View Full Version : 120,000 rounds per minute

Lazy D
May 13, 2005, 12:47 PM
Imagin this, 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.

Imagine a gun with no recoil, no sound, no heat, no gunpowder, no visible
firing signature (muzzle flash), and no stoppages or jams of any kind. Now
imagine that this gun could fire .308 caliber and .50 caliber metal
projectiles accurately at up to 8,000 fps (feet-per-second), featured an
infinitely variable/programmable cyclic rate-of-fire (as high as 120,000
rounds-per-minute), and were capable of laying down a 360-degree field of fire.


May 13, 2005, 01:15 PM
That looks amazing!
The article does leave me asking questions, though. If this thing could fire projectiles at up to 8,000 fps, how fast would that centrifuge have to spin? How could something that spins that ridiculously fast, not build up any heat?
Amazing, but I'm a bit skeptical without more info.

Lazy D
May 13, 2005, 01:17 PM
I think it is more Sci-Fi than anything. If it materialized I'd sure like to shoot the sucker.

Jim Watson
May 13, 2005, 01:47 PM
Anytime anybody says "no recoil" about any projectile weapon but a rocket, I get VERY suspicious about the rest of his claims. A two-foot diameter rotor (About the maximum you could get in that 32 inch housing with the wall thickness needed to direct the shot and protect the gunner against a fragmented rotor.) launching a shot at 8000 fps would have to be turning 76,000 rpm minimum.

May 13, 2005, 01:56 PM
I'm curious how you'd be able to manuever something with that much gyroscopic force.

3 weelin geezer
May 13, 2005, 01:56 PM
What about being able to shoot 360 deg.? Whats the point? I sure wouldnt want my gun killing me. Btw, that thing reminds me of that gun I used to have that shot foam disks when I was a kid. Why does it state a caliber anyways if it can shoot in any direction I don't see how it could have a barrel as we know it. I figger it operates like a cotton candy maker. Even if it does employ a barrel, how could anyone actually carry all that lead (in .308) to keep it fed for even one minute? How would they be fed into the gun? That thing looks more like a model of the USS RELIANT from 'the wrath of khan' movie.

May 13, 2005, 02:57 PM
Even if they made that thing battlefield ready,
I don't know how the range and acurracy would be on that thing , and thats the main problem i have with this weapons system.

The DREAD won't jam because, according to its inventor, it can't jam. The DREAD's operating and feeding mechanisms simply don't allow for stoppages or jams to occur. It thus follows that the DREAD Centrifuge Weapon will be the most reliable metallic projectile launcher/ballistic device on the planet.
And reliability is just about feeding problems and jams. I'd like to see how it works in a sandstorm, or after it's been saturated with driving rain or sleet.

to communicate over his own weapon's firing report. And, since the gun doesn't generate any muzzle flash or heat (it's heatless and frictionless, remember?)S

Frictionless?? :rolleyes: You're moving metal balls at over 8000 fps. In order to do that, there has to be contact somewhere.

I'm rather skeptical. And the fact that it's called DREAD doesn't help. :rolleyes:

May 13, 2005, 03:50 PM
I do kind of buy the recoilless part; it would vibrate more than kick as it launched things. (Think of it like a sling, not a gun. Forces are applied in acceleration, but not release.)

And yeah, it seems like it would be extremely vulnerable to damage and dirt.

May 13, 2005, 04:14 PM
Ya'll are a bunch of damn pessimists.......I would like to get my hands on one just for the hell of it!

May 13, 2005, 07:10 PM
JHC. :eek:

Does anyone realize what rounds 1/32 of an inch apart are? A SOLID STREAM OF DEATH. 8,000 fps?

I think I have to go sit down somewhere.

Lazy D
May 13, 2005, 08:12 PM
Jim, You thinking way too much brother. I kinda figured it was so insignificant, it's more of a novalty concept.

Double Naught Spy
May 13, 2005, 08:15 PM
Okay, well most of the hype is false. It is not silent, jam-proof, and there will be considerable heat building up when you are slinging ball bearings out at that rate. Moreover, it is going to be on a large motorized platform. The centerfuge will be very loud. With projectiles per second breaking the sound barrier, you can darned will believe it is going to make a lot of noise.

