GR-1 Anvil – world’s first handheld Gauss Rifle

https://arcflashlabs.com/product/gr-1-anvil/

by graderjs • 5 years ago

48 77 5 years ago

arcflashlabs.com

hprotagonist• 5 years ago

86 Joules at the muzzle: in context, about half the energy of a 40 grain .22LR.

graderjs10• 5 years ago

However the Joules are tunable. You can dial up and down, I believe.

GravitasFailure3• 5 years ago

To a point. Once the magnetic field gets to a certain strength, the projectile magnetically saturates and the only way to really get more kinetic energy into it is to make the barrel longer. If they can demonstrate this firing the equivalent to a .22LR, it would be really amazing.

Edit: They claim "up to" 75 ft-lbs muzzle energy, which is in the realm of .22LR. Check out this chart: https://www.mcarbo.com/22LR-Ballistics-Chart

motohagiography• 5 years ago

Non-firearms guy reading, was just looking at muzzle velocity, ~245fps (75m/s), where a .45ACP round goes ~500fps. - but joules would be the way to compare the physics. In terms of energy/silence, for hunting, it seems like you can buy more powerful crossbows at a camping store. Additional energy just seems like an optimization problem that could be solved with an external power pack source.

However, the real game changer may be in the economics of EMP shielding and weapons, where if all legal civilian firearms are electronic, they are also remotely manageable via DRM and less user servicable. The analogy could be like what electronic fuel injection did to carbeurators and the autonomy of drivers to service their own vehicles.

This rifle seems like a bit of a gimmick, but from a political perspective I could see some people saying, "let them hunt with coilguns, nobody needs gunpowder anymore," which will be a new leverage point on 2A limitations whereby this product is a managed substitute. Independent of where one stands on that issue, the product is a technology that could change the dynamic of that discussion.

graderjs10• 5 years ago

interesting diverse take, particularly about EMP, DRM and R2R. i appreciate the political/2nd-order effects perspective!

nradov3• 5 years ago

I don't know where you're getting those numbers but nominal .45ACP muzzle velocity is more like 800fps.

beloch• 5 years ago

More context:

"The GR-1 is capable of accepting 3 different standard projectile lengths (32 mm, 42 mm, and 52 mm) with a unique variable magazine system"

"Muzzle Velocity: 75 m/s."

75 m/s is slower than a lot of bows, and those are fairly big slugs, as compared to a .22 bullet.

What you should expect with this gun is a very curved trajectory and, likely, low accuracy. At the very least, it will need sights similar to what's available for bows, since a few meters of distance in range will have a large impact on where the bullet lands.

The large size of these bullets means they might actually not penetrate much, if at all. (I'd appreciate more spec's than just their length). Yes, they have half the kinetic energy of a .22 round, but that's going to be spread over a much larger impact area.

moftz• 5 years ago

You could easily put a point on the slug and give it some penetrating ability. It might not blow a hole through you but could at least break a bone or puncture some blood vessels.

rasz• 5 years ago

Another comparison: the ballsiest Airsoft limit I know is set by Poland to 17 Joules, with something like Frances 2J at the other end of the spectrum.

Y_Y4• 5 years ago

It would be great if they had a video of it in action. Also the ammo looks like you can make it yourself, that's cool.

(Does it bother anyone else that they say "Gauss" to rhyme with "paws' instead of "mouse"? It doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but in my experience it's one of the names even physicists will pronounce properly.)

graderjs10• 5 years ago

Yes it bothers me. It should be "gowce" - rhymes with mouse. It's not gauze, obviously. This is not a Bunsen. ;p ;) xx

ceejayoz3• 5 years ago

The video says "free of endless infringements" while showing what looks like a pile of pistol permit paperwork.

The idea that the ATF is gonna shrug their shoulders and go "welp, not a firearm" seems... iffy.

graderjs10• 5 years ago

Yes, unsure what they mean. For context it was developed in part by a guy from AFRL (Air Force Research Laboratory[0]); maybe it's a commercialization of some of the miniaturized railgun/coilgun tech from the secret programs that were 'abandoned'? I'm thinking that's maybe what they mean by free of infringements; as in patent infringements, but I don't know. Your guess seems plausible too.

