Advanced, microprocessor-controlled, high pressure inert gas cannons, however, can be used to kill people… among other things.
It is not a “firearm” by ATF definitions, in that it does not “expel a projectile by the action of an explosive” (after all, inert gasses are, by definition, non-explosive); however, this non-firearm is capable of generating over 3000 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle… by way of comparison, that is more than most commercial loads of .308 Winchester can produce. Granted, it slings out 1.25″ steel ball bearings which, being spherical, will not be tremendously accurate over longer ranges, and it is only capable of making 60 shots a minute (“only”), but I certainly would not want to be on the receiving end of this (note how the ball bearings go straight through both sides of the SUV – cars are concealment, not cover).
And I just love their mentioning “maritime use” – not being a firearm, it might (and I do mean “might” – I am not a lawyer, and I hardly understand this country’s laws, much less any others’) skirt other countries’ blanket prohibitions on commercial ships carrying firearms for defensive purposes, and I can guarandamntee you that a 1.25″ steel ball bearing going 1000+ feet per second would cause all manner of interesting problems for the kinds of boats pirates seem to like… especially once you factor in ricochets.
Even better (this is, indeed, the compressed air tank that keeps giving), the Nitron N32 pretty solidly perforates a surprising number of anti-rights “arguments”. Ban guns? Great, this is not a gun. Background checks for guns? Again, this is not a gun. Register guns? Er… still not a gun. Major mass murders are only committed with guns? Well, that one is already dead and gone, but I would bet that one of these in the back of a van would cause some pretty serious problems.
The simple truth is that guns are not the problem, and banning guns will not solve the problem – humans are ingenious little bastards, and if you close a door, they will find, or make, a window. I would not exactly describe the N32 as “man-portable” (especially not once you throw in the compressed air cylinder), but bolt that thing to the bed of a pickup or a whole host of them to a flatbed or panel truck, and you could get them pretty much anywhere you needed them… in a completely unregulated fashion. Oh, sure, as I type that, I already know authoritarians in the government are already trying to figure out how to control these air-cannons, and will redouble their efforts once the Brady Bunch and VPC liars get wind of this new “IT CAN SHOOT DOWN A PLANE!!!11!!!!” toy, but, hell, if you want a solid example of why regulating anything (firearms, alcohol, drugs, etc.) is a loser’s game, look no further than Nitron.
Good job, guys! If I ever need to equip my private yacht with an appropriate… er… shark-defense device… I will know where to go.
(Courtesy of The Firearm Blog.)
I wonder how hard it would be to mount that thing under a wing or fuselage of a small prop plane? Oh, the possibilities.
An acquaintance of mine built a coilgun that could punch a slug through a gallon can of soup– with parts scavenged out of dumpsters. Not only is it not a firearm, it’s an extremely COOL not-a-firearm.
VPC demands capacitors be serial numbered in 3… 2… 1…
Pretty awesome. Sure beats a firehose for repelling boarders. I dunno about all that microprocessor control business but I imagine you could build a 20 round per minute wholly-mechanical version without all that much trouble. The limiting factor is your air supply, assuming you want to be able to charge the thing yourself without buying nitrogen cylinders from outside.
A 1.25″ steel sphere weighs ~2050 grains. Holy crap! Now just rifle the barrel, rig a drum magazine to load sabot shotgun slugs, at only, oh, 550 grains max including the sabot… I see some real possibilities here. Hell, why not use long penetrators while we’re at it? No rifling necessary, and nothing says “I care” like a 10″ steel arrow through the wheelhouse.
See, you’re gonna get me in trouble. Here in about five years when I actually have a workshop again, and a mill, and a lathe, I’m going to remember this video…
@Groundhog – Heck, I was considering that those ball bearings are only about .5 inches smaller than a golf-ball… Go find yourself a golf range that is having a bad time and has a good backstop, buy them out, install a collection of pop-up and moving targets, and then buy a battery of these N32s. Charge people to run a turret for 15 minutes or so. Throw in some reactive targets. Hm. Might work.
@Dixie – There are instructions, videos, and webpages all over the place regarding how to build those awesome little toys… Unfortunately, most of them require a wall-socket for sustained and/or high-powered fire, but this thing needs a compressor, so it all works out.
And, coincidentally, both compressors and electrical supplies can easily be piggybacked onto most/all commercially-available vehicles – in fact, most cars already have them. And while drive-by shootings are unquestionably bad, drive-by railgunnings could be just as bad, assuming the person employing it had any kind of grasp of electromagnetic theory.
