DREAD weapon system, revolutionary or con

EnigmaNZ

New Member
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_DREAD,,00.html?ESRC=recruiting.nl

"No heat, no recoil, no sound, no gunpowder, no flash -- just 120,000 rounds per minute of pulverizing power. The next generation of weapons systems has arrived: the DREAD centrifuge-powered weapon system."

The guy has a patent on the weapon so not something dreamt up as a joke. But canceling out gyroscopic forces, and providing that sort of firepower with low power requirements and accuracy, guess time will tell.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,520,169.WKU.&OS=PN/6,520,169&RS=PN/6,520,169
 
Last edited:

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
EnigmaNZ said:
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_DREAD,,00.html?ESRC=recruiting.nl

"No heat, no recoil, no sound, no gunpowder, no flash -- just 120,000 rounds per minute of pulverizing power. The next generation of weapons systems has arrived: the DREAD centrifuge-powered weapon system."

The guy has a patent on the weapon so not something dreamt up as a joke. But canceling out gyroscopic forces, and providing that sort of firepower with low power requirements and accuracy, guess time will tell.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,520,169.WKU.&OS=PN/6,520,169&RS=PN/6,520,169
it'll be interesting to see what advantages it has over other rapidfire systems like Metalstorm.

the big issue on all these systems (and I worked on a metalstorm related project about 4 years ago) is recoil management and reload. they are not trivial issues.

gyroscopic influence will effect recoil (which in itself is 3 dimensional) that means that the CEP at a given range will be interesting. for a handheld weapon, it would be interesting to say the least. A vehicle mounted system would need stabilising
 

highsea

New Member
"No heat, no recoil, no sound, no gunpowder, no flash"

...no physics. Lol, I can accept no gunpowder, but the rest is a crock of you-know-what.

I don't even want to waste time on a serious analysis. All I can say is, when they test fire it, I hope they tell me so I can be a loooong ways away. The only danger that contraption poses is to the operators.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
highsea said:
"No heat, no recoil, no sound, no gunpowder, no flash"

...no physics. Lol, I can accept no gunpowder, but the rest is a crock of you-know-what.

I don't even want to waste time on a serious analysis. All I can say is, when they test fire it, I hope they tell me so I can be a loooong ways away. The only danger that contraption poses is to the operators.
I was trying to be polite when I crafted my response.. ;)

I should add that the project I worked on 4 years ago was recoil management. It was shown to DARPA and some of our NATO allies. There literally was zero recoil (and it was live tested in front of them) but there were peripheral and important issues associated with that.
 

highsea

New Member
gf0012-aust said:
I was trying to be polite when I crafted my response.. ;)
Lol, so was I.

gf0012-aust said:
I should add that the project I worked on 4 years ago was recoil management. It was shown to DARPA and some of our NATO allies. There literally was zero recoil (and it was live tested in front of them) but there were peripheral and important issues associated with that.
There are ways, but it takes energy, no matter how you do it. It has to come from somewhere.

To get the claimed rates of fire, that dread gun would need a huge power source to keep the drum spinning, as each pellet released would slow the drum down fractionally. There's still recoil, it just goes into the drum- you could cancel it out with a counter-rotating rotor, but that takes even more energy.

One has to wonder how a Humvee would handle with a big gyroscope on the top. I bet it wouldn't corner too good. ;)

A round ball has a horrible BC, so the range would suck, not to mention the aiming issues, reloading, keeping the drum perfectly balanced at 30,000 rpm, handling the torque, etc. And of course, you're giving the enemy millions of little tungsten or steel balls that he can run around and pick up off the ground. Perfect for repackaging into IED's, explosive vests, anti-personnel mines, etc.

I pity the crew serving the weapon, because one hit from a AK round, and the damn thing would send shrapnel in every direction. No thanks. ;)
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
highsea said:
A round ball has a horrible BC, so the range would suck, not to mention the aiming issues, reloading, keeping the drum perfectly balanced at 30,000 rpm, handling the torque, etc. And of course, you're giving the enemy millions of little tungsten or steel balls that he can run around and pick up off the ground. Perfect for repackaging into IED's, explosive vests, anti-personnel mines, etc.
Couple of other things. He's cheating on the physics by replacing a long barrel with a short one and hoping that dimpled shot will help the aerodynamics of the shot. the problem is that if you want to really influence the boundary layer, then you don't use a sphere. if you are going to use a sphere, then the dimples need to be hexagonal. he's using hemispherical ones. so he's maximising range by mucking about with the boundary layer and thus its reynolds number.

It's just a fancy way to fire off a stream of cannister shot. ;)
 

highsea

New Member
Lol. And when that little ball comes out of that horizontal drum, it's going to be spinning too. That's going to make for a hell of a slice, if my experience at the driving range is any indication. :D
 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
I did go and read an article on newscientist.com where they were discusing the weapon. Did think it was a joke, but to patent the idea, don't you need to have a working model, or to satisfy them that it works as outlined?
I haven't had a chance to see the patent drawings, but i am reminded of a mechanical pitching machine, 2 high speed wheels, drop in the balls and watch them fly out. But 1 wheel, now I'm reminded of a helicopter thats lost it's torque rotor. And after hearing about CDs shattering when used in the new 100x players, think I want to be somewhere else as well.
Gary, one thing thats puzzles me about metalstorm, once it is discharged, is there a fast/easy way to reload, have to reload say 100 barrels (10x10) with 1000 rounds (10 per barrel) sound a fiddly process.
Grrr, dam word processor, try and edit spelling errors and it eats the letters after the ones I add.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
highsea said:
Lol. And when that little ball comes out of that horizontal drum, it's going to be spinning too. That's going to make for a hell of a slice, if my experience at the driving range is any indication. :D
The way that I play golf means that I'm better off using one of these things instead of a club. I'm a NAGA. ;)

