electric triggers

gringojosh · February 20, 2012, 09:58 PM

I am interested in how far advanced the technology behind electric triggers for handguns and rifles is. As I understand it, an electric trigger system would result in zero delay between trigger pull and ignition of the powder. Then you would need rounds designed to be triggered electronically instead of with a firing pin, etc. Will we see this in the next 5 years?

ScottRiqui · February 20, 2012, 10:19 PM

Within five years? Almost certainly not, at least not for consumer-grade handguns and rifles. There's really not much wrong with the current primer/firing pin arrangement - at least, nothing serious enough to warrant the extra complexity, and who wants to worry about keeping their firearm's batteries charged?

Electrically-activated cartridges really shine in high-speed applications, though. the CIWS missile defense system uses electrically-activated 20mm cartridges. The Metal Storm superposed weapons (one million rounds per minute) use them as well.

vranasaurus · February 20, 2012, 10:25 PM

I don't see enough of an advantage to warrant the added complexity.

For small arms it is a solution in search of a problem.

Willie Lowman · February 20, 2012, 10:29 PM

These things have been around for years. I can recall reading about a caseless rifle prototype that used an electric trigger 15 years ago.

Didn't the HK G11 use some kind of electric ignition system?

mikejonestkd · February 20, 2012, 10:31 PM

Remington Etronix..
Already been tried...

Nickel Plated · February 20, 2012, 11:48 PM

the thing is the delay of a hammer dropping and igniting a primer is already so ridiculously short that trying to reduce it any further is really kind of pointless. Kind of like getting your gun to go from .20 MOA to .18 MOA. What real benefit do you get out of that?

Now an interesting idea would be to make the trigger not be mechanically connected to the hammer. The trigger would just act as an electrical switch that provides power for a servo that releases the hammer. That way you can adjust your trigger in whichever way you want. make it as light, as short and as smooth as possible without worrying about it perhaps not engaging the sear enough (making the gun unsafe) or not having to lighten the hammer spring on a revolver (making it less reliable) to lighten trigger pull.

The trigger would then be an isolated system that can be adjusted and modified how you want without affecting the rest of the gun's functionality, since the servo will always disengage the same way as long as it gets a current. but even that would probably be a whole lot of extra work and development for not a whole lot of benefit.

Only good thing I see from putting electronics in a gun is that they can be made much smaller so are good for subcompact weapons where space is at a premium and you don't want to waste it on all the mechanical clockwork.

then again the ATF may not look too kindly on the idea. Since electronics can be easily reprogrammed and are much harder to keep from being modified. What's to stop you from making your trigger a full auto circuit?

**Frank Ettin** · February 21, 2012, 01:32 AM

I believe that some kind of electronic sear release system is used in some very sophisticated target pistols and rifles designed for Olympic target events. The system allows for a very light trigger with imperceptible travel. That of course makes good sense in pistols and rifles used for ultra precision target shooting. It's hardly necessary for most applications and may cause reliability issues.

I'll stick with a mechanical system for now.

kraigwy · February 21, 2012, 01:41 AM

Quote:

As I understand it, an electric trigger system would result in zero delay between trigger pull and ignition of the powder. Then you would need rounds designed to be triggered electronically instead of with a firing pin, etc. Will we see this in the next 5 years?

They have them already, they are used in EOD to trigger disrupters. Most commonely used with 12 gage and 50 cal blanks.

They work just like electric blasting caps.

Just not practical in normal firearms.

FrankenMauser · February 21, 2012, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Remington Etronix..
Already been tried...

That^^

The electronic primers are still available every couple years, but INSANELY expensive. (Up to $1 apiece. ...IF you can find them.)

Skans · February 21, 2012, 09:04 AM

Seems to me that a semi-auto with an electronic trigger could be converted to fire full auto way too easily. Or, rigged to fire remotely. Knowing how BATFE feels about open-bolt guns, I think a manufacturer would have a difficult time producing an AR-15 with an electronic trigger that can't be jerry-rigged by some kid who knows how to jerry-rig I-Phones.

ScottRiqui · February 21, 2012, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Seems to me that a semi-auto with an electronic trigger could be converted to fire full auto way too easily. Or, rigged to fire remotely. Knowing how BATFE feels about open-bolt guns, I think a manufacturer would have a difficult time producing an AR-15 with an electronic trigger that can't be jerry-rigged by some kid who knows how to jerry-rig I-Phones.

In general, I agree, but I don't think that the number of people who could re-write or bypass the factory triggering programming is any larger than the number of people out there with the machining experience and equipment necessary to modify current conventional weapons to full-auto.