So, one has to ask one’s self – are the anti-rights nuts just trying to breed smarter criminals? Banning guns will just convince them to dream up something else…
@weambulance – I would imagine that a mechanical sequencer could be rigged up as well, but it is just a question of what you want the saltwater to attack – microcircuitry, or gears/cams. I would tend towards the former, just for the ease of swap-out and sealing/shielding, but those are just details at this point
. And most ocean-going vessels these days have, at the very least, some type of air compressor onboard to start up their diesels, or other miscellaneous work onboard. Run out a line to a couple of positions on the weatherdecks, and off you go.
Not entirely sure how the magazine feeds, so it may not be possible to feed it non-universally-symmetrical ammunition… but that would require more information than I have on it. And ‘poon guns are not exactly new
, if somewhat expensive and slow to reload.
Can I come help?
Yeah I wasn’t considering maritime applications myself. I was thinking more like mounting one in a cupola on my roof, strictly to repel the grizzly bear invasions, you understand.
A good point about the seawater. I don’t know much about what sort of air compressor a ship would have, but I see the website lists air supply pressure at 7500 PSI max, so I assume you want a supply pressure of at least three or four thousand PSI. That’s pretty serious. I’m certain any ship running large diesels could power such an air compressor, since all you really need is a compressor suitable for recharging scuba tanks. I’d be curious to see how quickly performance falls off as supply pressure drops.
Vehicle mounts? At low pressure, sure. But A/C compressors aren’t going to run that gun, and the vehicle electrical system would never handle the load with the wimpy alternators they use (150 amps? Pshaw!). That’s stock, of course. I can think of a dozen ways to rig a vehicle to make this work properly, like you said… so it’s a good thing the sort of people interested in drive by shootings aren’t generally good at engineering. Yet. A simple PTO compressor would do the job, but it would have to be purpose built or maybe a secondary system run from PTO hydraulics since nobody makes a 3000 PSI PTO air compressor that I’ve ever heard of.
They don’t really show the magazine at all, but I don’t think it would be a significant challenge to feed cylindrical sabots. Since there’s no reciprocating action to remove a spent casing, you can just drop them in and seal the chamber and be done with it. Suppose you used a three or four chamber rotating cylinder to pick up the rounds? If they can seal a rotary engine properly, I can seal my air cannon. Efficiency would almost certainly go up, since they can’t possibly be getting a good seal with those ball bearings. It just depends on whether or not the increased complexity is worth the performance gain, and in a maritime application I would say it probably isn’t.
I was thinking less harpoon and more small scale M1A1 Abrams main gun. That would be kinda gimmicky, I think, because a bunch of 1.25″ holes at the waterline would ruin a pirate’s day a lot quicker than zipping an arrow at them, but you’d get a hell of a lot more range from a sabot penetrator than a bunch of balls.
Now you’ve got me thinking of ways to boobytrap ships involving compressed air… like compressed air “claymores” and the like. I’m totally going to end up on ANOTHER watch list.
Sure, you can help, as long as you promise to be the first one to fire it.
I’ll be, uh, on the other side of the house…
The device has an OPERATING pressure range of 300-1200 MAX psi. It performs quite well at pressure as low as 300psi. Any gas source / supply providing output pressure from 300-7500psi will work well. 3-4kpsi supply pressure would be nice but…not necessary.
@weambulance – Yeah, when those fuzzy-wuzzies get all organized, they are indeed a force to be reckoned with
.
Oh, I was not trying to say that baseline alternators and A/C compressors would be enough to handle the demands of this little toy, but just pointing out that the basic versions of what it does need are already part of the car – increasing the size of those units, or adding additional ones, is relative child’s play for anyone mechanically inclined (at least on older models).
Yeah… given that whatever method they are currently using is capable of cranking out a round a second, I am not sure if one would need to bump that up any – sure, more is always better, but those little ball bearings weigh a bit, and will take up space, and reloading is always a concern.
Most of the old-style ‘poons had bore diameters of about 3 inches, so we are not talking lightweights… Nowhere near the range or capabilities of the Abram’s main gun, but given that the spear head was typically larger than the shaft, I would imagine poking those into the side of a boat would be… unpleasant.
Heh… Ringo strapped megaclaymores to the sides of his supertanks… Wonderful crowd dispersants, those.
@justaguy – Thanks for the specifics… I would imagine that a higher feed pressure would result in more shots faster, but I am just speculating.
