Shouldn't be confused with a Light Gas Gun. In a nutshell: An LGG is the mother of all BB guns, used to simulate meteoric impacts in labs. A CLGG is "gun, but what if powder is gas?".
The first one isn't quite right, light gas guns are not in any way like bb guns, except, you know of any kind that accellerates gas with a deflagrating propallent, cause i do not. Light gas guns are rather the pneumatic equivalent of a "shotgun starter" strapped to a catapult. ;D
@@Enthropical_Thunder I was just looking for a simple explanation and I felt that "you know the feeling when you spit out a cherry seed? How you have to build up pressure inside your mouth until the seed bursts through with increased velocity?" wasn't quite as good of an image.
The difference between CLGGs and LGGs is a C = Combustion. In LGGs you just have the hydrogen because of it‘s low molecular weight. But you don‘t use the chemical reaction of hydrogen with oxygen. The gas needs to be at high pressure to accelerate the projectile. There are multiple ways of achieving that. Seriously, look it up at Wikipedia! I can’t explain it in a RUclips-Commentary!
@S Schwerer Gustav was enormous and expensive. They only built two of them and scarcely used either because they were too expensive. A CLG gun would have been dirt cheap by comparison and far more effective.
@@Spookston Another factor of why ships really are the most likely platform for such a gun, along with the issue of hydrogen evaporation not being such a big deal if you can produce it on the spot. I guess those are also perhaps the main reasons I don't see this being mounted on a tank, as size really does matter.
Are there any conventional materials that could withstand such high velocities? I figured tungsten and DU but anything else? Seems like it'd burn up. I didn't know there was anything capable of firing as fast as a rail gun. Sounds like these fire way faster. So maybe I misunderstood in the video... The Navy is NOT currently fielding any guns like what was mentioned in the video? They've only tested them?
@@maxim6088 UwU. Yezz yet no. He will not stop it ever. I cannot stop it either. Shut your mouth. It is a parasite that effects minds. Soon you too will be infected by the UwU. The awoo. And the boi. You too will start using words such as bamboozled. Yes. It is terrible. But there is hope. Grab a tin foil hat
@@billhanna2148 the same reason that you can touch foil in the oven without burning yourself but not the food. it transfers the energy to the air more efficiently. imagine burning a piece of paper and dropping it into a barrel, all the fire is inside the barrel but the paper burns before it ever touches the barrel. then imagine placing that paper on the barrel and burning it; even with less paper (less power) it will heat up the barrel more. the whole system produces more heat, but the gun stays cooler, the heat is dumped into the environment.
My gut feeling is that this video overstates the safety difficulties of segregated cryogenic propellants. 1. If a cryotank loses active cooling, it doesn't immediately explode. This is because boiling is endothermic. As the LO2 or LH2 boils, this absorbs heat, cooling the liquid. In general, automatic pressure release valves are simple but extremely important. LN2 is often stored unpressurized in unpowered insulated containers, and maintains liquid state by boiling off slowly, which passively cools the fluid. In my experience, a handheld dewer should be good for a day and a pallet-sized dewer should be good for a week without active cooling. 2. LH2 and LO2 are very incendiary when mixed, but many things on a tank are. For example, main gun propellant is composed of oxidizer and fuel mixed together and is an extremely high fire risk: tanks put a ton of effort into protecting the crew from main gun propellant (see wet stowage and blow-off panels). Similarly, gasoline for the tank is a huge fire risk, because it's a liquid. I would expect LO2 and LH2 to be similar in danger to gasoline if well segregated: they can start fires easily, but probably not as intensely as main gun propellant. 3. A danger I didn't notice this video mention is suffocation. If the crew compartment filled with gaseous H2, you would suffocate and never feel out of breath. Gas monitors are important, as is segregating LH2 and LO2 from the crew. 4. Wikipedia says that these weapons have issues with muzzle velocity deviation. This matches my knowledge of gas/liquid mixing. In short, it's hard to get consistent propellant mixing. Accuracy suffers. The history of rocketry includes a ton of effort put into injector plate design.
i generally support all your claims you did there. The only thing i have to add is, that i think that the Crew dont will be in great danger. When you look at the T-14 Armata, the newest tank around right now, has the crew completly seperated from the gun and the turret. So when the LOX and LH is stored in tanks in the back (with blowout panels around) and the fuel lines go into the turret, the dont realy will hurt the crew inside when the tanks undergo a rapid heated dissasembly.
One idea is having the rear of the barrel set up as a combustion chamber. Actually, kind of like a muzzle-loading breach-action gun, the round would be pushed back atop the combustion chamber and fuel turbine-fed into it like a rocket engine.
Maybe you won't need to store the hydrogen in liquid form, as far as I know there's a solid variety where the hydrogen is put into a titanium alloy "sponge" that releases it when heated a bit.
etuanno the same happens with platinum but it can lead to metal fatigue and doesn't have a good storage capacity. Especially when hydrolox is not actually necessary for the technologies function.
Well, that's what you get from a channelm of wich the videos are more or less tailord to amuse, not to educate in high detail. ;D I mean, all the "future weapon" videos he made featured systems that i already knew about in quite more detail, in comparsion to what he put into the videos.
@@midgetman4206 Hydrolox plumes are usually cleaner and transparent (delta IV cores are red due to an ablative nozzle), methalox plumes are purple/red, kerolox are more opaque and usually yellowish-orange, hypergolic can look like anything (usually red-orange and somewhat darker), solids leave a trail of thick smoke. And TEATEB (ignitor fluid in Kerolox) burns green :D
7.2 km/s is literally Mach 21. That is incomprehensibly fast, I couldn't imagine how powerful a shock wave that'd be or the level of penetration a round capable of withstanding that force would have...
_ Jalmon _ ikr? When I heard faster then railgun my mind was blown, before that point I thought the railgun was the end all be all fast as fuck boi but I guess there is something that can fire rounds almost double a rail guns muzzle velocity lol.
@@Phantom-bh5ru Current railguns are limited by their construction, energy source and the material of the rails. While conventional cannons, LGG, CLGG have a theoretical maximum speed, limited by the maximum expansion speed of the gas, railguns have no theoretical speed limit (besides the speed of light). Railguns are still the be all - end all of kinetic weapons, we just need to develop it further.
@@Phantom-bh5ru For example if you made a railgun that was the size of a building and was powered by a nuclear plant you could even destroy something on the moon with it
Or the Apollo 1 fire for an example of how horrific a pure oxygen fire in a confined space can be, the standby emergency teams couldn't even put the fire out with powder and Halon and the flame retardant suits the Astronauts where wearing also caught fire.
I think CLG can only ever be practical in naval applications. For land applications it can only be practical on permanent to long term emplacement. Think missile defense facilities and shore artillery (which I know is obsolete today but with the increased range and very customizable trajectories will make it viable again along with naval gunfire artillery.)
7km/s of velocity? Modern apfsds can already go through serval buildings like they are made of paper. What you are looking at is something you can fire through new York end to end and still have enough penetration to go through 3 navy destroyers. Remember that these speeds are getting awfully close to orbital velocities, and are often superior to suborbital speeds, meaning you can easily get CLG guns to land on foreheads form another country.
