will likely be worth much more than the pistol. And what a great defensive round! Why, it was almost equal to a .45 ACP if you could get your attacker to stay at least 25 feet away so it could reach full velocity. At 8 feet, it was about equal in kinetic energy to a .22 short.

There was jest in my Shakespearian post.

My wife says that I do not adapt to new tech very well & I also shoot a flintlock.
My new gun which arrived on Friday was manufactured in April 1936, my car is 15 years old, my phone is not smart & I read the King James Bible.
It is not so much a rejection of the new as an aversion to yet unproven gimmicky fad stuff when a tried & true thing, which is a cheaper thing, is already in my hand.

Black powder, smokeless powder & an air rifle all rely an a very rapid increase in internal air pressure to expel a projectile.
What I am failing to see here is how is the electricity going to be a propulsive force ?
Ignition source; Yes. The electricity causes another substance to act.
Even to use a very fast acting solenoid to take place of a spring in an air rifle, the propulsion force is still air pressure.
To create lightening & a thunder clap in the guns chamber, the propulsion force is still air pressure.
A electric short spark is thrown by air pressure. In the open air it is weak. Contained it may strengthen a bit, but not enough on its own.

String & the energy stored in a bent bow & stretched rubber bands have the ability to impart a propulsive force on a projectile.
Being electrocuted & thrown across the room is from the propulsive force of contracting muscles, the same as a bow or rubber band.

That is just how I am seeing it now, but I will wait & see if someone can explain how electricity can be a propulsive force to hurl a projectile.
O.M

The same way an electric motor works. But, it's easier to let you read this basic explanation.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

SRH