Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 7/10/2001 10:02:19 AM EDT
[img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/013/F2/Lb/qj/wb18796.jpg[/img] [red]Left[/red]- 13MM Anti-Material Gyrojet Rocket- The kind given to Rice Farmers in Vietnam to use against VC armored vehicles. [red]Center[/red]- 0.45 ACP Round [red]Right[/red]- 13MM Conical Gyrojet Rocket My question is about the Conical rocket... [b]DOES ANYONE KNOW WHO MADE THESE, IF THEY ARE STILL MAKING THEM, AND WHEN THEY WERE MADE?!?![/b]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:07:31 AM EDT
Sorry, I don't. [:(] BTT Low on ammo, huh? I bet the Ammoman doesn't stock 'em. [BD]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:08:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:16:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Garryowen: Thge importent question is what is the propellent used? You could make a mold and injection mold the buggers and make a plastic "Target/Plinker" round and maybe breath new life into the concept....
View Quote
Hmmmmmmmm...... You know.... Hmmmmmmmm...... That ain't a bad idea. The originals use compressed high-grade Rocket fuel though. Would burn through any plastic.... Also, the ports (4) on the rear have to be insanely precise to get the things to fly right...I don't know if a casting could pull it off. They Rockets themselves are like mini-machines.. But, that is a [i]damn[/i] good idea. Even if I used a single rear jet port and some Estes low grade rocket fuel, with a small pistol primer, and maybe mold some fins into the rocket body for stabalazation to compensate for the lack of timed port thrust, it may be possible... [:D] [:D] ROCKET SCIENCE RULES!!!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:22:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/10/2001 10:32:49 AM EDT by raf]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:32:10 AM EDT
[bounce] Wow! Boards sure movin quick today.. RamblinWreck) I wish! $50-100 PER ROUND depending on where you go...Sometimes one can get lucky, and find them at shows one at a time for $20 or $30 each...But definitley not a constant source. RAF) Good point... Didn't even think of that.
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:32:40 AM EDT
McUzi, or anyone for that matter, could one of you post a pic of a gyrojet pistol? Until I started reading these posts I thought talk of a a gyrojet was just BS. Now I'm wondering what they really look like... Thanks
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:37:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/10/2001 10:35:49 AM EDT by McUZI]
Originally Posted By jobux: McUzi, or anyone for that matter, could one of you post a pic of a gyrojet pistol? Until I started reading these posts I thought talk of a a gyrojet was just BS. Now I'm wondering what they really look like... Thanks
View Quote
[img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/010/cy/Z3/LQ/0m33623.jpg[/img] Here's mine. Mint-In-Box Pre-68 GCA 13MM Gyro- All original Papers. 100% Condition. Probably the best Gyro pistol out there. I also have 34 Rockets for it. Pretty much silent (Sounds like air from a tire), no recoil, and a rocket on full birn generates enough energy to punch through light armor, and I ain't talkin "Kevlar". The answer to your next question is "too much, and that's if you can find one." It took me years to find mine.
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 10:56:17 AM EDT
Thanks McUzi! You're right, that was my next question, lol! I had always pictured them looking like the bad guys gun from that Tom Selleck movie where the bullets followed the people who ran from them... That is very cool man, congrats!
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 11:04:30 AM EDT
McUzi here is something for you [url]http://pub80.ezboard.com/bmbassociatesgyrojetpage[/url] this guy is starting a Gyrojet web site Ron
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 11:45:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Rons Toys: McUzi here is something for you [url]http://pub80.ezboard.com/bmbassociatesgyrojetpage[/url] this guy is starting a Gyrojet web site Ron
View Quote
Wow! Someone really did see it... Yeah. It's mine [:D]... I guess I am the only Gyro owner in the world. [:(] No one seems to have any...
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 11:52:06 AM EDT
Who is the manufacture of these bullets? You need to find out the mixture for the rocket fuel, the primer (if any), and manufacturing method. Get a lathe and make some new bullets from copper rod. Sounds like fun, don't blow off your hands.
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 11:56:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Chaingun: Who is the manufacture of these bullets? You need to find out the mixture for the rocket fuel, the primer (if any), and manufacturing method. Get a lathe and make some new bullets from copper rod. Sounds like fun, don't blow off your hands.