The one application that immediately stands out for a CLG cannon would be future missile defense, especially for ground installations. If you can lob fragmentation rounds at 7km/s, that could make for an effective way to knock down hypersonic missiles at a drastically lower cost per shot compared to rocket interceptors.
The issue with hypersonic weapons is tracking them. They produce plasma due to the high velocity heating the air into plasma. The plasma blocks radar reflections make it impossible to track using radar. Hypersonic weapons also take evasive action, & fly in a non-predictable flight path to make it nearly impossible to shoot them down with ballistic weapons. The rate of fire from a CLG or rail gun would be about 1000 times to slow to be effective. Even a Laser system would like be unable to stop them, because a laser weapon needs several seconds on target to deliver enough energy, especially for a hypersonic missile or kinetic projectile that needs to deal with extreme amount of heat. Laser weapons have a limited effective range because the air will disperse the energy, and very powerful laser beams will ionize the air causing severe attenuation of the beam's energy.
The best part about rail/CLG guns is that they are constantly improving, and at the accelerated rate of tech coming out we'll probably see these weapons on ships and tanks in the near future.
@@youmukonpaku3168 Electrolysed from ice deposits on the moon. If we're at the stage where we're fighting over stuff in space, we almost definitely have that
EnterpriseKnight basic idea is that the round has a radar that detects proximity to the nearest object, once the round enters within X meters it detonates the round. Very useful against aircraft where scoring a direct hit can be very difficult.
I was watching this and literally thinking "It sounds like we should use these as like, Super Heavy Artillery equivalents, Long Range High impact guns with a tender and main gun vehicle" and then you suggested the two vehicle setup. Excellent Video as always! I could see these deployed in limited numbers as Long Range Fire support and on ships in a specialized almost battleship replacement like vessel (IE heavy fire support) Though im not sure if Tanks will ever get them (at least not in their current form) since it sounds very mechanically complex and thats, as you've said before, not always the best for a frontline combat vehicle. (Also like, Excellent music choice, love the Mechanicus soundtrack)
oh! thats actually a question i had for you Spook! What are your thoughts on Direct Fire support vessels? will there ever be a successor to the Battleship in terms of hard hitting and relatively big guns?
hydrogen has very low density, even cooled, meaning the storage tanks have to be quite big so it's very unlikely they will even think about putting it in a tank, artillery on the other hand can work as there is less of a size problem (than and you can have a tender for the propellant like spookston talked in the vidya)
I had thought about methanol or dimethyl-ether as possible replacements. Also nitric oxide is a pretty easy to store as a compressed oxidizer. For combustion instability, couldn't an internal combustion chamber, like a rocket engine combuster, be used. If it's turbine fed you could hypothetically have constant barrel pressure and unlimited throttle control.
What i love about this series is how it looks at some of the more obscure ideas. Because ithere's a lot of interesting stuff like this that gets overloooked in favor of lasers and railguns. And i'm sure there's more stuff out there like the RAVEN gun that i've never even heard of before this series.
I’m wonder if CLG would be viable for space combat, the ambient temperature of space could be used to keep the gasses cool and it would be much easier to maintain the vacuum in the chamber since the new issue become keeping gas in rather than atmosphere out.
Man I love videos like these ones. I like to keep up with military history and technology, but outside of railguns, have not heard of any of these other systems. Keep up the awesome work and amazing content.
DIS IS WAT I DON GET ABOUT U HUMIES YA TALK LOT BOUT “DESINE” AN’ WOTNOT AND UR STUFF STILL DON’ WORK. JUS PUT A GUN N’ SUM WHEELS ON A CHAIR AND U GIT A PER’ECT DAKKA MASHEEN
So what I've gathered from this is it could make a very effective artillery platform for either specialized artillery units or cannons on naval vessels I really like your videos I enjoy learning about armoured combat units and the weapons they use both realistic and sci-fi
Hey Spookston, after all this videos about technicalities on tanks, cannons and even experimental technologies, I really have to ask: how do you manage to acquire such informations? Are you just a "tank enthusiast" or there are wikias or even, I dunno, "courses" to know and study all this things? Because they're NUTS interesting and I'd like to know more. Thanks in advance, keep up the good work man, best channel I discovered in a while ;)
I feel that this would be ideal on a warship, but as you said filling the ship with lots of liquids that are cryogenic and go boom might not go down well. Was there any prototypes of multi-stage coil guns, like MAC in Halo ever built? That seems like it has the benefits of railguns (and CLGGs) but with out the barrel wear or the mad propellants.
Ships are already stuffed with explosive and flammable materials. Replacing solid propellant with liquid/gaseous propellant probably wouldn't be too much of a change from the norm. That being said, pure oxygen IS extraordinarily flammable, and has to be stored with utmost care.
@@Cowboycomando54 That's what they actually call it yes. To be fair it's a bit of a mistranslation, the chinese words that PLA is translated from reads more accurately as "People's Liberation Force" or some other non-force-specific name for armed forces, but it got directly translated to "Army" and has stuck ever since.
Because we do not have a good understanding of how Metallic Hydrogen works, whether it is stable at normal pressures, as the only place we speculate it exists is deep inside gas giants like Jupiter or Saturn, any thing concerning Metallic Hydrogen is just that speculation. But if it does remain solid after formation, or just liquid, Metallic hydrogen becomes a radical propellant for not just rockets as far less fuel would be needed to get into orbit, but for CLGGs the fuel becomes far less of a liability in combat. However I do agree that CLGGs make more sense as ship board artillery or battlefield artillery. As a Tank weapon it seems unlikely at this time. Metallic Hydrogen also poses the possibility of room temperature superconductivity. If this is teh case, then Railguns just matched or leapfrogged CLGGs.
Imagine going against the first nation to put CLGG into production on ships and it firing directly at you: 1. Outranges most modern weapons 2. Pretty much no warning 3. Interception is pretty much impossible 4. You can’t use any electronic warfare to interfere since it’s a kinetic energy round
Coilguns could provide similar advantages with even longer ranges with the added simultaneous benefit and disadvantage being that all energy being generated by electricity. The US Army and DARPA are testing such a gun with a range in excess of 1000km. Its range is so significant, they couldn’t accurately assess its full capabilities firing across half the Pacific Ocean basically.
I think water storage and on-board hydrolysis could be the answer to storage pressures bc water is inert and could be hydrolyzed to create the gasses needed for the charge in small quantities and held in overpressure (to allow there to always be enough gas to operate the cannon) until the round is fired
@@oakwhelie That would seem like a noticeable issue. You'd probably still need some gas storage so you can more easily reload the shots. You'd also have to make sure you prepared in advance.
Did your research turn up anything about the use of alternative fuels such as methane or monopropellants? You end up taking a hit in projectile velocity, but the gases are much more storable as a result.
Methane should be the second best. You want the gas that pushes the shell to made of molecules as light as possible. Gun powder create steam, nitrogen and carbon dioxide gas and the later two are much heavier than water molecules. If you use pure hydrogen the pushing gas would be water. If you use methane there would be some carbon dioxide in the gas but the fuel still have one of the highest hydrogen content. You could also use ammonia but it's corrosive to the metal and quite toxic at high concentration.