Should we assume that you happen to be affiliated with the Nitron folks? Are there any more pictures/specifics of their shiny device forthcoming?
justaguy –
Seems to me that the higher the supply pressure, the quicker you can fire the cannon, within reason. A 300 PSI compressor is not delivering 300 PSI instantaneously and in infinite volume. They’re talking about running 60 rpm, which (unless the air volume per shot is tiny) is not a trivial volume of air. Also, 300 PSI is not going to propel something as quickly as 1200 PSI, all else being equal. Just like anything else in engineering, you have compromises to make. Reduce your rate of fire and keep the pressure up for a given air source, to a limit, since obviously you can’t get more pressure in the gun than your air source can produce. Reduce your pressure and thus your muzzle velocity and keep your rate of fire up.
Just thinking about the basic physics, it seems to me that with a lower air pressure you’d want to increase the cross section of the barrel and use a sabot system to keep the projectile mass down (and improve the ballistic coefficient of the slug). But the tradeoff is you now need a higher volume of air per shot.
The assumption I’m making is that there are some minimum performance requirements, X feet per second at Y range at Z rounds per minute. Those requirements are subjective, and you would need to choose your air source based on them.
Or, instead of getting all elegant and trying to purpose design each system, we could just spend $7500 on a 9 HP diesel powered air compressor for SCUBA/SCBA tanks that puts out 5000 PSI at 10 CFM and use a SCUBA tank or two as a reservoir at each gun. That compressor would probably run three or four of those cannon at acceptable performance levels quite easily. It’s way more trouble than it’s worth, in my opinion, to deal with the issues in getting high performance out of an inferior air source.
Maybe we have different ideas of what “operating quite well” means, I don’t know. I could build a basic air cannon from plumbing pipe, a ball valve, and my 150 PSI compressor in the corner too, and plenty of people would say it operated quite well. That’s an extreme example, but I suspect our performance demands are simply different.
Are you affiliated, and do you have more specific information? Because I’d be interested to hear it.
Besides, they also state 3000+ ftlb of energy, when a 1.250″ diameter uniform steel sphere (assuming a density of 0.284 pounds per cubic inch and thus a weight of ~2033 grains) at 1000 fps would, according to my muzzle energy calculator, produce ~4550 ftlb of energy. Yeah, 4550 > 3000, but they’re off by a rather huge amount. So, at least one data point on their website is wrong, and I’m not going to take a claim of acceptable performance at 300 PSI at face value when they’re only getting around 1000 fps at 1200 PSI.
Linoge – I’m drawing the conclusion that it’s best to leave the vehicle out of it as a power source and just invest in some SCBA tanks. You can probably get a decent used compressor to fill them for a few grand and keep it at home, and just keep two or three 80 cubic foot tanks on hand. You’d probably run out of projectiles before you ran out of air. Besides, then you’re not tied to your vehicle.
I’m a lot less concerned about air sources now; I didn’t realize how readily available high PSI compressors are. But, I’m sure you’d have to get government permission to own one right quick after the first air cannon incident.
@Linoge –
“I am not sure if one would need to bump that up any – sure, more is always better, but those little ball bearings weigh a bit.”
60 RPM = 17.528 pounds of steel down range per minute.
“I would imagine that a higher feed pressure would result in more shots faster, but I am just speculating.”
The ROF is currently programed into the processor @ 60 rpm. ROF is not controlled by the supply pressure. Low supply pressure (E.g. 300psi) results in lower power shots. 60 per min ROF is more than ample because a moment between shots is necessary to re-acquire the target.
“Should we assume that you happen to be affiliated with the Nitron folks?”
Sorry…..you’ll just have to trust me on this info.
“Are there any more pictures/specifics of their shiny device forthcoming?”
Yes…much is forthcoming!! Check the web site (Nitronllc.com) in a few weeks.
Your calcs are correct and Nitron is well aware of that point. The web side states “3000+”. Nitron did not see the need to drag out the number for every last number or digit a calculator would yield, just for what some might view as “bragging rights”. The site states 3000+ which is accurate, correct, yet very conservative.
Interesting, thanks for the replies.
FWIW, the majority of my comments are not directed toward the N32 system, but toward a theoretical repeating air cannon that a home machinist could build. I wouldn’t require more than 45 rpm at most, because as you said, it takes time to reacquire the target. I’m much more of a precision fire than volume fire kind of guy.