It can't jam? So it is going to work every time, perfectly, such as all the feeding mechanisms always work, the centerfuge always works, etc.?

The M16 was self cleaning, as I recall. Uh-huh, sure. And Glenda the good witch married Santa Claus.

May 13, 2005, 08:15 PM
Need a $200 stamp for that? it isn't a firearm, it just flings mini golf balls.

May 13, 2005, 10:13 PM
This magical new weapon "can't jam" and "is frictionless"??? Kinda reminds me of the story about the guy who got on a fully automated airplane and heard "There is no pilot on this airplane. The computer controls everything. But don't worry because nothing can go wrong, can go wrong, can go wrong, can go wrong, ..."

Good shooting and be safe.

May 13, 2005, 11:18 PM
Having seen lab grade centrifuge in use, I have to call BS. The torque on that gun would be extreme. The power requirements would be impossible. and the slightest speck on any part of the rotor would cause it to vibrate to destruction. I remember asking if the frame of the centrifuge fould stop anything if the rotor failed. She laughed and said that it is near impossible to stop anything moving that fast. That's why tolerances are so high and inspections are performed on the equipment daily.

May 14, 2005, 10:10 AM
Crosshair nailed it.

I too have used ultra centrifuges that ran to 75k and above.
(1) They use some fairly exotic systems to achieve that speed, Diffusion pumps/turbine drives etc
(2) Rotors were titanium and had to be derated over time due to the stresses placed on them or they would shatter.
(3) The inside to the chamber is surrounded by armor plating and the unit weighs hundreds of pounds. The armor belt is there for a reason

Before samples tubes can be placed in the rotor they must be carefully weighed on a lab balance and a darn good one to assure samples across from each other weigh the same. If not, it super stresses the head which could fail, so kiss of 300K.

And these folks would have us believe they have designed a system which by its very nature is constanly un-balancing the rotor (ball carrier) as it slings of balls. Even if it ejected balls from opposing sides in a constant attempt to re-balance, the stresses on something typing to be a gyroscope at 75K rpm would be amazing.

I could be wrong but I don't thinks so.

Didn't the Australians invent a weapon with multiple barrels each holding a stack of rounds that fired successively to achive high rounds per minute?
I know someone did but I have heard no news it was very embraced or deployed.


May 14, 2005, 11:41 AM
how does it work? I mean 360 deg.? what size could it have?

May 14, 2005, 11:58 AM
Sounds like what people have been workin on for years; rail guns, gauss guns, etc.

May 14, 2005, 12:56 PM
Well, not really.

The DREAD operates like a big-ass sling; ever tie a string to a rock, whip it around really fast, and then let go? DREAD's like that.

novus collectus
May 14, 2005, 12:59 PM
Didn't the Australians invent a weapon with multiple barrels each holding a stack of rounds that fired successively to achive high rounds per minute?
Google O'Dwyer or Metal Storm and you will find the company website with video of the 1,000,000 round per minute gun in action. I could not find anything about the latest developements or applications when I last looked though, but I have read about the projects they are planning on using it for. Like a mortar system, or a replacement for the Phalanx anti missle system currently used on Navy ships.

May 14, 2005, 01:02 PM
Well, not really.

The DREAD operates like a big-ass sling; ever tie a string to a rock, whip it around really fast, and then let go? DREAD's like that.

May 14, 2005, 01:05 PM
Unless Newton's third law has been repealed, there has to be recoil.

Spherical ballistics being what they are, how far could that 3000 f.p.s. ball really go before it slows to a trot?

novus collectus
May 14, 2005, 02:03 PM
Spherical ballistics being what they are, how far could that 3000 f.p.s. ball really go before it slows to a trot?
The claim is 8,000 fps, but that doesn't sound feasible either IMO.

May 14, 2005, 04:32 PM
Here we go.. put blades on the centrifuge and launch it like a frisbee. :rolleyes:

May 14, 2005, 05:20 PM
The Roswell Throwswell - the next (figuratively speaking) Bradley Fighting Vehicle.