View Quote
Problem is, they aren't "bullets"- They are rockets. That whole hunk of metal you see in the pic comes flying out of the gun...There is no case left over. So it can't be reloaded. AND the rear ports are very finely made, so special tooling would be needed to make new ones. The ammo hasn't been made for years... And like I said. The rounds are impossible to find, and insanely priced when I do [img]http://www.3dpcgames.com/cwm/s/cwm/big/disgust.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 12:21:14 PM EDT
Let me re-phrase our discussion and talk really slow and louder TOO LPOSDAMF!!! 1)FIND MANUFACTURER AND PROPELLENT MIXTURE 2)MAKE PROJECTILES FROM ROUND STOCK (LATHE, BLUEPRINTS AND BRAIN REQUIRED) 3)FIND OUT METHOD FOR PACKING PROPELLENT
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 12:46:31 PM EDT
Actually, for the sake of propellant, several years ago H&K made a rifle that used "caseless ammo"... The propellant was modeled after a solid rocket fuel and was actually compressed to the rear of the bullet. The rifle never made it into production ([i]same scenario as the OICW[/i]), but thge concept was well received and written about. I have a book at home with all the info on it! Now, with the above knowledge and other viable resources ([i]Poor Man's James Bond books[/i]) it should be rather easy to come up with something that will work for you on a "homemade" basis. Personally, I would opt for the milling of a copper ingot, leaving an internal fuel cavity with very fine exhaust ports ([i]something in the #68-72 range[/i]) that are primer driven ([i]suggest magnum rifle primers[/i]), packing the cartridge, adding a threaded projectile cap and testing with very weak loads until the right ratio comes into play. Oddly enough, 3-F black powder used with a cap may be about as strong as you need when made into a paste form and hardened into a solid, non-powdered, substance... This would also greatly add to the stability of the fuel substance. When it gets right down to it, "Rocket Science" is not really science at all... but rather an intense trial and error situation! [*] I'll look for the book and post what it says about the H&K cartridge I mentioned above!
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:05:42 PM EDT
I apologize Mcuzi....i didn`t believe you when you said you were a "rocketeer"........[beer]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:07:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By antiUSSA: Personally, I would opt for the milling of a copper ingot, leaving an internal fuel cavity with very fine exhaust ports ([i]something in the #68-72 range[/i]) that are primer driven ([i]suggest magnum rifle primers[/i]), packing the cartridge, adding a threaded projectile cap and testing with very weak loads until the right ratio comes into play.
View Quote
The problem I can forsee is that the ports are angular, in order to compenate for cant, and to provide spin. Production of the port system would require some fairly insane dedicated tooling. The case itself is rather easy, since like you said. It can be turned to proper shape on a lathe. An auger-bit on a drill press representing the correct internal dimensions for fuel payload could bore the right cavity size, and solve the fuel-storage problem... The rounds I have are totally seamless... But.... . . . [img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/026/Tw/nm/LF/O728512.jpg[/img] . . The rocket on the left is the conical shaped rocket. The ports are do indeed appear to be of some sort of synthetic material, so Garryowen was right. I guess the rockets don't generate enough heat to melt the rear port gasket, and after the rocket has achieved desired gyration rate, it wouldn't matter anyway (insofar as the physical mass wasn't dimensionially altered). I don't know if propellant bun-rate would affect this or not (I assume it would)- The faster and hotter the fuel, the more likely it is to melt the port gasket. The rocket on the right is one of the anti-material rockets. The ports are metal, and non-directionial. Also, the worknamship on these rockets is of far inferior quality to the conical rocket. The lathe marks are clearly visable, while on the other rocket type, it looks as if it were polished glass smooth. Fuck it. I'm selling the damn thing anyway.
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:26:45 PM EDT
McUzi post the patent # here's a patent web site but it requires the # for anything before 1975. [url]http://www.uspto.gov/patft/[/url]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:33:02 PM EDT
If you are serious about selling, please contact us, otherwise, check out the following link, as I found the rifle I was referring to... [url]http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/1300/1303.htm[/url]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:40:12 PM EDT
One more thing... The cartridge on the right would appear to have the 4 holes all at an obvious 90* to each other, and the internal angle would need to be roughly 20* inward angle in order to keep the projectile on course, via the 4 opposed ports all driving against each to keep the nose forward. I'm no mathmatician, but obviously simple physics would apply here!