Any sort of computer controlled mechanism is way beyond my capabilities, so I would be relying wholly on mechanical devices here. Thus, the design would have to be substantially different. We’re comparing apples to oranges in some ways, but I’m still not convinced that 300 fps would meet my performance threshold.
I will admit, however, that pelting the deck and wheelhouse of a pirate trawler with 5 ounce steel balls at even a few hundred feet per second would be one heck of a weapon. I just don’t think it would SINK the ship as my bloodthirsty nature requires.
Er, 300 PSI in the third paragraph. My mistake.
An amusing scenario indeed but, as we all know and agree, such an act would be illegal. That’s why the N32 is designed for recreational type use only and no other purpose.
@justaguy – Yeah, see, having to tote nearly 20 pounds of ammunition to the position a minute just does not sound fun to me… highly destructive at the other end, but you would have to rig up some kind of chute system… *goes to check his notes*
And you are absolutely right… forgot that the microprocessor controlled the rate, so it just works out to be slower rounds. Rounds I would still not want to catch, and 300 psi is not too hard to maintain.
I will keep an eye on their webpage, but thanks for taking the time to field our questions here, whatever your affiliation!
Well, I am not a lawyer, but I did spend some time out in international waters, and that is not entirely true – self-defense is internationally recognized as an acceptable reason to open fire on another vessel, even if you are doing your shooting with something that is not a firearm by anyone’s definition. The key word in weambulance’s comment is “pirate”
.
But I can see some recreational applications too
.
I just rolled my eyes so hard I think I sprained something.
I’m not sure exactly what maritime use Nitron, LLC thinks people will put an air cannon of such dimensions and power to that will constitute recreational use. Maybe they intend to offer a spear fishing kit? Or is it to shoot halibut before taking them on board? ‘Cause, ya know, that stuff is already covered and they might want to rethink their marketing strategy.
I was always interested in the riverboat mounted, steam powered guns from Leo Frankowski’s Conrad’s Quest for Rubber as an example of low-tech improvised weaponry. They worked on a similar principle, firing ball bearings at high enough velocities to be comparable to regular firearms with a high rate of fire, but using steam instead of compressed air.
That’s pretty much the key point in any kind of gun control laws, and why they don’t work.
Shooting pirates isn’t recreational?
@Linoge – The last design of his I saw used laptop batteries worn on the body– which served wonderfully as armor. (chuckle)
@Dixie
Perhaps I misunderstand your statement but, if you are saying that Nitron has EVER put forth a design for a “Lithium Powered Leisure Suit” or the like…..you are in ERROR! If I’ve taken the meaning of your post incorrectly …I apologize in advance.
@weambulance – I can see their new toy recreationally disposing of all manner of vehicles, appliances, building materials, and whatever else large and semi-durable you have on-hand that does not fit in a trash can…
@Jake – I have actually never managed to read those books, though, from the looks of their Wikipedia entry, I should
. For me, it brought to mind that steam-and-hellfire creation the Mythbusters reproduced a year or so ago, supposedly designed and possibly implemented during the Civil War.
The N32 seems a lot safer, though.
And, hell, that is pretty much the failing point of all control-related laws (see: Prohibition, War on (Some) Drugs).
@Dixie – Hm. Acid-filled armor seems bad to me.
@justaguy – I think Dixie was referring to his friend who was constructing the hand-held electromagnetic mass accelerator
.
Linoge
“I think Dixie was referring to his friend who was constructing the hand-held electromagnetic mass accelerator.”
Thanks for the clarification. The thought being associated with such a design was substantially less than pleasant. My apologies to Dixie!
@Linoge – “Acid-filled armor seems bad to me. ”
More or less bad than firing a coilgun made from materials found in a dumpster? (chuckle) Last time I talked to him, he was trying to get away from using batteries, but a replaceable capacitor isn’t that safe, either.
@justaguy – “The thought being associated with such a design was substantially less than pleasant. My apologies to Dixie!”
No apologies needed. His other designs are even worse, though– take the Faceless Cymbal-Clapping Monkey of DOOM, for instance. (chuckle)
Can this cut both ways? Since (I think) much of our law equates arms with firearms, 2nd amendment arguments seem to apply only to firearms in practice. Doesn’t that leave government free to require registration or permits for tasers, rail guns, knives or whatever else?
I don’t know anything about the law, so I apologize if this is a silly question.
It’s not a silly question. I am not a lawyer, but the simple answer is that since our system of law is based on the idea that laws restrict actions, rather than permit them, even if the second amendment specifically mentioned firearms, that would not exclude other tools of war. So as long as the law does not specifically say “you can not do X”, it’s legal.
