# Would These Bullet Ideas Work? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 2, 2005, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608 "2005-01-02T00:49:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608/21 "2005-01-02T04:04:54Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > I knew I should have said railgun instead of Gauss rifle. When I said the wiring and batteries were huge, I was referring to guns which use a magnetic field to accelerate the projectile. > > Re Voere rifle > > I was unaware of such a thing. (I don’t know that much about guns) I can’t get the page to work properly. I get text, and two boxes with red Xs. A quick search didn’t really help. > > How exactly, (I ask in complete seriousness) is this different from the minirockets of the Gyrojet? Is all the propellant used inside the chamber, or does the projectile burn propellant as it travels? Does it have the same trail of smoke problem the Gyrojet did? > > Finally, I think the battery is a bad idea. If they could adapt the ammunition for use in standard M-16s, then maybe. **Doc** , the page appears to use flash for the images. Judging from the photo of the bullet, they’re about 1/2 the height of an M-16 round, with much of the bullet being surrounded by what looks like a ceramic insulator. Presumably, that’s the propellant. ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608/22 "2005-01-02T04:14:08Z")
The [H&K G11](http://securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/1300/1303.htm) also used caseless ammunition, though I’m afraid I don’t know how it worked. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608/23 "2005-01-02T04:33:50Z")
> [@adam yax](#): > > But it seems that all you need to foil this is a rabbit eyes vest. [Rabbit eye vest.](http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/yojimboguy/detail?.dir=/180a&.dnm=b2c8.jpg&.src=ph) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9bd4f/32.png) [@The\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Cat)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608/24 "2005-01-02T08:54:43Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > IIRC, cesium reacts more violently to water than sodium does. If not cesium, then it’s one of the elements just below it on the periodic table. My friend originally suggested sodium, but we watched a movie in chemistry class when I was in high school where they dropped sodium in basically a punch bowl half filled with water. The sodium rolled around, boiling and giving off sparks. Then they dumped cesium into an identical punch bowl with water. It exploded. All the metals of the alkali group (the first collumn on the periodic table) will react violently with water. I remember the experiment you’re talking about, my chemistry teacher compared pottasium to sodium though. I believe cesium would have the effect that you’re shooting for. The reason they will NEVER produce these rounds is they’re such a fire/explosion hazard. If moisture ever got inside the round it would react with the cesium and set off the powder, not exactly something you could safely keep in your home. I just don’t think exploding bullets are really necessary when you witness the damage a hollowpoint round can do. ---
**Author:** ![Berkut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a88e57/32.png) [@Berkut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Berkut)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608/25 "2005-01-02T08:57:55Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > How exactly, (I ask in complete seriousness) is this different from the minirockets of the Gyrojet? Is all the propellant used inside the chamber, or does the projectile burn propellant as it travels? The propellent is a solid cylinder with the bullet embedded in the end. It’s not a rocket round like the Gyrojet. [http://www.voere.com/ammunition\_vec91.htm#Seitenbeginn](http://www.voere.com/ammunition_vec91.htm#Seitenbeginn) ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608/26 "2005-01-02T16:52:10Z")
> [@Berkut](#): > > Caseless rounds have existed for some time now. The batteries and wiring are not a problem, at least not in the weight department. > > [The Voere caseless rifle.](http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/2300/2384.htm) Or even more pertinent: [http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/arms/Trends/section13-en.asp](http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/arms/Trends/section13-en.asp) The H&K G11 4.7mm caseless ammo rifle almost went into service with West German forces in the late 1980’s, but the Soviet collapse shelved those ideas. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-these-bullet-ideas-work/282608.md?page=1)