Talk:Recoilless rifle

Military history: Technology / Weaponry Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Firearms Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Physics

However at firing instead of all the propellant blast driving the projectile forward a large portion is directed backwards in the opposite direction.

I wasn't happy with this explanation of the physics. I tried to write a slightly more detailed explanation. If it makes sense, can we incorporate it into the main article:

In a normal gun, the reverse momentum (equal and opposite to the forward momentum given to the projectile) is transferred to the body of the gun. In a recoilless rifle, the explosive gases are allowed to escape out the back of the gun, thereby avoiding this transfer of momentum. Due to their relative masses, far more kinetic energy is imparted to the explosive gases in a recoilless rifle compared to that imparted to the body of a conventional gun. This means that recoilless rifles require a more powerful charge to achieve the same muzzle velocity. 220.237.34.36 01:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other

I removed the part It was undoubtedly the most destructive man-portable weapon ever devised. from the section about the Davy Crockett nuclear device since it is plain out wrong. Many other man-portable weapons with equal or more destructive power have been devised; viruses are a good example. The [[Special Atomic Demolition Munition SADM]] nuclear device, also man portable, had a maximum yield four times as large. 217.208.71.65 3 July 2005 07:53 (UTC)

Actually the SADM is almost certainly the same warhead as the Davy Crockett. Maury 16:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Davy Crockett (nuclear device) and Special Atomic Demolition Munition, both used the dial-a-yeild W54 warhead, however the Davy Crockett was limited to .2kt rather than the 1kt in the SADM, most likely due to the fact that it's kind of a bad idea to fire a big nuke from a gun with a 2 to 4 klick range. The Davy Crockett probably stands as the most powerful man-portable projectile weapon ever fielded. Granted, given the size and weight of the warhead, plus propellant, gun tube, and propellant, it was probalby barely man-portable for the crew of 3-5. scot 21:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added some info about Soviet DRP development. I wonder if Germans were in any way influenced by them? Anyone have info about design history of Panzerabwehrwerfer 7.5? --Mikoyan21 12:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all knowledgeable in the field but, reading the introductory paragraph, oughtn't "and all are often called recoilless guns" logically read "and all are often called recoilless rifles"?--80.229.8.165 20:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! Maury 22:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

This article is getting big and I was wondering if anyone more experienced on the subject could make an infobox using the Weapon Infobox. Doing this would probally earn the article a "B" rating on the quality scale. Cheif Captain 23:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox templates are more for specific weapons, this article has more in common with "howitzer" or "rifle". GraemeLeggett 10:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wouldnt the projectile go much slower since most of the gasses are going out the back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.164.85 (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firing mechanism

How is the cartridge actually fired? I think would be an important contribution. J-stan 20:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It varies from weapon to weapon; in most, there's a firing mechanism that strikes a primer at the back of the case in the normal method for mechanically ignited single-piece artillery ammunition. Georgewilliamherbert 20:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]