The only overtank that would make sense to me would be a light recon vehicule... No MBT, no heavy. Just rush at grass hopping altitude, get in, get the recon, get out regardless of terrain. So, no. No tank. A hover jeep or drone would make sense, but armor and guns tipicaly associated with tanks won't work with hover tech in my opinion...
Y'all need to stop talking about helicopters, yes I saw the video, I mean a hover tank not a helicopter. How many times do I have to say I want a hover tank for you people to stop saying helicopter?
This is the problem with most "future" weapon ideas. Limited use or practicality which will lead to not being fully adopted or in very rare cases. It's not bad but its along the lines of the G11 and caseless munitions. Great idea but not up to scuff with more conventional designs or munitions that work. in 10 years this comment will probably be wrong as composite cases get replaced by caseless and im getting body parts replaced with robotics.
Everything goes through a phase like this, but I'm pretty sure you could go back to the Forties and find all sorts of proposals that were blue sky ludicrous back then, but now are commonplace.
@@CallanElliott I kind of referred to that in my comment in the last part. I was just saying now it seems ridiculous and even if adopted it wouldn't be a major use but in the future the idea might be able to be of use (like caseless ammo) and able to actually be adopted.
Good observation! CLG isn’t likely to be a technology used on MBTs anytime soon. Artillery however is well suited to the use, the solid propellant used in artillery today is nearly as dangerous. With properly applied safeguards could be safer.
Could you solve the hydrogen leaking issue by just switching to a different propellant (albeit at a loss of efficiency). Kerosene is commonly used in rockets today and doesn't have the same sorts of storage issues. Methane is going to be used on the rockets of tomorrow (basically a lot of the rockets currently under development, well, 3 American ones, use methane as their fuel), and although that does have to still be cryogenically frozen it doesn't have the same leakage problem of hydrogen. If you add the Sabatier process to the electrolysis and scrub CO2 from the atmosphere then you can also create that aboard ships, and it would be a bit more efficient than kerosene (but less efficient than hydrogen).
You need a very very low molecular weight fuel for this to work properly. There's a strict underlying velocity limit to combustion powered firearms: The projectile can never be faster than the speed of sound in the (pressurized due to explosion) propellant. The heavier the propellant, the lower the speed of sound.
@@xSchattenfluchx That does complicate matters, and I will admit that hydrogen would be better if it's feasible, but would the use of methane still be better than the use of gunpowder? I think I'd need to read up on some stuff, since due to it being cold, liquid, and pressurized, the speed of sound in both methane and hydrogen would be different from the easily google-able results.
Good job, great video! I think you are the only youtuber that make videos about futuristic-experimental technologies (maybe i'm wrong). Keep it going! Stay safe! (sorry for my bad english, I salute you from Romania)
nicy vinoy I would think cruisers would work better. Battleships are too slow and don't have enough armor. Using many more small cruisers would help protect the fleet from both naval and aerial torpedoes. I have also read a comment on here that mentions using methane and compressed air instead of cryogenic hydrolox. Imagine a wall of cruisers armed with two triple-gun turrets firing 10" shells at 7 Km/s ~60 RPM per ship.
Hey spookston, I would like to see a video on quad track tanks and see how they fail and see how you would fix them if you could (even though it’s better to just have two tracks) so that we could see if we could make a quad track tank work
Liquid O2 was used for part of the propellant of Japanese type 92 torpedoes in WW2. The type 92 long lance was a very devastating torpedo with exceptional range. But the cost of a shell hitting the torpedo magazine caused the destruction of numerous ships during the war. Even hits that a US ship would easily survive could sink Japanes ships in the 40s due to catastrophic explosion.
An awesome application for this might be onboard an aircraft. Aircraft like Hercules already carry their own LOX, so if you wanted to make a very potent airbourne bombardment platform with CLG guns, you could. Imagine the power of that, especially against armour and fortifications. Obviously there are issues with pressure differentials and temperatures onboard aircraft, but there are such immense benefits to a platform like a Spectre gunship but with CLG. Not to mention deployment as land based artillery
I'm an independent researcher and principal investigator for the US DOE and a mechanical engineer. I might be able to provide some insight here. We solve the problem of conventional approached to CLGG by using NOS and methane instead of hydrogen and LOX. The tanks gun uses the same fuel as its engine. There is a methane gas vapor accumulation tank. A high pressure fuel pump powered by the main engine pressurizes the fuel to 1500 PSI, the waste heat from the exhaust coupled to an induction heater heats the fuel to 1000 F. This phase changes the fuel into a supercritical fluid which is then pushed through a zeolyte catalyst to break ANY combustible liquid, gasoline, diesel, jp-8, crude oil, waste motor oil, vegetable oil, burnt brake fluid, waste paint thinner, you get the idea, into methane and methane gas-like products. A pressure reducing regulator drops the pressure and ensures the vapor accumulation tank remains at about 200 PSI. The tanks engine draws from these vapors to power it, this can be done via natural gas fuel injectors or a needle valve in the intake plenum. A pressure line from the vapor accumulation tank is routed to the CLGG, where natural gas injectors squirt a measured charge of the methane gas into the breech. Simultaneously, pressurized air from an air compressor driven by the tanks main engine fills an air tank, which is used for pneumatic tools, brakes, and pneumatic drive systems. This air is compressed to about 2000 PSI with a pressure reducing regulator for the auxiliary pneumatic systems. The high pressure air is also routed to the breech of the CLGG where injectors allow a measured charge of air to shoot into the breech at the same time the methane does. A massive selonoid coil is wrapped around the breech and slams the shell against the breechface, which effectively compression ignites and detonates the fuel and air. To ensure ignition even in arctic environments, a series of spark plugs without the side electrodes removed will fire if the shell gets close enough to allow the capacitors connected to the spark plugs to discharge by exceeding the breakdown voltage strength of the gas/air mix. Effective, this is a HCCI CLGG detonation cannon. Even though liquid diesel fuels have about 1/3 the overall energy density by weight compared to hydrogen gas, they have higher energy density's per volume. Liquid hydrogen has an energy density of about 10 MJ/K wheras diesel fuel has 38 MJ/K meaning that diesel has about 4 times the energy density in terms of volume compared to liquid hydrogen. And in a tank, we're more concerned about volume than weight anyway. The CLGG will use a fraction of a fraction of the total energy of the fuel tank, the engine uses most of the energy, and the CLGG would use it incredibly efficiently.
Br!an Delta V that's a brilliant idea. How much energy is used by the induction heater? Also, how large are the pre heater and catalyst? Are there any problems with sulphur induced corrosion?
Another question, what is the internal barrel pressure? Oh, how sharp is the pressure curve? I had thought about possibly using a rocket style fuel injector to stabilize combustion. Do you run into problems with uneven combustion or are you using a swirl combustor built into the bottom of the barrel to avoid that? Would it be helpful to use gas pumps the boost the inlet pressure to allow continual combustion rather than an injection regulator for the variable muzzle energy?