Dave Haven
May 14, 2005, 10:15 PM
Centrifugal machine guns have been developed in the past. IIRC, GE developed one in the '50's or so... I read about it in Small Arms of the World or some such publication. Velocity and accuracy were unimpressive.

May 15, 2005, 09:20 AM
I have to call BS

May 20, 2005, 11:00 AM
With a 2' dia. rotor, I get a rotational speed of just over 152,000 RPM to hit 8000 fps. Not that the 70 some odd is much easier to attain...

This basic idea's been around for a long time, but so far has never gotten off the ground.

Harper's Weekly, March 25, 1861. Steam powered centrifugal gun captured:

Never did get used.

June 27, 2005, 08:01 AM
The problem that I see is that it would act like a gyro and be extremely hard if not impossible to move in an acceptable way. Nice Idea though, I suppose.


Double Naught Spy
June 27, 2005, 12:19 PM
Unless Newton's third law has been repealed, there has to be recoil.

Um, nope, no recoil and no law repealed. Centerfuges don't have recoil.

June 29, 2005, 02:14 PM
Good grief. I hope no politician reads this! Next they'll be a Bill banning "deadly centrifugal assault weapons". That its never been built, won't work with todays technology, is irrelevant. Its like banning "plastic guns that ignore x-ray detection", or banning cloning of humans lest we get another Fienstein, Hillary, et al. Keep it quiet! They may cancel their August vacation for this "important business". :barf:

4V50 Gary
June 29, 2005, 02:21 PM
Looks like a starship. :p One problem - it empties fast. You don't need that high a rate of fire.

June 30, 2005, 05:40 PM
I would not wont to be pfc that has to load those magazines. 1...2...3...4...5...six hours later...4997...4998...4999...5000.
Done sarge....1 minute later...1...2
Boy wouldnt that suck

June 30, 2005, 11:46 PM
BS yet again.

If you could get the mechanism to work it would have so much recoil that it could be used as a rocket engine.

July 1, 2005, 12:32 AM
You owe me a new keyboard Skeetin'870. That was funny to the extreme. :cool:

July 1, 2005, 11:35 PM
Centrifuges don't have recoil.They sure do when they throw things. A normal centrifuge doesn't recoil because nothing's leaving the system. If something leaves at a high rate of speed (as with this design), there will DEFINITELY be recoil of some sort. It may not be a conventional recoil action, but something's definitely going to move around to balance the loss in the system. Newton is still right.

Also, if you assume the "throwing wheel" is about 1 foot in diameter, it's going to have to spin around 150,000rpm to throw something at 8,000fps. I hardly think it's going to be silent. Also the spin up time will not be anything like instantaneous. The whole time it's ready to shoot, it's already going to have to be spun up. I hate to think what will happen if it's damaged and it becomes unbalanced. If it can throw something at 8,000fps, that's how fast parts will be going when they fly off it.

And the comments about gyroscopic effects are on target.

July 2, 2005, 12:45 AM
Uh, I balance engines and various other things at work. I have to point out the obvious here. If you get that big metel disc rotating at speed with a bunch of loose projectiles wandering around in there it's gonna thrash around like a gut shot squirrel. The dynamic and kinetic balance are going to be constantly changing with the number of projectiles. Oh, and another observation. One of the other gentleman here mentioned gyroscopic force. I'm no egghead, but have you ever ran a 9" angle grinder? They turn at about 6000 rpm. You can definetly feel the thing squirming in your hands as you go. It would be a bugger to aim this dread deal, even if you could work out the balance problem.
Here's another one. You gotta have some kind of recoil somewhere here. I'm not sure how there channeling the steel balls out of this thing, but regardless of how it's done there's still an equal and opposite force when the projectile leaves the unit.
And yet one more observation. Or I guess a question really. What the heck kind of bearings are they gonna use in this thing? 120000.00 rpm? I haven't seen a bearing in my line of work that will put up with that.
I guess you could say I'm a sceptic :rolleyes:

July 2, 2005, 05:06 PM
I would dread having to deal with one of those...

... sorry... I know that was pretty bad :rolleyes: