PDA

View Full Version : different kinds of gunpowder



huh_what
29 Apr 05,, 04:11
What kinds of gunpowder (explosives) are out there?

USSR
29 Apr 05,, 13:43
What kinds of gunpowder (explosives) are out there?

Actually, smokeless gunpowder is not explosive. If you break down a cartridge, dump the powder on the floor and strike a match to it, it simply burns. Different burning rates are required for the various cartridges, so there are many different gunpowders made. If you intend to reload cartridges, I suggest you search the Internet for the various reloading forums. And if your intentions are otherwise, I suggest you will not receive any further information.

Don

leib10
29 Apr 05,, 15:00
Gunpowder not compressed and packed in is not explosive. If gunpowder is packed in, then it becomes very explosive. In my younger (and more foolish days), I destroyed many a water flume with pipe bombs made from a small metal pipe and Black Cat firecracker gunpowder, tightly packed in.

sniperdude411
29 Apr 05,, 21:33
I do know that there was black powder, which totally sucked (people would stop firing their guns during battle in the civil war etc. because of the smoke). Then there was smokless powder; people would often become deaf very quickly in the Wild West because of the use of smokeless powder. One of the m16a1's problems was that the cartridges it used had stick powder ionstead of ball powder. Stick powder was more powerful, but burn a lot dirtier that ball did. That and the lack of chrome plating caused the m16a1 to jam frequently.
That is what I know about powder.

Beaugeste93
30 Apr 05,, 00:02
There are hundreds of kinds of powder today, check out a reloading manual sometime, or a reloading forum. One nitpick-smokeless powder is what we use now, it came around in the late 1880s (or thereabouts). US troops armed with .45-70 trapdoor Springfields were at a disadvantage in Cuba during the Spanish-American war against Spanish mausers using smokeless. The black powder clouds made picking out targets easier for the Spanish, and more difficult for us.

leib10
30 Apr 05,, 01:11
I read somewhere that during WWII we didn't even use smokeless powder. I think the book was called The Deadly Brotherhood or something like that.

Beaugeste93
30 Apr 05,, 02:15
I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but what did we use then? Generally speaking, its either smokeless or black powder. Cordite, et al falls under the smokeless category.

sniperdude411
30 Apr 05,, 02:41
In WWII?
The first standard-issue US military rifle that used smokeless (to my current knowledge) was the Springfield 1896.

Beaugeste93
30 Apr 05,, 03:00
The springfield-built Krag-Jorgenson came in in 1896 or 1898 with smokeless powder. National Guard units in the Span-Am war still had trapdoors...hence the black powder for them.

ChrisF202
30 Apr 05,, 18:24
The springfield-built Krag-Jorgenson came in in 1896 or 1898 with smokeless powder. National Guard units in the Span-Am war still had trapdoors...hence the black powder for them.
And the trapdoor was basically an upgraded Civil War era Springfield with breach loading capability?

Beaugeste93
30 Apr 05,, 19:37
And the trapdoor was basically an upgraded Civil War era Springfield with breach loading capability?


Pretty much. Its a good weapon for its era, but against charger-loading bolt action mausers with smokeless powder its at a serious disadvantage.

sniperdude411
30 Apr 05,, 21:23
I heard on the Histroy channel that a good trapdoor shooter could fire up to only 13 unaimed shots per minute.

Beaugeste93
30 Apr 05,, 23:41
I heard on the Histroy channel that a good trapdoor shooter could fire up to only 13 unaimed shots per minute.


True but have some perspective. The muzzle loading springfield it replaced could do 3-4 rounds per minute. 13 was a great improvement. Even the "revolutionary" Gras and Dreyse bolt guns of the period were single shot with a similar rate of fire. I don't have a trapdoor, but rapid firing my Martini is a little rough on the shoulder. Big cartridge + steel buttplate + rapid fire= shoulder pain. Of course having a bunch of angry enemies trying to kill you would moderate that.

sniperdude411
01 May 05,, 14:27
Right. But again, if you get used to it, it's nothing. I've got a single-shot bolt-action .22, and I can fire about 18-20 rds. per minute. And I do have to pull the firing pin back manually.
Also, my 12-gauge shotgun's recoil seems like nothing to me, and I'm only 14.

USSR
02 May 05,, 15:51
One of the m16a1's problems was that the cartridges it used had stick powder ionstead of ball powder. Stick powder was more powerful, but burn a lot dirtier that ball did.

Actually, it's the other way around. The M16 was designed using a stick powder, yet the 5.56 ammo that was issued was a ball powder. Stick powder is no more powerful than ball powder, and ball powder is generally more dirty than stick powder.

Don

sniperdude411
02 May 05,, 21:25
you sure about that? I heard it the other way around.
Plus, the name "m855 ball" come to you?
Snipe, help please!

USSR
03 May 05,, 12:31
SDude411,

The "Ball" in M855 Ball refers to the bullet, which is a throwback to when muzzleloaders were loaded with ball. And, yes, I am sure.

Don

Injecteer
03 May 05,, 12:48
what about the liquid "powder"? like the one used in G11 cartriges? any specs?

a bit off-topic, but I heard some rumours about electrochemical guns with very hi muzzle velocity, used in FCS. What are the physical principles of it?

Bill
03 May 05,, 14:43
Personally, i just knew they changed the powder because of excessive fouling. Whether they switched from stick to ball or ball to stick, beyond my base of knowledge....

USSR is obviously an experienced shooter, i'm sure he's right....he's certainly right what the 'ball' part of M855 means. Ball= FMJ.

sniperdude411
03 May 05,, 21:20
I stand corrected.
The powder the G11 uses is in fact powder, it's just pressed an glued together.
For electrochemical powder, I'm not finding anything. May just be from a TV show that I didn't see yet.