So after to many months of debating on what to build I've finally settled for this. The devastating Pak 40.
So here's some specs for the build.
Over under design so I can incorporate the chamber into a recoil mechanism (I'll vent some of the hot gas's to force the gun to recoil)
A 52" x 1" barrel (have to keep it short to keep it transportable)
A 40" x 2" chamber (trying to keep the pressure low for safety)
A full mount
A recoil system (the forced recoil system I mentioned earlier)
A full operational elevation and traverse mechanism
A chicken Plate shield in front
Some sort of sights (not sure how to work them out yet possibly like the m203s leaf sights)
Shooting clumps of 50 .2 gram bbs is some type of container (still to be designed)
Ditched the burst disk idea I had to reduce even more pressure
Some HGDT results
Still trying to reduce the fps a little to prevent injury to other players as of right now its got a muzzle velocity of 699 (approx)
What do you guys think, first major build should be started building it after I work everything out on paper (I can't afford to mess up)
7.5 Cm Pak 40 Project - Airsoft cannon replica
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26203
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 569 times
- Been thanked: 345 times
I've seen a couple of these in the flesh around the world, very impressive piece.battlelava wrote:The devastating Pak 40.
I think you'll find that if the chamber is mounted free on a low friction rail it will already recoil a considerable amount without the need for assistance.Over under design so I can incorporate the chamber into a recoil mechanism (I'll vent some of the hot gas's to force the gun to recoil)
Ditched the burst disk idea I had to reduce even more pressure
Some HGDT results that can only be seen with a scanning electron microscope
crop por favor
With the dimensions you have in mind, I think you're chosen the wrong aesthetic model, there are more adequate German WW2 anti-tank weapons I can think of that suit the scale of your build better:What do you guys think, first major build should be started building it after I work everything out on paper (I can't afford to mess up)
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
- battlelava
- Specialist
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:13 pm
Sorry about not cropping I can't believe I forgot to.
Is that a pak 36 I was thinking of it, or maybe sleeving the whole thing in a 3" pipe. To give it a better appearance
Is that a pak 36 I was thinking of it, or maybe sleeving the whole thing in a 3" pipe. To give it a better appearance
-
- Specialist 3
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
Actually, The BEST Combination I've EVER gotten with a combustion was a 10 inch by 3 inch chamber, with a 2.5 foot by 3 inch chamber. That should help with power, range, and size.
- battlelava
- Specialist
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:13 pm
two chambers? I'm confusedevanmcorleytv wrote:Actually, The BEST Combination I've EVER gotten with a combustion was a 10 inch by 3 inch chamber, with a 2.5 foot by 3 inch chamber. That should help with power, range, and size.
I think that what he meant was a 3 inch diameter, 10 inch long chamber, and a 2.5 foot long, 3 inch diameter barrel.
<a href="http://www.danasoft.com"><img src="http://www.danasoft.com/citysign.jpg" border="0"></a><div>
THIS STATES WHERE YOU LIVE, NOT ME, IT SAYS WHERE YOU LIVE BASED ON YOUR IP ADRESS.
THIS STATES WHERE YOU LIVE, NOT ME, IT SAYS WHERE YOU LIVE BASED ON YOUR IP ADRESS.
- battlelava
- Specialist
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:13 pm
That would make sense. According to HGDT it would reduce my output by half compared to the Barrel and Chamber I had planned.blind909 wrote:I think that what he meant was a 3 inch diameter, 10 inch long chamber, and a 2.5 foot long, 3 inch diameter barrel.
Edit: Heres a picture of the HGDT results that you can actually see
I'm not sure about the projectile friction and initial position part... Should be close though as i remember someone saying it was 2 psi resistance.
- jackssmirkingrevenge
- Five Star General
- Posts: 26203
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
- Has thanked: 569 times
- Been thanked: 345 times
If you blow down the barrel and the projectile moves, then friction is less than 3 psi.
Initial position is basically "how far down the barrel is the projectile when loaded", in most sensical launchers this is zero.
Are you fitting a chamber fan? if not, put the diameter and flow to zero.
I say model it on a 37mm anti tank gun like the Panzerabwehrkanone 36 or this lovely Bofors:
Another advantage of the Pak 36 is that you can "realistically" do this
Initial position is basically "how far down the barrel is the projectile when loaded", in most sensical launchers this is zero.
Are you fitting a chamber fan? if not, put the diameter and flow to zero.
I say model it on a 37mm anti tank gun like the Panzerabwehrkanone 36 or this lovely Bofors:
Another advantage of the Pak 36 is that you can "realistically" do this
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
- battlelava
- Specialist
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:13 pm
What about a pak36 with this for a breech without the "charge" at the end of the muzzle. I don't know how easy it would be to make an end attachment like that that's not deadly especially with my limited resources.
This is were I got it from and it seems to work really good for him, And then with the recoil I can make it auto eject.
edit: Fixing the picture I'm not sure why they keep coming out so massive.
This is were I got it from and it seems to work really good for him, And then with the recoil I can make it auto eject.
edit: Fixing the picture I'm not sure why they keep coming out so massive.