Of course, you could have talented people making and distributing replacement chips that almost anyone could install themselves, but you have the same situation now - lots of people with the means to manufacturer illegal conversion kits that are drop-in (or nearly so).

I think the BATFE could handle illegal conversions of electronically-triggered weapons using their existing policies - "Yes, it can be done, and it's not even particularly difficult. Just understand that if you're caught doing it or helping someone else do it, it's your ass."

Willie D · February 21, 2012, 08:47 PM

Electronic trigger:

http://www.pardini.it/weapon/target_pistols-sp1-sp1.htm

DaleA · February 22, 2012, 02:10 AM

Thanks for the Pardini link Willie D.

I remember reading some fiction where the author was talking about an Olympic grade pistol and he used the phrase 'insanely accurate' which has stuck with me.

Sure would be fun to try one out. It would be REALLY fun to be rich enough to buy one.

Jim March · February 22, 2012, 03:05 AM

Well there's two ways to do it:

1) Conventional primer ammo with a firing pin driven by a solenoid. Trigger pull can be set insanely light (.5oz anyone!?) and you'll get some reduction in lock time. You also don't need to reset the cocking of the firing pin in any way, so cocking the gun isn't part of the loading cycle. It could be adapted to more or less any action type, and could be part of an electrically operated full-auto cycle if you wanted to (and it was legal).

2) True electronic ignition means you're setting off the powder charge with something akin to a spark plug. Plausible, and might reduce the lock time even further, BUT you're now doing a different type of ammo and if you're trying to set off the "main charge" directly with electricity, you probably need some serious amps which means bigger battery, etc.

In the latter case, I can think of one fairly easy way to do it:

a) Make the firing chamber out of a non-conductive material such as a cobalt alloy (Stellite-6k or Talonite, both used with some success in knife blades so it ought to hold up OK.

b) Put conductive points into it on two sides, positive and negative.

c) Use caseless ammo, basically a solid-fuel propellant with a bullet jammed in the front.

d) Pour enough juice across the two terminals to crank off the round.

In this design you don't have a primer at all. A couple of Lithium-Ion batteries out of a laptop stuck in a rifle stock should give enough juice for a fair number of rounds. And it should be possible to home-brew the ammo easily enough - all you need is a mold to hold the bullet and liquid-poured powder, keep it steady while it dries. Maybe use some kind of flammable glue matrix to hold everything together while it chambers and fires in a fairly conventional fashion...?

The Etronics probably used an electrically fired primer, which means less electricity involved but more complexity and some added lock-time as the primer set off the main charge. If you use enough juice to set off the main charge you've dropped both the complexity and the lock-time, at a cost of more juice needed.

FrankenMauser · February 22, 2012, 03:37 AM

Quote:

In general, I agree, but I don't think that the number of people who could re-write or bypass the factory triggering programming is any larger than the number of people out there with the machining experience and equipment necessary to modify current conventional weapons to full-auto.

Of course, you could have talented people making and distributing replacement chips that almost anyone could install themselves, but you have the same situation now - lots of people with the means to manufacturer illegal conversion kits that are drop-in (or nearly so).

I think the BATFE could handle illegal conversions of electronically-triggered weapons using their existing policies - "Yes, it can be done, and it's not even particularly difficult. Just understand that if you're caught doing it or helping someone else do it, it's your ass."

Negative.

As for the modifications...
There are several readily-obtained weapons that can be converted to FA with nothing more than 10 minutes, knowledge of the weapon, and a sharp file. (The SKS is a great example.)

The BATFE's existing policy is that if you have the parts (in this case, knowledge) and the firearm readily available, you have the FA weapon already.
And, ANYTHING that can be readily installed on a SA weapon that will fire it repeatedly with a single pull of the trigger, is also considered a machinegun. Since a little circuit board tweaking could cause that....
The BATFE won't let civilians have this technology.

In 2008, I built a remote trigger to pressure test a bolt action rifle. I made absolutely certain I was legal, before it was installed and/or used. Various conversations with the ATF resulted in a single bottom line: Don't ever have the remote trigger device in the same place as a semi-auto weapon it can be installed on; let alone actually installing it. Just having the trigger and a SA firearm in the same place, was enough for the ATF to call it a machinegun.

ScottRiqui · February 22, 2012, 12:29 PM

Quote:

The BATFE's existing policy is that if you have the parts (in this case, knowledge) and the firearm readily available, you have the FA weapon already.

If simply having the knowledge in your head of how to convert a firearm (along with the firearm itself) were enough to satisfy the BATFE's definition of "constructive possession", then that would be the first example of a true "thought crime".