In reality, I doubt they would ever try to register any of that stuff. They’d just ban it, like they do in England. Registration is just step one in banning something (or rigidly controlling its use to such extremes that nobody bothers anymore), and the serious knife or railgun communities are small enough that the government could probably just ban them outright. At the local level knives are already heavily restricted. You can’t buy an automatic knife unless you’re active duty military, or a cop/fireman. Carrying even a normal belt knife is illegal in most places. Half the knives I own, I can’t legally carry. I’m not up to date on taser law, but I know they’re illegal in a lot of places (New York state for sure). I imagine railguns are esoteric enough to escape notice for the moment, but if they ever do become practical and have even the repeatable power of a 22LR, I’d expect an outright ban.
@Wayne Conrad – Not a silly question at all, especially considering what our government has tried to regulate and restrict in the past. And, given that these are not “arms” in either the traditional or modern sense (no modern military, military-style force, or police entity I am aware of extensively employs lethal inert-gas-launched projectiles), my non-lawyer arse would reflexively vote that these are not covered by the Second Amendment.
But, then again, are knives? Walking sticks? Bows and arrows? Where doe sone draw the line and why? Anything can be, and is, used as a weapon, and while I would love that definition of “arms”, I do not ese it flying in the near future.
I think part of the problem would be defining it – how would you restrict/regulate something like that, without unnecessarily taking out other things, like jackhammers? The American government, at every level, has a marked lack of specificity and understanding, and I would venture to guess that any attempt at banning things like the N32 would have nasty unintended consequences. Then again, that has never stopped our government(s) before…
And, on the flip side of all of this, is the underpinning assumption that everyone always forgets – our government was only supposed to be capable of regulating and controlling things as specifically spelled out in the Constitution, and no further. Granted, the point is moot these days, but it always helps to approach these kinds of discussions from that perspective, if only for old-time’s sake
.
@weambulance – Actually, automatic knife use and carrying, so long as you do not do it across state borders, depends on the states’ laws – in Florida, I could, and did, carry an automatic knife around with me, and a cop would have no problem with it whatsoever. Here in TN, ownership is supposedly fine for “collecting” purposes, but carrying and using is strictly verboten.
Now, interstate transport and sales are still regulated by the feds, but there are still some semi-reasonable states out there.
Hmm, I wondered if it was something like that. So, it has to be legal in the state, made in the state, and never leave the state? Heck, might as well be banned… what if you move? I’ve moved five times in the last five years. Fricking .gov.
I’m surprised they haven’t managed to ban assisted openers yet (I think they tried / were trying?), or basically any knife you can open with one hand. God forbid I give them any ideas, but an axis-lock Benchmade is just as quick to open as an automatic knife, safe to close with one hand, and considerably cheaper than an automatic knife of comparable quality. Which explains why I don’t own any automatic knives, but do own several nice axis-lock Benchmades.
Anyway, this is where we enter the territory the framers were worried about when they were considering to include the Bill of Rights at all. There was a concern that the Bill of Rights would be interpreted as “granting” rights and thus be used to limit freedom, rather than protect the most important God-given rights as intended. I’m glad the Bill of Rights exists, even though it is being used to limit freedom in a roundabout way, because without it we would not retain what little freedom we still do have.
And, anyone who can read the 10th Amendment should have no trouble remembering that the federal government only has a few major powers. I said in the other thread that the budget thing is what blows my mind, but I think the deliberate misinterpretation of such a simple, straightforward document is just too ridiculous for me to even comprehend. My mind must have a safety valve, and that level of stupid just never makes it to my consciousness, or else my head might explode.
The truly hilarious part (ha. ha.) is how our government is pretty much a failure in the very areas it has legitimate authority to act.
I know that most higher level government officials are not ignorant of our Constitution. They simply don’t care. Their arrogance is astonishing.
Honestly, I am not terribly sure about moving… hopefully it is not a problem
.
And, indeed, the government did make a ploy to ban any knife that could be opened with a single hand… Thankfully, the appropriate organizations caught wind of it before it went too far, and thanks to a maelstrom of public response, the bill died a quiet, hopefully painful, death.
Coincidentally, we just had a post up about how the Bill of Rights might or might not have been a good idea…
Like I keep saying, I always thought, as a kid, that it would be interesting to observe a society self-destruct… I never wanted to live it, though.