I used to get sent out to play against the defence guys to make them happy - it was a guaranteed win for them. Uniform happy = client happy = christmas card list.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
EnigmaNZ said:
Gary, one thing thats puzzles me about metalstorm, once it is discharged, is there a fast/easy way to reload, have to reload say 100 barrels (10x10) with 1000 rounds (10 per barrel) sound a fiddly process.
Grrr, dam word processor, try and edit spelling errors and it eats the letters after the ones I add.
It's been a while since I had anything to do with it. But I wrote a risk issues document on it about 4 years ago and stated in that doco that one of the single most important issues was reload.

according to some I know, they reckon that it's been fixed. I've not seen anything to show that to date. For the personal weaponns its easy, it's just a barrel change over, similar to the size of a larger magazine. for a platform mounted weapon (like a CIWS) then that becomes a lot more complex.

without automation you can mount and dismount barrels via a ring lock (much like a breakdown sniper rifle). on the 36 barreled weapon it would get interesting.
 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Then again I used to wonder the same about the spanish Meroka CIWS with its 12 barrels, but it works.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNSpain_2cm-120_Meroka.htm
Its the inner barrels that would be tricky in metalstorm.
Hmmm, in a ship installation, after firing all barrels, the unit tilts to the reloading angle, a hatch opens and the reloading unit slides out and meets up with the rear of the unit, guides ensuring precise location, the breech opens, 36 powered ramrods then push the 360 (10 x 36) shells into the barrels from 36 reloading tubes, the breech closes, the reloading unit slides away and the firing unit is ready for fire. The magazine is loaded with preloaded reloading unit cores, when the relaoding unit is removed from the firing unit, it drops under cover, the core with the 36 now empty tubes is removed and a full one is fitted, the reloading unit is now ready to reload the firing unit. The loading of the cores are done on land in a automated factory. 100 reloading cores would provide 36,000 shells. Best I can at at short notice hehe.
 

highsea

New Member
EnigmaNZ said:
I did go and read an article on newscientist.com where they were discusing the weapon. Did think it was a joke, but to patent the idea, don't you need to have a working model, or to satisfy them that it works as outlined?
No, you only need drawings, and it has to be original, or an improvement that hasn't been already patented. The "concept" has to be valid. Centrifugal guns have been talked about (and patented) since at least the 1830's. Nobody has ever built a practical one.
EnigmaNZ said:
I haven't had a chance to see the patent drawings, but i am reminded of a mechanical pitching machine, 2 high speed wheels, drop in the balls and watch them fly out. But 1 wheel, now I'm reminded of a helicopter thats lost it's torque rotor.
The pellets feed through tubes inside the rotor, imagine spokes on a bicycle wheel. The drum spins up and they are released from the tubes. The claims of "silence" are bogus, since anything supersonic will make a noise. At 8,000 fps, the pellets would be instantly incandescent when they hit the air. Since the device is open to the air, it's acting like a pump also, strange things are possible there for sure, the drum would have to be spinning at mach 4 or something like that. major friction and mechanical degradation, even with mag-lev bearings.

Someone worked out the power requirements, the .50 cal version at 120,000 rate of fire was in the Megawatts. IIRC, the .308 at 30,000 rounds per minute needed over 600 horsepower to drive the rotor.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
EnigmaNZ said:
Then again I used to wonder the same about the spanish Meroka CIWS with its 12 barrels, but it works.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNSpain_2cm-120_Meroka.htm
Its the inner barrels that would be tricky in metalstorm.
Hmmm, in a ship installation, after firing all barrels, the unit tilts to the reloading angle, a hatch opens and the reloading unit slides out and meets up with the rear of the unit, guides ensuring precise location, the breech opens, 36 powered ramrods then push the 360 (10 x 36) shells into the barrels from 36 reloading tubes, the breech closes, the reloading unit slides away and the firing unit is ready for fire. The magazine is loaded with preloaded reloading unit cores, when the relaoding unit is removed from the firing unit, it drops under cover, the core with the 36 now empty tubes is removed and a full one is fitted, the reloading unit is now ready to reload the firing unit. The loading of the cores are done on land in a automated factory. 100 reloading cores would provide 36,000 shells. Best I can at at short notice hehe.
The barrels are pre-loaded. At worst this means deflecting the all up cannister and reloading a new one lock stock and barrel (bad pun)

think of the barrel as a modified version of an all up round cannister.
 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
Thats a wee bit more than the 150 watts claimed the unit requires, oh well. Back to metalstorm.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
more butt clenching info I've managed to pull:

Here's another data point on how dangerous the DREAD is to the operator if the rotor ever ruptures due to hits from enemy fire.

The patent shows a rotor with 20 spokes each containing 50 balls (1000 balls total). If we assume 7.62mm diam steel balls are the projectile and the rotor is spinning at 25000 rpm (see my post above). If you do the calculation, you'll see the rotational kinetic energy of *just* the 1000 balls in the rotor is about 300kJ - that about 220000 ft-pounds of KE!
If the rotor ruptures, the total kinetic energy released from the 1000 balls is equivalent to about 200 slugs from an M16, or about 600+ 9mm Parabellum bullets.

Personally, I wouldn't want to be in a vehicle with the DREAD - its sort of like carrying a flamethrower into combat. The range is short and everyone will start shooting at you in the hopes of seeing something spectacular...
 
Top