Nickel Plated · February 22, 2012, 09:12 PM

I seriously doubt just the knowledge and a gun is enough to justify constructive possession. I'm pretty sure that having the components and intent to do so is kind of necessary for a conviction. If that were true then, as someone mentioned earlier, every bar in the country would be guilty of intent to manufacture destructive devices. The fact that none actually plan to do so is what saves them. Also you would be guilty of intent to commit rape, robbery, murder, and all that other good stuff.

FrankenMauser · February 23, 2012, 01:57 AM

When it comes to circuit boards, all it takes is the knowledge and the tool.

Considering that, sometimes, the only tool needed is a car key or some spit.... I think everyone would be in constructive possession.

I stand by my previous statements. Perhaps I should have clarified a bit more, but I stand by the concept: You will not see electronically-fired semi-auto firearms allowed in civilian hands, for at least 75 years.

ScottRiqui · February 23, 2012, 02:21 AM

Quote:

You will not see electronically-fired semi-auto firearms allowed in civilian hands, for at least 75 years.

Except for the ones that are already there (see post #12).

Ben Towe · February 23, 2012, 03:13 AM

Quote:

The BATFE's existing policy is that if you have the parts (in this case, knowledge) and the firearm readily available, you have the FA weapon already.
And, ANYTHING that can be readily installed on a SA weapon that will fire it repeatedly with a single pull of the trigger, is also considered a machinegun. Since a little circuit board tweaking could cause that....
The BATFE won't let civilians have this technology.

So... Iiif I have an AK-47, aaand I have a toothpick, I have a fully automatic weapon? Cause that's all it takes. Don't think that'll fly hoss

.

Skans · February 23, 2012, 08:17 AM

AK47 and a toothpick? Full-auto? I don't think so. I'm pretty familiar with the workings of an AK, and simply jamming a specific part on it with a tooth pick won't make it fire full-auto. Most likely will just cause it to jam.

Nickel Plated · February 23, 2012, 12:31 PM

Maybe he's thinking of a FAL? I hear the British L1A1s can be made full auto by jamming a toothpick or a match in there.

FrankenMauser · February 23, 2012, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Except for the ones that are already there (see post #12).

Those only claim to have an electronic trigger mechanism. They don't claim to be electronically fired (electronically-fired .22 LR might be impossible to produce, anyway). With only an electronic trigger, a mechanical disconnect can still be built into the mechanism.

ScottRiqui · February 23, 2012, 02:53 PM

But it's still subject to the same shenanigans that you claimed would incur the BATFE's wrath.

If you have an electronic switch (the trigger) that causes the gun to fire, then what's to keep you from reprogramming the circuit so that one press of the trigger "button" generates multiple commands for the gun to fire?

I'll say it again - I believe that it would be no harder or easier to illegally convert an electronically-activated firearm to automatic fire compared to a conventional firearm, so the BATFE could handle them just the same - "Yes, we realize that illegal modifications are possible, and we realize that they're not particularly difficult. But understand that if we catch you, you're going to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for a few years."

NavyVet1959 · March 16, 2015, 07:49 AM

How about if you make it without any type of logic circuitry. Basically, you press the switch, power goes to the servo, the servo pin hits the firing pin, the firing pin hits the primer, the round fires? Or maybe the trigger switch activates an electric relay which then gives power to the servo. Of course, I'm thinking of it more for a single shot weapon and a way that hobbyists could build a firearm without having to make all the small parts that make up a trigger system.

The question becomes whether there are some small servos that would have enough force to ignite a primer with a batter pack as small as a cell phone battery.

Since the trigger could be so light, you could make it so that there were two switches, wired in series, so that you had to press both of them before it could fire. Using a rifle as an example, you could put one type of touch sensor on the handguard and the other switch where the trigger is traditionally located.

(Yeah, I know it's an old thread, but I find the idea interesting and worth reviving without starting a new thread)

February 20, 2012, 10:29 PM	#4
Willie Lowman Senior Member Join Date: March 5, 2009 Location: Uh-Hi-O Posts: 3,006	These things have been around for years. I can recall reading about a caseless rifle prototype that used an electric trigger 15 years ago. Didn't the HK G11 use some kind of electric ignition system? __________________ "9mm has a very long history of being a pointy little bullet moving quickly" --Sevens

February 20, 2012, 10:31 PM	#5
mikejonestkd Senior Member Join Date: January 3, 2006 Location: Brockport, NY Posts: 3,717	Remington Etronix.. Already been tried... __________________ You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.