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv Less than 300 watts would be needed for the induction heater, we only need to heat very small amounts of fuel at a time. This keeps things safer and reduces total energy consumption. As far as pressure goes, I detonate the fuel at supersonic velocity's and keep the pressure spike low enough that it doesn't break the system by using less fuel. This means I don't need to worry about flamefront stabilization or any of the weird shit conventional deflegration based engines use. Continuous combustion would keep temps up too high for too long and would be less efficient. We want constant volume, not constant pressure, supersonic combustion. Muzzle energy is varied by using more or less fuel.
Br!an Delta V that truly is brilliant. I hadn't even considered detonation as a mechanism to stabilize combustion. Do you think it would be possible to integrate this technology with rarefied wave guns? I had suggested continuous combustion as a way to increase muzzle energy for naval artillery. On ground vehicles there wouldn't be a need for it. Ohh.. how about using CLGGs as the starter for a ram accelerator mounted further up the barrel in naval applications?
Also, would it be possible to use an electric or pneumatic drivetrain for this design. For wide fuel range I'm assuming a gas turbine is used and you mention an induction heater and air compressor so I was wondering it the generator or compressor could be upscaled for the drivetrain.
Clg guns, could possibly the halo 5 Scorpion be like that in a way, because they do have some type of gas or liquid container on the right bsck side of the turret
It is important to note that hydrogen can fit through the molecules of most materials, so even a solid metal tank will leak. This can be seen when many rockets make a fireball around themselves at ignition, despite aluminum walls in the tanks. This is easily solved by having ways for the gas to dissipate before it becomes dangerous.
From what I know that's not the reason. Reason being that some rockets during start expell a lot of of propellant (with a different mixture) from engines before they ignite, which then catches on fire to avoid too much buildup.(and usually it's fine)
Damn there's a ton of people sharing some very nice info on physics and chemistry(which i SUCK at) down below. i'm surprised to see that there's quite a few stuff that i haven't heard of before and that led to a ton of bookmarks and research i'm gonna be doing in this period. i'm SO GLAD to see there's sooooo much stuff i don't know because i never heard of before...such a nice opportunity to learn new interesting things thank you to all the cool guys down below that shared such info.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Shouldn't be confused with a Light Gas Gun. In a nutshell: An LGG is the mother of all BB guns, used to simulate meteoric impacts in labs. A CLGG is "gun, but what if powder is gas?".
Airsoft Chem-Rail Artillery, oh yes
The first one isn't quite right, light gas guns are not in any way like bb guns, except, you know of any kind that accellerates gas with a deflagrating propallent, cause i do not.
Light gas guns are rather the pneumatic equivalent of a "shotgun starter" strapped to a catapult. ;D
@@Enthropical_Thunder I was just looking for a simple explanation and I felt that "you know the feeling when you spit out a cherry seed? How you have to build up pressure inside your mouth until the seed bursts through with increased velocity?" wasn't quite as good of an image.
So basically almost every gun invention, this, but better
The difference between CLGGs and LGGs is a C = Combustion.
In LGGs you just have the hydrogen because of it‘s low molecular weight. But you don‘t use the chemical reaction of hydrogen with oxygen. The gas needs to be at high pressure to accelerate the projectile. There are multiple ways of achieving that. Seriously, look it up at Wikipedia! I can’t explain it in a RUclips-Commentary!
Effective range of 200km...
When you want need to land warheads on foreheads but want to keep your artillery within your borders.
How poetic
If the Germans had this in ww2, they wouldn't need the v2 rocket
Call it cross-country
@S Schwerer Gustav was enormous and expensive. They only built two of them and scarcely used either because they were too expensive. A CLG gun would have been dirt cheap by comparison and far more effective.
Germans had the "Paris Gun" in WW1, which did exactly this. And it was useless.
Another issue with hydrogen is its low density, leading to very large fuel tanks compared to other propellants.
Yup. This can be seen on diagram for the fuel vehicle
@@Spookston Another factor of why ships really are the most likely platform for such a gun, along with the issue of hydrogen evaporation not being such a big deal if you can produce it on the spot. I guess those are also perhaps the main reasons I don't see this being mounted on a tank, as size really does matter.
Unless you used metallic hydrogen. It's light and incredibly dense.
However metallic hydrogen is nigh impossible to make.
@@nil981 yeah, a minor hiccup!
Are there any conventional materials that could withstand such high velocities? I figured tungsten and DU but anything else? Seems like it'd burn up. I didn't know there was anything capable of firing as fast as a rail gun. Sounds like these fire way faster.
So maybe I misunderstood in the video... The Navy is NOT currently fielding any guns like what was mentioned in the video? They've only tested them?
"One issue with CLGG is the demand for extremely accurate parts manufacture..." -happy German noises.
*Laughts in Swiss*
Copies in China
@@M8143K not for too much longer if attitudes develop which eschew chinese manufacturing.
Spectating in Malay.
Casually drunk in American
>Excess of 200km
>7km/s
This thing doesn't have ballistic drop...
It has *orbital arc*
UwU Awoo-boi noticed my bulge!
@@bob123728 what... the... fuck... STOP. JUST. STOP.
@@maxim6088 no u
@@bob123728 *confused screaming*
@@maxim6088 UwU. Yezz yet no.
He will not stop it ever. I cannot stop it either. Shut your mouth. It is a parasite that effects minds. Soon you too will be infected by the UwU. The awoo. And the boi. You too will start using words such as bamboozled. Yes. It is terrible. But there is hope.
Grab a tin foil hat
2:06 "CLG guns are actually as cool or cooler then even conventional cannons..." Oh yes they are! Oh you were talking about temperature...
How or why is that ? It sounds counter intuitive ..all that energy and LESS heat ??🤔
@@billhanna2148 the same reason that you can touch foil in the oven without burning yourself but not the food. it transfers the energy to the air more efficiently.
imagine burning a piece of paper and dropping it into a barrel, all the fire is inside the barrel but the paper burns before it ever touches the barrel. then imagine placing that paper on the barrel and burning it; even with less paper (less power) it will heat up the barrel more. the whole system produces more heat, but the gun stays cooler, the heat is dumped into the environment.
Mechanicus music in the background aha I see you have taste
The intro with it and a rocket launch footage gave me goosebumps
For the Omnissiah
-happy mars boi noises-
My gut feeling is that this video overstates the safety difficulties of segregated cryogenic propellants.
1. If a cryotank loses active cooling, it doesn't immediately explode. This is because boiling is endothermic. As the LO2 or LH2 boils, this absorbs heat, cooling the liquid. In general, automatic pressure release valves are simple but extremely important. LN2 is often stored unpressurized in unpowered insulated containers, and maintains liquid state by boiling off slowly, which passively cools the fluid. In my experience, a handheld dewer should be good for a day and a pallet-sized dewer should be good for a week without active cooling.
2. LH2 and LO2 are very incendiary when mixed, but many things on a tank are. For example, main gun propellant is composed of oxidizer and fuel mixed together and is an extremely high fire risk: tanks put a ton of effort into protecting the crew from main gun propellant (see wet stowage and blow-off panels). Similarly, gasoline for the tank is a huge fire risk, because it's a liquid. I would expect LO2 and LH2 to be similar in danger to gasoline if well segregated: they can start fires easily, but probably not as intensely as main gun propellant.