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:52:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Chaingun: McUzi post the patent # here's a patent web site but it requires the # for anything before 1975. [url]http://www.uspto.gov/patft/[/url]
View Quote
Neat site... but... . . . [img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/013/F2/Lb/ql/in13500.jpg[/img] . . . In 1989, the Gyro's co-inventor Robert Mainhardt sold a handfull of early 13MM Gyros to the public from his personal collection. This is one of them. No Patent # [:(] Good from a collectors standpoint, Bad from a reseachers standpoint. Anti) Good site man. See, [b]I KNEW WE COULD ONE DAY FIND LOVE FOR EACH OTHER![/b] C'MERE AND GIMME A KISS YA BIG LUG! [:p] [:\] [:p] [bounce] [pyro] [:)] [uzi]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 1:55:07 PM EDT
They actually tested one of these in Vietnam with SOG. Another member here sent me a link yesterday with info on them, hopefully he will post it here as I have it no longer...
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 2:01:21 PM EDT
Like Anti said, as far as the ports, it is simple math. Any good machinist could do it with and indexing table and milling machine. Infact there are several smaller type table top CNC machines I used to work and play with that could also do it quite easily.
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 2:13:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 2:19:07 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 5:12:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 5:23:03 PM EDT
[b](1) the rocket-propelled round MUST be fired out of a smooth-bore barrel, since it does not develop sufficient KE to negotiate the friction encountered by a rifled barrel at the onset of ignition.[/b] Could easily be solved with modern faster propellands, thin "relief" rifling, and free-bore for the first 1/2 of the tube. I have put a lot of thought into that. [b](2) given the above, accuracy concerns were never adequately addressed, since the round relied for accuracy upon the canted exhaust ports, which were difficult to machine in a cost-effective manner.[/b] Yep. [b](3) Finally, the project is an interesting collectors item, but without extensive and expensive development PRACTICALLY useless. IOW: Impressive pyrotechnics, but inaccurate. A fire arm which no one would wish to trust their life [/b] I can hit anything I have to at 20 yards with it. The only other encounter I have ever read od one was a guy who used one in NAM, and he wouldn't have traded it for a 1911. See that ClassicFirearms link earlier in this thread. The account is there.
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 5:29:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/10/2001 5:30:54 PM EDT by raf]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 5:34:20 PM EDT
The rockets provide a 1/10 second burn... If modern alloys were used to lighten the projectile, and modern fuels and compression techniques were used to maximize the payload, not to mention a static rifling to stabalize the projectile, the gun would work. Sadly, the GCA put the handcuffs on the technology.... So it was never allowed to evolve. If it had, Guided "Gyro Rockets" would be available today. There is a good theory on Guided Gyros on that little EZ Board Gyrojet page... I'll figure it out soon enough, and hopefully get some prototypes in line as soon as I can get some shop time [:)]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 5:41:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 6:45:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By raf: Would the ideal Gyro-Jet round be any improvement over current technology?
View Quote
As Gyros stand... 1) Virtually no recoil. 2) Virtually no noise 3) Even the "60's" technology rockets generate enough force to punch through armor... 4) Extremley Light Weight Just that alone pretty much beats any handgun in existence. If the technology and materials were modernized, and accuracy improved with the above listed methods, the Gyrojet would outclass every small arm in existence. Could you imagine a belt fed full-auto gyro? Spitting 600 Rockets per minute, out of a weapon that weighed 4 pounds?!?! Or a directional Gyro, utilizing payload-burn-budgeting and mobile ports..that could be guided on target with the laser attached to the gun? In todays technological world, these things are an absolute reality... It's just gunna take someone to take the science in hand, and bring it into the 21st century [:)]
Link Posted: 7/10/2001 7:16:39 PM EDT
Who wouldnt want a Rocket Gun?