[0] https://www.afrl.af.mil/

didgeoridoo• 5 years ago

TIL the legal definition of “firearm” includes the stipulation that the projectile be propelled by “explosives”[0]. ATF probably would need to go to Congress to get the relevant section of law updated to be more tech-agnostic (maybe based on muzzle energy?)

[0] https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-guides-importation-ver...

syedkarim2• 5 years ago

If muzzle energy was used in the definition of a firearm, then high-powered air rifles would get reclassified as firearms.

syedkarim2• 5 years ago

Here is one federal statute related to the definition of a firearm. It seems that the common denominator for firearms is the use of an explosive.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921

The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.

(4)The term “destructive device” means—

(A)any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas— (i)bomb, (ii)grenade, (iii)rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, (iv)missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, (v)mine, or (vi)device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses;

(B)any type of weapon (other than a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and

(C)any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into any destructive device described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled.

Y_Y4• 5 years ago

From (B): "expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant"

I would say here that a "propellant" would have to refer to some kind of chemical (even boring pressurised gas) and that it couldn't reasonably be extended to a magnetic field (or series of virtual photons or whatever). I'd like to know if that's likely to be the view the legislature or judiciary would take though.

okamiueru• 5 years ago

Hm, I suppose common denominator is correct. But, the gauss gun falls pretty easily withing the overall definition you've quoted. There are plenty of "and similar" stipulations that pretending it doesn't would seem a bit silly.

dzdt• 5 years ago

It seems analogous to air guns, which use compressed air to expel a projectile. Yes, the ATF says "welp, not a firearm". About half of US states have some kind of explicit regulations though...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_gun_laws#United_States

ncr100• 5 years ago

UK:

The Offensive Weapons Act 1996 says, “any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him (or some other person)” (https://www.slingshotworld.co.uk/slingshots-law/)

pelletmaster56• 5 years ago

the atf can decide whatever they deem fit

bradhe3• 5 years ago

Free of endless infringements

Woof. America...

oneplane2• 5 years ago

Yeah, and the weird part is that somehow it completely misses the point that society might actually want 'infringements' (infringing on what?), and that most of the world doesn't like the idea of making it easy for people to apply violence to other people.

jakearmitage6• 5 years ago

What I find weird, and interesting, is that you seem to summarily correlate a weapon with applying violence to someone. Weapons are frequently used in self-defense, specially among minorities and women abused by their partners. Weapons create a balance to an otherwise unfair and cruel power relationship.

As a matter of fact, those "infringements" already caused the death of an abused woman:

https://www.nj.gov/oag/newsreleases16/pr20160408a.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Carol_Bowne

I invite you to broaden your perspective on the concept of gun ownership and the principles behind the 2nd Amendment. Black men and women bought 58% more guns in the first six months of 2020 than they did in 2019. Black women are being empowered all across America, along with another vast diversity of people, by the right to keep and bear arms.

mod4• 5 years ago

(infringing on what?)

In case you were asking seriously, infringing on the 2nd Amendment right of US citizens to keep and bear arms. The amendment specifically uses the word, ie "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

So the word "infringe" is commonly used in that context.

making it easy for people to apply violence

Not to delve into politics, but IMO it's easier to "apply violence" without a weapon, or with less complicated weapons. I'm sure most of us can infer your actual point, but it might be worth it to come up with a less-easily-defeated argument.

avereveard• 5 years ago

"gunpowder age is ended" seems a bit premature

as a tech demonstrator is great, but we're a few technology generation away from replacing the good old rifle, both because of power density (40+ shots per charge so you're going to ferry a few of these and battery pack are heavy) and capacitor (2 seconds/round isn't stellar)

given the coil/power constraint I think the natural evolution of this tech is probably going to remain a niche application for slow firing and high powered applications, not a tout-court gunpowder replacement; railguns seems to be a better candidate for rifle replacement.

nradov3• 5 years ago

The US Navy has given up on railguns for now and will stick with chemical propellants.

https://taskandpurpose.com/military-tech/navy-electromagneti...

graderjs10• 5 years ago

totally agree. that seemed like marketing schtick. we are still very much in the gp/chemtech age of ballistic propulsion. alternative propellant is not better than electric vehicles are to oil vehicles, for now...

but i feel that with higher power density battery tech, warmer superconductors, stronger magnets, and metamaterials with exotic electrical properties, maybe this category isn't something we should totally write off for not just niche 'artillery' applications but something like this hand-held category but gamechanging?

rapjr9• 5 years ago

So how much do batteries have to improve to make small electric energy based weapons practical? If Li-Ion could store double the energy in the same weight and volume would that change the nature of small guns? Just wondering how close we are to a major change in weapons technologies if it all depends on batteries. Maybe there is a certain limit beyond which batteries should start becoming controlled technology? Even current lithium batteries of all kinds are close to being explosives (at least chemically) which is an indication of how much energy is stored in them.

h2odragon2• 5 years ago

20lb. ouch

Stick a couple prongs off the front hooked tot he capacitor bank, and it could be dangerous.

webmaven2• 5 years ago

Hah. A cattle prod in place of a bayonet!

dionian• 5 years ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20210727051112/https://arcflashl...

Gys• 5 years ago

which allows the GR-1 to fire up to 20 rounds per minute (at full power) or up to 100 rounds per minute at 50% power.

Huh?

EDIT: Aha, I thought it meant battery power, but this is more likely the applied power for 'slinging' each 'bullet'.

L_226• 5 years ago

Site returns 500 for me. But this reminds me of my own coilguns I made as a kid. Disposable camera flash circuits connected to a set of solenoids wrapped around a thin pvc pipe. Accelerated using a cascade triggering of each solendoid in series. Contact pairs directly in the pipe to close the next solenoid circuit when the metal slug reaches them.

adamrezich• 5 years ago

that sounds like a ton of fun!

webmaven2• 5 years ago

The server seems to be suffering from the hug of death, here is a recent archived snapshot of the page:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210727051112/https://arcflashl...

boboche• 5 years ago

3000$ for 200fps? Am I missing something?

Maybe I just played too much Instagib and have impossible expectations when I see gauss rifles or railguns?

h2odragon2• 5 years ago

Look into "Varmint Shooting" stuff; they make stuff like .17 caliber with a muzzle velocity of 5k+ fps... About as close as we get under tank or battleship sizes.

lm28469• 5 years ago

The video looks like a parody but I'm sure the creators feel like real manly men and are dead serious about it...

graderjs10• 5 years ago

I also got that vibe. The video is not great production values, and it's unclear to me how much they really took it serious and thought "fuck yeah! this is awesome!" and how much they thought they're doing it ironically or satirically while still projecting "tough" (which is a trope in amateur 'tough guy' antics, sorta like humble bragging).

But in general I think that incorrect conflation of 'real manly men' and guns is wrong, because, first you got the stereotype of 'real manly men' you shouldn't pigeonhole people like that, and second, if anything guns are much more feminine because of how relatively asymmetrically they can empower women. So paradoxically, a really feminine man can benefit more from a bun (edit: heh, 'bun', ie, man bun?--typo, meant gun, but leaving it ;p ;)) than a 'manly man', which makes it quite weird the association we have in the discourse.

Also, we might be able to establish guns' femininity from a purely cis-hetero point of view: the gun is a phallic metaphor, priapic and ejaculatory, so it's "natural" that all these women want to run around clutching them, as that's what they do in heterosexual life anyway, but it's funny that all these cis-hetero men want to do so, unless we either consider it is an "acceptable" expression of "latent homosexual desires" (maybe we're pushing it too far, here), or if we view the gun as only superficially masculine, but somehow deeply feminine, which would explain man's loving care, attention and desire to run around clutching them under their arms. How might a gun be deeply feminine? In the same way that you can see all weapons as deeply feminine from the point of view of feminine being openness, vulnerability (in the true strength sense), permeability and being receptive. A gun, or any weapon, acts as a propagator of these "permeability values" by perforating its targets making them more perforated, permeable, and vulnerable and open, if not in the "psychological" sense, then definitely in the gross anatomy sense. So a weapon is nothing more than a physical manifestation of the enforcement of feminine values, an instrument to aggressively spread feminine values around the world: turning otherwise obdurate and resistant flesh into flesh which is permeable, vulnerable, perforated and open. Pretty fucking weird when you think of it like that, but I think there's something to it, especially if you want to take other critical and sociological theory ideas seriously, then there's something to this, too.

Stevvo• 5 years ago

What the fuck?

coldelectrons• 5 years ago

ZARDOZ HAS SPOKEN

junon• 5 years ago

I'm just annoyed the narrator pronounced it "Gawss".

GR-1 Anvil – world’s first handheld Gauss Rifle

Related Stories