Inventions Needed: Improved Handgun Design: internal collared ballast on the front of barrel 07 09 2017
The problem with handguns today is that the semiautomatics have a tilt barrel. The barrel tilts upon firing. There are fixed semi-autos available but they are usually heavier and prone to problems.
If you took a fixed barrel blowback gun and added a collared ballast to the front of the barrel....
essentially a slice of a cylinder with a hole in it... and mounted that to the front of the barrel...so that the gun is configured so that upon firing as the barrel is forced backward... pressure is created in that hollow cylinder behind the ballast that would serve as your recoil reducer, weight reducer and mechanism that ejects and cocks a new round.
Alternatively the collared ballast could be mounted at the rear of the barrel and ride in the "tube" of the slide. So that the slide comes backward and pressure is created in the cylinder.
Either the collared ballast could have an o ring on it or metal spring rings. The back of the slide would have a top vent port or more than one. The decreased blowback allowing for more muzzle velocity and therefore a straighter shot. The fixed in relative position of the barrel leading to straighter shots.
The gun would not need to weigh as much because weight would not be integral to the slide function in this type of blowback.
As always any defects to the gun design would have to be thought out before final production so that it wouldn't be something to be pulled off the shelves, recalled or have no interest in.
Today weight to slide is an integral part of how the mechanism works. There is no reason why you can't have a barrel in a cylinder type arrangement as described above. Gas systems have long been proven with the AR-15 and the AK-47.
There could indeed be more than one collared ballast mounted to the barrel either permanently or using a multi key approach. Also barrel could be of different diameters so that the collared ballast or ballasts screw onto it at different places. There being no gap between them on the length of the barrel because the collared ballasts could be flanged with a smaller diameter on one or both ends serving as a spacer. There could even be one where it is screwed on and then a spring loaded key holds it into that position on the barrel.
Mounted to the front of the barrel you might have a stretching force of the barrel come into play? That could be lessened with more than one collared ballast. Some of which would be narrower. Actually what I am describing could also be engineered to have an integral silencer in the barrel effect, via the gaps between the collared ballast.
It would seem to me that a manufacturer ought to be able to get the tolerances and mechanism of any gun right with regard to the range of powder charges commonly found in ammunition sold for them. But that doesn't hold true into today's manufacturing market. It would seem to me that you create the parameters you need to satisfy to make something and a capable and qualified engineer designer can solve every single one of them in one product with as few moving parts as possible. But again that isn't the standard of the world we live in today.
© 2017 Thomas Murphy
Originally published on 07 09 2017 at: www.inventionsneeded.blogspot.com
The problem with handguns today is that the semiautomatics have a tilt barrel. The barrel tilts upon firing. There are fixed semi-autos available but they are usually heavier and prone to problems.
If you took a fixed barrel blowback gun and added a collared ballast to the front of the barrel....
essentially a slice of a cylinder with a hole in it... and mounted that to the front of the barrel...so that the gun is configured so that upon firing as the barrel is forced backward... pressure is created in that hollow cylinder behind the ballast that would serve as your recoil reducer, weight reducer and mechanism that ejects and cocks a new round.
Alternatively the collared ballast could be mounted at the rear of the barrel and ride in the "tube" of the slide. So that the slide comes backward and pressure is created in the cylinder.
Either the collared ballast could have an o ring on it or metal spring rings. The back of the slide would have a top vent port or more than one. The decreased blowback allowing for more muzzle velocity and therefore a straighter shot. The fixed in relative position of the barrel leading to straighter shots.
The gun would not need to weigh as much because weight would not be integral to the slide function in this type of blowback.
As always any defects to the gun design would have to be thought out before final production so that it wouldn't be something to be pulled off the shelves, recalled or have no interest in.
Today weight to slide is an integral part of how the mechanism works. There is no reason why you can't have a barrel in a cylinder type arrangement as described above. Gas systems have long been proven with the AR-15 and the AK-47.
There could indeed be more than one collared ballast mounted to the barrel either permanently or using a multi key approach. Also barrel could be of different diameters so that the collared ballast or ballasts screw onto it at different places. There being no gap between them on the length of the barrel because the collared ballasts could be flanged with a smaller diameter on one or both ends serving as a spacer. There could even be one where it is screwed on and then a spring loaded key holds it into that position on the barrel.
Mounted to the front of the barrel you might have a stretching force of the barrel come into play? That could be lessened with more than one collared ballast. Some of which would be narrower. Actually what I am describing could also be engineered to have an integral silencer in the barrel effect, via the gaps between the collared ballast.
It would seem to me that a manufacturer ought to be able to get the tolerances and mechanism of any gun right with regard to the range of powder charges commonly found in ammunition sold for them. But that doesn't hold true into today's manufacturing market. It would seem to me that you create the parameters you need to satisfy to make something and a capable and qualified engineer designer can solve every single one of them in one product with as few moving parts as possible. But again that isn't the standard of the world we live in today.
© 2017 Thomas Murphy
Originally published on 07 09 2017 at: www.inventionsneeded.blogspot.com