February 22, 2012, 03:05 AM	#14
Jim March Senior Member Join Date: February 14, 1999 Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA Posts: 7,417	Well there's two ways to do it: 1) Conventional primer ammo with a firing pin driven by a solenoid. Trigger pull can be set insanely light (.5oz anyone!?) and you'll get some reduction in lock time. You also don't need to reset the cocking of the firing pin in any way, so cocking the gun isn't part of the loading cycle. It could be adapted to more or less any action type, and could be part of an electrically operated full-auto cycle if you wanted to (and it was legal). 2) True electronic ignition means you're setting off the powder charge with something akin to a spark plug. Plausible, and might reduce the lock time even further, BUT you're now doing a different type of ammo and if you're trying to set off the "main charge" directly with electricity, you probably need some serious amps which means bigger battery, etc. In the latter case, I can think of one fairly easy way to do it: a) Make the firing chamber out of a non-conductive material such as a cobalt alloy (Stellite-6k or Talonite, both used with some success in knife blades so it ought to hold up OK. b) Put conductive points into it on two sides, positive and negative. c) Use caseless ammo, basically a solid-fuel propellant with a bullet jammed in the front. d) Pour enough juice across the two terminals to crank off the round. In this design you don't have a primer at all. A couple of Lithium-Ion batteries out of a laptop stuck in a rifle stock should give enough juice for a fair number of rounds. And it should be possible to home-brew the ammo easily enough - all you need is a mold to hold the bullet and liquid-poured powder, keep it steady while it dries. Maybe use some kind of flammable glue matrix to hold everything together while it chambers and fires in a fairly conventional fashion...? The Etronics probably used an electrically fired primer, which means less electricity involved but more complexity and some added lock-time as the primer set off the main charge. If you use enough juice to set off the main charge you've dropped both the complexity and the lock-time, at a cost of more juice needed. __________________ Jim March

February 23, 2012, 01:57 AM	#18
FrankenMauser Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Location: In the valley above the plain Posts: 13,424	When it comes to circuit boards, all it takes is the knowledge and the tool. Considering that, sometimes, the only tool needed is a car key or some spit.... I think everyone would be in constructive possession. I stand by my previous statements. Perhaps I should have clarified a bit more, but I stand by the concept: You will not see electronically-fired semi-auto firearms allowed in civilian hands, for at least 75 years. __________________ Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

March 16, 2015, 07:49 AM	#25
NavyVet1959 Senior Member Join Date: April 27, 2014 Location: Texas, ya'll Posts: 166	How about if you make it without any type of logic circuitry. Basically, you press the switch, power goes to the servo, the servo pin hits the firing pin, the firing pin hits the primer, the round fires? Or maybe the trigger switch activates an electric relay which then gives power to the servo. Of course, I'm thinking of it more for a single shot weapon and a way that hobbyists could build a firearm without having to make all the small parts that make up a trigger system. The question becomes whether there are some small servos that would have enough force to ignite a primer with a batter pack as small as a cell phone battery. Since the trigger could be so light, you could make it so that there were two switches, wired in series, so that you had to press both of them before it could fire. Using a rifle as an example, you could put one type of touch sensor on the handguard and the other switch where the trigger is traditionally located. (Yeah, I know it's an old thread, but I find the idea interesting and worth reviving without starting a new thread) __________________ When you fill out your income tax forms at the end of the year, look and see how much money you have given the government throughout the year. Then, take a moment to ponder -- has the government done $X worth of stuff FOR you or TO you this year? I tend to believe the latter... https://sites.google.com/site/navyvet1959 Last edited by NavyVet1959; March 16, 2015 at 07:55 AM.

February 20, 2012, 09:58 PM	#1
gringojosh Member Join Date: December 1, 2011 Posts: 42	electric triggers I am interested in how far advanced the technology behind electric triggers for handguns and rifles is. As I understand it, an electric trigger system would result in zero delay between trigger pull and ignition of the powder. Then you would need rounds designed to be triggered electronically instead of with a firing pin, etc. Will we see this in the next 5 years?

February 20, 2012, 10:19 PM	#2
ScottRiqui Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2010 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 2,905	Within five years? Almost certainly not, at least not for consumer-grade handguns and rifles. There's really not much wrong with the current primer/firing pin arrangement - at least, nothing serious enough to warrant the extra complexity, and who wants to worry about keeping their firearm's batteries charged? Electrically-activated cartridges really shine in high-speed applications, though. the CIWS missile defense system uses electrically-activated 20mm cartridges. The Metal Storm superposed weapons (one million rounds per minute) use them as well.

February 20, 2012, 10:25 PM	#3
vranasaurus Senior Member Join Date: November 16, 2008 Posts: 1,184	I don't see enough of an advantage to warrant the added complexity. For small arms it is a solution in search of a problem.

February 20, 2012, 11:48 PM	#6
Nickel Plated Senior Member Join Date: January 17, 2010 Location: Brooklyn, NYC Posts: 610	the thing is the delay of a hammer dropping and igniting a primer is already so ridiculously short that trying to reduce it any further is really kind of pointless. Kind of like getting your gun to go from .20 MOA to .18 MOA. What real benefit do you get out of that? Now an interesting idea would be to make the trigger not be mechanically connected to the hammer. The trigger would just act as an electrical switch that provides power for a servo that releases the hammer. That way you can adjust your trigger in whichever way you want. make it as light, as short and as smooth as possible without worrying about it perhaps not engaging the sear enough (making the gun unsafe) or not having to lighten the hammer spring on a revolver (making it less reliable) to lighten trigger pull. The trigger would then be an isolated system that can be adjusted and modified how you want without affecting the rest of the gun's functionality, since the servo will always disengage the same way as long as it gets a current. but even that would probably be a whole lot of extra work and development for not a whole lot of benefit. Only good thing I see from putting electronics in a gun is that they can be made much smaller so are good for subcompact weapons where space is at a premium and you don't want to waste it on all the mechanical clockwork. then again the ATF may not look too kindly on the idea. Since electronics can be easily reprogrammed and are much harder to keep from being modified. What's to stop you from making your trigger a full auto circuit?

February 21, 2012, 01:32 AM	#7
Frank Ettin Staff Join Date: November 23, 2005 Location: California - San Francisco Posts: 9,471	I believe that some kind of electronic sear release system is used in some very sophisticated target pistols and rifles designed for Olympic target events. The system allows for a very light trigger with imperceptible travel. That of course makes good sense in pistols and rifles used for ultra precision target shooting. It's hardly necessary for most applications and may cause reliability issues. I'll stick with a mechanical system for now.

February 21, 2012, 09:04 AM	#10
Skans Senior Member Join Date: November 20, 2008 Posts: 11,132	Seems to me that a semi-auto with an electronic trigger could be converted to fire full auto way too easily. Or, rigged to fire remotely. Knowing how BATFE feels about open-bolt guns, I think a manufacturer would have a difficult time producing an AR-15 with an electronic trigger that can't be jerry-rigged by some kid who knows how to jerry-rig I-Phones.

February 21, 2012, 08:47 PM	#12
Willie D Senior Member Join Date: June 24, 2007 Posts: 1,149	Electronic trigger: http://www.pardini.it/weapon/target_pistols-sp1-sp1.htm

February 22, 2012, 02:10 AM	#13
DaleA Senior Member Join Date: September 12, 2002 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 5,313	Thanks for the Pardini link Willie D. I remember reading some fiction where the author was talking about an Olympic grade pistol and he used the phrase 'insanely accurate' which has stuck with me. Sure would be fun to try one out. It would be REALLY fun to be rich enough to buy one.

February 22, 2012, 09:12 PM	#17
Nickel Plated Senior Member Join Date: January 17, 2010 Location: Brooklyn, NYC Posts: 610	I seriously doubt just the knowledge and a gun is enough to justify constructive possession. I'm pretty sure that having the components and intent to do so is kind of necessary for a conviction. If that were true then, as someone mentioned earlier, every bar in the country would be guilty of intent to manufacture destructive devices. The fact that none actually plan to do so is what saves them. Also you would be guilty of intent to commit rape, robbery, murder, and all that other good stuff.

February 23, 2012, 08:17 AM	#21
Skans Senior Member Join Date: November 20, 2008 Posts: 11,132	AK47 and a toothpick? Full-auto? I don't think so. I'm pretty familiar with the workings of an AK, and simply jamming a specific part on it with a tooth pick won't make it fire full-auto. Most likely will just cause it to jam.

February 23, 2012, 12:31 PM	#22
Nickel Plated Senior Member Join Date: January 17, 2010 Location: Brooklyn, NYC Posts: 610	Maybe he's thinking of a FAL? I hear the British L1A1s can be made full auto by jamming a toothpick or a match in there.

February 23, 2012, 02:53 PM	#24
ScottRiqui Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2010 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 2,905	But it's still subject to the same shenanigans that you claimed would incur the BATFE's wrath. If you have an electronic switch (the trigger) that causes the gun to fire, then what's to keep you from reprogramming the circuit so that one press of the trigger "button" generates multiple commands for the gun to fire? I'll say it again - I believe that it would be no harder or easier to illegally convert an electronically-activated firearm to automatic fire compared to a conventional firearm, so the BATFE could handle them just the same - "Yes, we realize that illegal modifications are possible, and we realize that they're not particularly difficult. But understand that if we catch you, you're going to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for a few years."