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 5:43:52 AM EDT
I've done a bit more thinking about this, so bear with me... Below are a couple projectile examples to be considered for practical application: 1) Rottweil ([i]sp ?[/i]) shotgun slugs with the rifling built in. 2) Sabotted slugs with stabilizers. The concept is there with both of these, the only remaining factor would be the propulsion system. Hell, a "thinking man" might even consider 2-part projectiles that have a forward cavity packed with an explosive compound and a primer tip then would detonate on impact. ([i]As actually seen utilized in the archery scene in Rambo[/i]). Oh well, what do I know..?
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 6:12:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By antiUSSA: Hell, a "thinking man" might even consider 2-part projectiles that have a forward cavity packed with an explosive compound and a primer tip then would detonate on impact. ([i]As actually seen utilized in the archery scene in Rambo[/i]).
View Quote
Ya know, I had put some thought into that... I came up with 2 potential devices. 1) As the Rockets are, they generate a pretty anemic muzzle velocity out to say 10 feet. If a detonater was added to the tip of the rocket that utilized the existing fuel payload as the explosive charge, one would have a rocket that exploded upon hitting a close range target (Using it's own fuel as the explosive charge) [i][b]and[/i][/b] penetrated armor at greater distances (Once the rocket was up to full speed, and had no fuel left to detonate, explosion wouldn't matter anyway) Fuck dude. Could you imagine how versitale a weapon that would be? Complete destruction of soft targets (I.E Body Tissue) at close range, and anti-material capabillity to boot, all packed in a friggin handgun?!?!?!?! 2) Adding a charge to the existing rocket design in the nose...This would allow explosion regardless of the rockets fuel payload. But it would have to be timed some way with a penetrator shell (Tungsten alloy?), so it would penetrate deep enough for it's explosion to cause material disruption. This would be best applied to strictly anti-material work. Either way, there is enough brainpower out there to revive the concept of the gun...although, if it is ever made again, the ATF would clamp it. They already tried twice to make them DD's, since they are over .50 Cal, and failed in court...
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 6:22:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 7:35:13 AM EDT
IT had better not scare you! [:p] [:p] Please keep in mind I have more knowledge about firearms; general, or specific; scientific or theoretical: than 90% of the members on this board combined. I just like to have fun too!
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 9:04:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 9:08:24 AM EDT
Well, it is definitley gunna be a long walk to sucess with New Gyros...But I have built other things in the past that "worked"...So i'll give this a try too! [:)] Skeptics are good. They bring up good points, and are the facillitators of refinment! [:D]
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 9:09:27 AM EDT
McUzi How thick is the baffle? .030-.040 ? What is the angle of exhaust ports? A cost effective way of mass producing them would utilize a die punch set up on a press. (Punch out all angled exhaust ports in first operation) Primer pocket and baffle would be blanked out in a separate operation. No problem. By the looks of the picture that's how they did it. How many thousand to you want? [:D] The only limiting factor is how deep your pockets are [heavy]
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 10:16:32 AM EDT
Man, I wish I knew.... I am too chicken to cut a rocket open... I dont want it to blow on me. If I can figure out a way to crack one open, I will know, and can really begin on my research. [img]http://ubb.mcuzi.com/ubb/icons/icon71.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 12:08:26 PM EDT
To reduce the risk of ignition during opening, spay electrical component cooler on the shell to eliminate heat buildup from friction during cutting. Also, use liberal amounts of WD-40 or some other type of lubricant to reduce the risk of static. This should all be done with the shell very carefully cradled in a bench vise where it cant possibly get away from you if something should happen. Furthermore, to eliminate the risk of potential grounding, I would have it secured in a leather sheath when in the vise jaws. NO metal-to-metal contact. A very fine graphite saw blade should also be in order. One more thing, don't forget to wear safety goggles and your athletic cup... Just in case! [B)]
Link Posted: 7/11/2001 12:45:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2001 12:43:02 PM EDT by david_r]
Originally Posted By antiUSSA: A very fine graphite saw blade should also be in order.
View Quote
Should this be a #2 pencil? Seems a little soft for cutting copper. I think a carbide blade would work a little better. [;)] McUZI, isn't that bottom rolled over? Shouldn't be too difficult to pry it up. Or, send me one and I'll cut it open. I'll use a pipe cutter or take the lip off with a pencil. I would ground both the shell and the tool, myself. It's not like we are dealing with an object that in current form is an explosive. It's a compressed propellant. Granted, loose and contained it could become explosive ....
Top Top