3. A danger I didn't notice this video mention is suffocation. If the crew compartment filled with gaseous H2, you would suffocate and never feel out of breath. Gas monitors are important, as is segregating LH2 and LO2 from the crew.
4. Wikipedia says that these weapons have issues with muzzle velocity deviation. This matches my knowledge of gas/liquid mixing. In short, it's hard to get consistent propellant mixing. Accuracy suffers. The history of rocketry includes a ton of effort put into injector plate design.
i generally support all your claims you did there. The only thing i have to add is, that i think that the Crew dont will be in great danger. When you look at the T-14 Armata, the newest tank around right now, has the crew completly seperated from the gun and the turret. So when the LOX and LH is stored in tanks in the back (with blowout panels around) and the fuel lines go into the turret, the dont realy will hurt the crew inside when the tanks undergo a rapid heated dissasembly.
One idea is having the rear of the barrel set up as a combustion chamber. Actually, kind of like a muzzle-loading breach-action gun, the round would be pushed back atop the combustion chamber and fuel turbine-fed into it like a rocket engine.
Maybe you won't need to store the hydrogen in liquid form, as far as I know there's a solid variety where the hydrogen is put into a titanium alloy "sponge" that releases it when heated a bit.
etuanno the same happens with platinum but it can lead to metal fatigue and doesn't have a good storage capacity. Especially when hydrolox is not actually necessary for the technologies function.
Well, that's what you get from a channelm of wich the videos are more or less tailord to amuse, not to educate in high detail. ;D
I mean, all the "future weapon" videos he made featured systems that i already knew about in quite more detail, in comparsion to what he put into the videos.
I'm happy you used a rocket that actually uses Hydrolox as a propellant (and in all stages too :D)
I felt like it wouldn't be right if I didn't. And I knew someone was going to notice lol
@@Spookston Well, I'm a bit of a rocket nerd ;P
@@Katniss218 a bit? I like rockets too but I haven't even looked at how to tell the difference between fuels
@@midgetman4206 Hydrolox plumes are usually cleaner and transparent (delta IV cores are red due to an ablative nozzle), methalox plumes are purple/red, kerolox are more opaque and usually yellowish-orange, hypergolic can look like anything (usually red-orange and somewhat darker), solids leave a trail of thick smoke.
And TEATEB (ignitor fluid in Kerolox) burns green :D
MidgetMan 420 well if you can tell what rocket it is, then you can know the fuel it burns
7.2 km/s is literally Mach 21. That is incomprehensibly fast, I couldn't imagine how powerful a shock wave that'd be or the level of penetration a round capable of withstanding that force would have...
_ Jalmon _ ikr? When I heard faster then railgun my mind was blown, before that point I thought the railgun was the end all be all fast as fuck boi but I guess there is something that can fire rounds almost double a rail guns muzzle velocity lol.
@@Phantom-bh5ru Current railguns are limited by their construction, energy source and the material of the rails. While conventional cannons, LGG, CLGG have a theoretical maximum speed, limited by the maximum expansion speed of the gas, railguns have no theoretical speed limit (besides the speed of light).
Railguns are still the be all - end all of kinetic weapons, we just need to develop it further.
Bennet Petersen ah ok thx
@@Phantom-bh5ru For example if you made a railgun that was the size of a building and was powered by a nuclear plant you could even destroy something on the moon with it
@@abyssstrider2547
"You can't just shoot a hole into the surface of Moon!"
For a case study on why using pure oxygen as propellant for combat weapons can be problematic, see the Japanese Type-93 torpedo.
The type 93 didn't use liquid oxygen, but compressed oxygen. You are correct in that 100% oxygen is extremely problematic.
Crosshair84 That’s right, I guess I got wrapped up in the subject of the video and wrote “liquid” instead of just “oxygen” or “pure oxygen.”
Or the Apollo 1 fire for an example of how horrific a pure oxygen fire in a confined space can be, the standby emergency teams couldn't even put the fire out with powder and Halon and the flame retardant suits the Astronauts where wearing also caught fire.
@@Tuberuser187 Main reason modern spacecraft are pressurized with regular air.
German and US torpedoes didn't even need that to be far more problematic :D
I think CLG can only ever be practical in naval applications. For land applications it can only be practical on permanent to long term emplacement. Think missile defense facilities and shore artillery (which I know is obsolete today but with the increased range and very customizable trajectories will make it viable again along with naval gunfire artillery.)
And that is also just cool
Imagine having the entire ocean being your propellant charge.
Super long range broadside battleships!
Imagine the glory! Dear grid square a-10, please humbly accept these one hundred cannon rounds.
dangerouspeople1!!!!!!! This is why shore artillery can finally be viable again. Limitless access to potential propellant.
Never knew about CLG guns but it sounds amazing to build with it a super weapon like in command and conquer.
EVEN IN DEATH SERVE THE OMNISSAH
01000110 01001111 01010010 00100000 01010100 01001000 01000101 00100000 01001111 01001101 01001110 01001001 01010011 01010011 01001001 01000001 01001000
When i heard mechanicus playing it reminded me of mandolorgaming dancing to it.
I’m gonna need a link to that vid
"7.2 km/s"
So.... orbital speed! Hit things over the horizon without even aiming up.
orbital defence battery, welcome to earth
Not quite, that's 11km/s
@@CallanElliott 11 km/s is escape velocity, low earth orbit is only 7.8 - 8 km/s
@@CallanElliott Create a bigger one and then boom, you shooting space
@Tuzszo Loss of efficiency due to gravity and atmosphere still needs to be counted into it, more than 1km/s is added (usually)
The idea sort of reminds me of how the Sturmtiger used a rocket propelled mortar round. Not the same in operation, but hey, rockets!
Sturmtiger would be closer to Gyrojet. In battleship caliber though:D
Ah. So this is the product of wanting to shoot a tank through what could've been, a building
7km/s of velocity? Modern apfsds can already go through serval buildings like they are made of paper. What you are looking at is something you can fire through new York end to end and still have enough penetration to go through 3 navy destroyers.
Remember that these speeds are getting awfully close to orbital velocities, and are often superior to suborbital speeds, meaning you can easily get CLG guns to land on foreheads form another country.
I’m loving this series, keep it up man
Spooks, your optimistic outlook on the future of weaponry is an inspiration to us all
I think this is the most practical future gun concept. (For artillery, at least)
That range is pretty scary.
BLESSED BE THE MACHINE
For the omnissiah
01000110 01001111 01010010 00100000 01010100 01001000 01000101 00100000 01001111 01001101 01001110 01001001 01010011 01010011 01001001 01000001 01001000
The one application that immediately stands out for a CLG cannon would be future missile defense, especially for ground installations. If you can lob fragmentation rounds at 7km/s, that could make for an effective way to knock down hypersonic missiles at a drastically lower cost per shot compared to rocket interceptors.
In short, hyperspeed shotguns
M P supersonic CIWS shotguns.
I think it won't be using the "Close" part of that.
@@FMHikari "Close" compared to the 200 km range.
The issue with hypersonic weapons is tracking them. They produce plasma due to the high velocity heating the air into plasma. The plasma blocks radar reflections make it impossible to track using radar. Hypersonic weapons also take evasive action, & fly in a non-predictable flight path to make it nearly impossible to shoot them down with ballistic weapons. The rate of fire from a CLG or rail gun would be about 1000 times to slow to be effective. Even a Laser system would like be unable to stop them, because a laser weapon needs several seconds on target to deliver enough energy, especially for a hypersonic missile or kinetic projectile that needs to deal with extreme amount of heat. Laser weapons have a limited effective range because the air will disperse the energy, and very powerful laser beams will ionize the air causing severe attenuation of the beam's energy.
It's a water gun.
This guy gets it
@@Daniel-wy2kx is that a secret missing substance is a helium
Its wa'er
That could turn a destroyer into Swiss cheese within 5 seconds at 300km
We are all water.
Many things are water.
Water is all.
The best part about rail/CLG guns is that they are constantly improving, and at the accelerated rate of tech coming out we'll probably see these weapons on ships and tanks in the near future.
2:25 yup, remembered that from my ROTC training on an 105 howitzer. Up to 7 bags (if I still remember correctly) for that type of round.
This will actually work more in space for some reason, high speed and the fuel is right there.
right there at incredibly low density, still has recoil that your engines have to compensate for, and where'd you find the free oxygen?
@@youmukonpaku3168 Electrolysed from ice deposits on the moon. If we're at the stage where we're fighting over stuff in space, we almost definitely have that
6:27 are we gonna ignore the fact that he shot down a chopper with the main gun?
I was using a proximity round, so it's not incredibly impressive
@@Spookston Abrams has VT fuzed munitions?
TheArklyte ye
@@Spookston Proximity rounds? I guess that's a topic for a next video
EnterpriseKnight basic idea is that the round has a radar that detects proximity to the nearest object, once the round enters within X meters it detonates the round. Very useful against aircraft where scoring a direct hit can be very difficult.
Spook even chose the right rocket lol...
Great video Spook, Iove your potential future guns vids
nice man
very interesting to see what the future holds in store for cannons
I was watching this and literally thinking "It sounds like we should use these as like, Super Heavy Artillery equivalents, Long Range High impact guns with a tender and main gun vehicle" and then you suggested the two vehicle setup.
Excellent Video as always!
I could see these deployed in limited numbers as Long Range Fire support and on ships in a specialized almost battleship replacement like vessel (IE heavy fire support) Though im not sure if Tanks will ever get them (at least not in their current form) since it sounds very mechanically complex and thats, as you've said before, not always the best for a frontline combat vehicle.
(Also like, Excellent music choice, love the Mechanicus soundtrack)
oh! thats actually a question i had for you Spook!
What are your thoughts on Direct Fire support vessels? will there ever be a successor to the Battleship in terms of hard hitting and relatively big guns?
hydrogen has very low density, even cooled, meaning the storage tanks have to be quite big so it's very unlikely they will even think about putting it in a tank, artillery on the other hand can work as there is less of a size problem (than and you can have a tender for the propellant like spookston talked in the vidya)
I had thought about methanol or dimethyl-ether as possible replacements. Also nitric oxide is a pretty easy to store as a compressed oxidizer. For combustion instability, couldn't an internal combustion chamber, like a rocket engine combuster, be used. If it's turbine fed you could hypothetically have constant barrel pressure and unlimited throttle control.
*Hears music in the background*
*Starts praying to Omnissiah in binary code*
What i love about this series is how it looks at some of the more obscure ideas. Because ithere's a lot of interesting stuff like this that gets overloooked in favor of lasers and railguns. And i'm sure there's more stuff out there like the RAVEN gun that i've never even heard of before this series.
I’m wonder if CLG would be viable for space combat, the ambient temperature of space could be used to keep the gasses cool and it would be much easier to maintain the vacuum in the chamber since the new issue become keeping gas in rather than atmosphere out.
Man I love videos like these ones. I like to keep up with military history and technology, but outside of railguns, have not heard of any of these other systems. Keep up the awesome work and amazing content.
I feel like somebody can make a tank design so rediculous it works even though it shouldn't...
Also I never knew this kind of weaponry existed
*Ferdinand Porsche would like to know your location*
*Panzer VIII Maus would like to know your location...*
DIS IS WAT I DON GET ABOUT U HUMIES
YA TALK LOT BOUT “DESINE” AN’ WOTNOT AND UR STUFF STILL DON’ WORK. JUS PUT A GUN N’ SUM WHEELS ON A CHAIR AND U GIT A PER’ECT DAKKA MASHEEN
I've heard of these things before but never knew what the big deal was about them, thanks for filling me in.
So what I've gathered from this is it could make a very effective artillery platform for either specialized artillery units or cannons on naval vessels I really like your videos I enjoy learning about armoured combat units and the weapons they use both realistic and sci-fi
You beat me to it. I was going to say that ETC guns are probably the future for direct combat. Good vid.
Hey Spookston, after all this videos about technicalities on tanks, cannons and even experimental technologies, I really have to ask: how do you manage to acquire such informations? Are you just a "tank enthusiast" or there are wikias or even, I dunno, "courses" to know and study all this things? Because they're NUTS interesting and I'd like to know more. Thanks in advance, keep up the good work man, best channel I discovered in a while ;)
You can find a lot of military research papers and stuff like that pretty easily on Google
"so, I want to kill that spacecraft with a tank."
I go kill capitalist xenos for motherland (insert picture of tank in space)
I hope you have a good day oh and the first bit was a joke.
I feel that this would be ideal on a warship, but as you said filling the ship with lots of liquids that are cryogenic and go boom might not go down well.
Was there any prototypes of multi-stage coil guns, like MAC in Halo ever built? That seems like it has the benefits of railguns (and CLGGs) but with out the barrel wear or the mad propellants.
Ships are already stuffed with explosive and flammable materials. Replacing solid propellant with liquid/gaseous propellant probably wouldn't be too much of a change from the norm. That being said, pure oxygen IS extraordinarily flammable, and has to be stored with utmost care.
“Children of the Omnissiah” is the Perfect music for this video
so does that mean we could finally see the return of the Montana Class Battleship with large bore CLGs? (this is a joke)
Wouldn't be a shock if the PLAN tries it, then has an accident, losing the ship an all hands.
@@flyboymike111357 PLAN? People's Liberation Army Navy?
@@Cowboycomando54 Yeah, they're already cutting corners on railguns
@@Cowboycomando54 That's what they actually call it yes. To be fair it's a bit of a mistranslation, the chinese words that PLA is translated from reads more accurately as "People's Liberation Force" or some other non-force-specific name for armed forces, but it got directly translated to "Army" and has stuck ever since.
@@Cowboycomando54 more like people’s liberation armed forces navy
Children of the omnissiha as your background music THE MACHINE GOD APPROVES OF THIS ACTION
Imagine mixing this with coilgun tech; use the light gas as the first stage then the electromagnetic coils to boost the velocity even further!
Children of the omnissiah as the background music, i see you are a man of culture
Because we do not have a good understanding of how Metallic Hydrogen works, whether it is stable at normal pressures, as the only place we speculate it exists is deep inside gas giants like Jupiter or Saturn, any thing concerning Metallic Hydrogen is just that speculation. But if it does remain solid after formation, or just liquid, Metallic hydrogen becomes a radical propellant for not just rockets as far less fuel would be needed to get into orbit, but for CLGGs the fuel becomes far less of a liability in combat. However I do agree that CLGGs make more sense as ship board artillery or battlefield artillery. As a Tank weapon it seems unlikely at this time.
Metallic Hydrogen also poses the possibility of room temperature superconductivity. If this is teh case, then Railguns just matched or leapfrogged CLGGs.
Imagine going against the first nation to put CLGG into production on ships and it firing directly at you:
1. Outranges most modern weapons
2. Pretty much no warning
3. Interception is pretty much impossible
4. You can’t use any electronic warfare to interfere since it’s a kinetic energy round
Coilguns could provide similar advantages with even longer ranges with the added simultaneous benefit and disadvantage being that all energy being generated by electricity. The US Army and DARPA are testing such a gun with a range in excess of 1000km. Its range is so significant, they couldn’t accurately assess its full capabilities firing across half the Pacific Ocean basically.
They can use or MEK-hydrogenperoxide or heptil-sulfur acid propellant system.
It toxic, but lower temperature and pressure standards.
Калиев Мади I had thought about nitric oxide and methanol. Both really cheap and easy to store, if underpowered compared to hydrolox.
I think water storage and on-board hydrolysis could be the answer to storage pressures bc water is inert and could be hydrolyzed to create the gasses needed for the charge in small quantities and held in overpressure (to allow there to always be enough gas to operate the cannon) until the round is fired
The problem would be doing it fast enough in combat situation
@@oakwhelie
That would seem like a noticeable issue. You'd probably still need some gas storage so you can more easily reload the shots. You'd also have to make sure you prepared in advance.
So you just fixed my mortar/artillery propulsion for my military science fiction mate
Ive listened to Children of the Omnissiah so much i thought i was going crazy when I heard it in the background haha
That was a "puts on sunglasses" cool topic.
stfu
“How do we make out tank guns better?”
“F*CKING ROCKETS”
When I saw the thumbnail I thought CLG stands for comically large gun.
The background music, i love you so mutch
Did your research turn up anything about the use of alternative fuels such as methane or monopropellants? You end up taking a hit in projectile velocity, but the gases are much more storable as a result.
Yeah, I mean when you're in excess of 5km/s, the difference between velocities becomes academic.
Methane should be the second best. You want the gas that pushes the shell to made of molecules as light as possible. Gun powder create steam, nitrogen and carbon dioxide gas and the later two are much heavier than water molecules. If you use pure hydrogen the pushing gas would be water. If you use methane there would be some carbon dioxide in the gas but the fuel still have one of the highest hydrogen content. You could also use ammonia but it's corrosive to the metal and quite toxic at high concentration.
Using the Mechanicus ost on a video about future tech? *The Omnisiah approves.*
So, any chance on episodes on wheeled tanks and electic tanks in the foreseable future?
Your vehicle weaponry videos are your best ones so far.
Phase 1 of plan complete, engaging phase 2...
Design a hover tank that makes sense plz?
There's the Apache Longbow and the Hind, what other kind of hover thank do you want?
hovertanks are called helicopters
The soviets actually succeeded in creating a hover tank it's called a Mil Mi 24
The only overtank that would make sense to me would be a light recon vehicule... No MBT, no heavy. Just rush at grass hopping altitude, get in, get the recon, get out regardless of terrain. So, no. No tank. A hover jeep or drone would make sense, but armor and guns tipicaly associated with tanks won't work with hover tech in my opinion...
Y'all need to stop talking about helicopters, yes I saw the video, I mean a hover tank not a helicopter. How many times do I have to say I want a hover tank for you people to stop saying helicopter?
I see you're using the new Mechanicum theme, the Fabricator General approves.
This is the problem with most "future" weapon ideas. Limited use or practicality which will lead to not being fully adopted or in very rare cases.
It's not bad but its along the lines of the G11 and caseless munitions. Great idea but not up to scuff with more conventional designs or munitions that work.
in 10 years this comment will probably be wrong as composite cases get replaced by caseless and im getting body parts replaced with robotics.
So far it would only be applicable in navy but if we figure out how to store hydrogen easier and safer then it could be used in land vehicles as well.
Well, G11 ultimately passed all trails and what killed was economics.
Everything goes through a phase like this, but I'm pretty sure you could go back to the Forties and find all sorts of proposals that were blue sky ludicrous back then, but now are commonplace.
@@CallanElliott I kind of referred to that in my comment in the last part. I was just saying now it seems ridiculous and even if adopted it wouldn't be a major use but in the future the idea might be able to be of use (like caseless ammo) and able to actually be adopted.
Fuckin hell man, i was checking all my other tabs thinkng i accidentally left the Mechanicus playlist on; turns out it was this video all along.
What about the vindicator from Warhammer 40k can you talk about that one?
Good observation! CLG isn’t likely to be a technology used on MBTs anytime soon. Artillery however is well suited to the use, the solid propellant used in artillery today is nearly as dangerous. With properly applied safeguards could be safer.
CHILDREN OF THE OMNISSIAH!!!
Love the use of the mechanicus soundtrack
Could you solve the hydrogen leaking issue by just switching to a different propellant (albeit at a loss of efficiency). Kerosene is commonly used in rockets today and doesn't have the same sorts of storage issues. Methane is going to be used on the rockets of tomorrow (basically a lot of the rockets currently under development, well, 3 American ones, use methane as their fuel), and although that does have to still be cryogenically frozen it doesn't have the same leakage problem of hydrogen. If you add the Sabatier process to the electrolysis and scrub CO2 from the atmosphere then you can also create that aboard ships, and it would be a bit more efficient than kerosene (but less efficient than hydrogen).
You need a very very low molecular weight fuel for this to work properly.
There's a strict underlying velocity limit to combustion powered firearms: The projectile can never be faster than the speed of sound in the (pressurized due to explosion) propellant. The heavier the propellant, the lower the speed of sound.
@@xSchattenfluchx That does complicate matters, and I will admit that hydrogen would be better if it's feasible, but would the use of methane still be better than the use of gunpowder? I think I'd need to read up on some stuff, since due to it being cold, liquid, and pressurized, the speed of sound in both methane and hydrogen would be different from the easily google-able results.
Highly informative, great way to start the day
man can you post your bibliography for this i really want to read it my self
Good job, great video! I think you are the only youtuber that make videos about futuristic-experimental technologies (maybe i'm wrong). Keep it going! Stay safe! (sorry for my bad english, I salute you from Romania)
How do I make an great anphibius tank?
Making it float would be ideal
but seriously, it depends on the doctrine of the nation using it
T(h)ank you good sir, I will now use this new found knowledge to make my own private tank
5 seconds in and I gotta comment on the awesome choice of music! Mechanicus has such an awesome soundtrack
Hey spookston can we bring back battleships with CLG guns
nicy vinoy I would think cruisers would work better. Battleships are too slow and don't have enough armor. Using many more small cruisers would help protect the fleet from both naval and aerial torpedoes. I have also read a comment on here that mentions using methane and compressed air instead of cryogenic hydrolox. Imagine a wall of cruisers armed with two triple-gun turrets firing 10" shells at 7 Km/s ~60 RPM per ship.
For oxygen and hydrogen storage, you could store instead water then perform the electrolysis just before firing
Ant Grif how fast can that be. Also you’d have to cool them down to cryogenic.
Hi spook lad
hello
Hey spookston, I would like to see a video on quad track tanks and see how they fail and see how you would fix them if you could (even though it’s better to just have two tracks) so that we could see if we could make a quad track tank work
Local furry explains tank weaponry
He's using mechanicus music
This means that CLGGs are now blessed by the omnissiah
Using the Warhammer 40k Mecanicus soundtrack... brave... i love it
Liquid O2 was used for part of the propellant of Japanese type 92 torpedoes in WW2. The type 92 long lance was a very devastating torpedo with exceptional range. But the cost of a shell hitting the torpedo magazine caused the destruction of numerous ships during the war. Even hits that a US ship would easily survive could sink Japanes ships in the 40s due to catastrophic explosion.
I hear that OST in the background.
*PRAISE THE OMNISSIAH!!!*
I can feel the Omnissiah's presence in the background. Praise be.
The Mechanicus soundtrack is fitting.
An awesome application for this might be onboard an aircraft. Aircraft like Hercules already carry their own LOX, so if you wanted to make a very potent airbourne bombardment platform with CLG guns, you could. Imagine the power of that, especially against armour and fortifications. Obviously there are issues with pressure differentials and temperatures onboard aircraft, but there are such immense benefits to a platform like a Spectre gunship but with CLG. Not to mention deployment as land based artillery
great content as always, short and informative
I'm an independent researcher and principal investigator for the US DOE and a mechanical engineer. I might be able to provide some insight here. We solve the problem of conventional approached to CLGG by using NOS and methane instead of hydrogen and LOX. The tanks gun uses the same fuel as its engine. There is a methane gas vapor accumulation tank. A high pressure fuel pump powered by the main engine pressurizes the fuel to 1500 PSI, the waste heat from the exhaust coupled to an induction heater heats the fuel to 1000 F. This phase changes the fuel into a supercritical fluid which is then pushed through a zeolyte catalyst to break ANY combustible liquid, gasoline, diesel, jp-8, crude oil, waste motor oil, vegetable oil, burnt brake fluid, waste paint thinner, you get the idea, into methane and methane gas-like products. A pressure reducing regulator drops the pressure and ensures the vapor accumulation tank remains at about 200 PSI. The tanks engine draws from these vapors to power it, this can be done via natural gas fuel injectors or a needle valve in the intake plenum. A pressure line from the vapor accumulation tank is routed to the CLGG, where natural gas injectors squirt a measured charge of the methane gas into the breech. Simultaneously, pressurized air from an air compressor driven by the tanks main engine fills an air tank, which is used for pneumatic tools, brakes, and pneumatic drive systems. This air is compressed to about 2000 PSI with a pressure reducing regulator for the auxiliary pneumatic systems. The high pressure air is also routed to the breech of the CLGG where injectors allow a measured charge of air to shoot into the breech at the same time the methane does. A massive selonoid coil is wrapped around the breech and slams the shell against the breechface, which effectively compression ignites and detonates the fuel and air. To ensure ignition even in arctic environments, a series of spark plugs without the side electrodes removed will fire if the shell gets close enough to allow the capacitors connected to the spark plugs to discharge by exceeding the breakdown voltage strength of the gas/air mix. Effective, this is a HCCI CLGG detonation cannon. Even though liquid diesel fuels have about 1/3 the overall energy density by weight compared to hydrogen gas, they have higher energy density's per volume. Liquid hydrogen has an energy density of about 10 MJ/K wheras diesel fuel has 38 MJ/K meaning that diesel has about 4 times the energy density in terms of volume compared to liquid hydrogen. And in a tank, we're more concerned about volume than weight anyway. The CLGG will use a fraction of a fraction of the total energy of the fuel tank, the engine uses most of the energy, and the CLGG would use it incredibly efficiently.
Br!an Delta V that's a brilliant idea. How much energy is used by the induction heater? Also, how large are the pre heater and catalyst? Are there any problems with sulphur induced corrosion?
Another question, what is the internal barrel pressure? Oh, how sharp is the pressure curve? I had thought about possibly using a rocket style fuel injector to stabilize combustion. Do you run into problems with uneven combustion or are you using a swirl combustor built into the bottom of the barrel to avoid that? Would it be helpful to use gas pumps the boost the inlet pressure to allow continual combustion rather than an injection regulator for the variable muzzle energy?
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv Less than 300 watts would be needed for the induction heater, we only need to heat very small amounts of fuel at a time. This keeps things safer and reduces total energy consumption. As far as pressure goes, I detonate the fuel at supersonic velocity's and keep the pressure spike low enough that it doesn't break the system by using less fuel. This means I don't need to worry about flamefront stabilization or any of the weird shit conventional deflegration based engines use. Continuous combustion would keep temps up too high for too long and would be less efficient. We want constant volume, not constant pressure, supersonic combustion. Muzzle energy is varied by using more or less fuel.
Br!an Delta V that truly is brilliant. I hadn't even considered detonation as a mechanism to stabilize combustion. Do you think it would be possible to integrate this technology with rarefied wave guns? I had suggested continuous combustion as a way to increase muzzle energy for naval artillery. On ground vehicles there wouldn't be a need for it. Ohh.. how about using CLGGs as the starter for a ram accelerator mounted further up the barrel in naval applications?
Also, would it be possible to use an electric or pneumatic drivetrain for this design. For wide fuel range I'm assuming a gas turbine is used and you mention an induction heater and air compressor so I was wondering it the generator or compressor could be upscaled for the drivetrain.
I just wanted to say I love your work and your growing channel
Clg guns, could possibly the halo 5 Scorpion be like that in a way, because they do have some type of gas or liquid container on the right bsck side of the turret
Ahhh I love the mechanicus soundtrack
It is important to note that hydrogen can fit through the molecules of most materials, so even a solid metal tank will leak. This can be seen when many rockets make a fireball around themselves at ignition, despite aluminum walls in the tanks.
This is easily solved by having ways for the gas to dissipate before it becomes dangerous.
From what I know that's not the reason. Reason being that some rockets during start expell a lot of of propellant (with a different mixture) from engines before they ignite, which then catches on fire to avoid too much buildup.(and usually it's fine)
I love the vids keep up the great work also i love the fact you go in deep detail and give so much info
Bruh, That's some railgun competition right there... Like damn... 200km? You can Yeet a shell halfway across Europe...
I love the Children of the Omnissiah in the background
Damn there's a ton of people sharing some very nice info on physics and chemistry(which i SUCK at) down below.
i'm surprised to see that there's quite a few stuff that i haven't heard of before and that led to a ton of bookmarks and research i'm gonna be doing in this period.
i'm SO GLAD to see there's sooooo much stuff i don't know because i never heard of before...such a nice opportunity to learn new interesting things
thank you to all the cool guys down below that shared such info.
Bro the ending credits music. The memories. The feels.
Every day brings us closer to rocket-propelled Bolter Guns. The Emperor protects!