Someone should build a modern Blake rifle.

[Tacti-square]

Just finished reading about a very interesting design from 1892 (http://candrsenal.com/rifle-the-blake-infantry-rifle/). Apparently there was very little controversy or criticism, it was just the luck of the draw that it wasn’t selected by any of the branches. I would love to see this applied to something today, with modern tools and engineering. 54 inches is pretty long for 2013. Make it semiautomatic, use lighter materials, utilize a modern cartridge, even make it a bullpup. I’m picturing the DTA SRS Covert with a lighter construction, a rotary en bloc storage gate instead of a magazine well and no external bolt. With a smaller round you could fit a lot more than 7 in a clip (yes, that’s the correct terminology in this instance), and reloading could be relatively simple if they were designed to drop free. The barrel could be as short as you'd like, considering how a revolver mechanism doesn't need a gas tube or a piston to operate. The original had a 30" barrel length, I think you could make this work with a third of that.

Why do this? Here's a couple things to think about. Generally revolvers are noticeably more reliable than their “pistol” relatives, more than likely due to their operating system. Why wouldn’t the same be true for rifles? When you take out the hassles of magazine loading (springs, followers, ejection, stripping fresh rounds, BCGs), the firing process is quite simplified. Also, with the absence of an ejection port opening and closing after every shot, significantly less dirt and debris would work their way into the internals. The en bloc would be proportionately lighter than a revolver’s due to the thin construction (if they were the same size). You wouldn’t get burned by powder or gasses because the clip would be safely tucked up inside the gun.

I’m not saying this is the most practical idea ever, but it would be a really cool experiment that would push the envelope. Any thoughts?

[ag08]

Thanks for posting that article. Historical firearm mechanisms fascinate me and many are forgotten since only a few really catch on. Many dont catch on without military adoption.

It may be silly of me, but I feel this type of mechanism could have merit in a lever action to speed reloads or maybe in something as exotic as a pump action bullpup for those stuck behind enemy lines. I feel our like-minded brothers and sisters in ban states are being left behind as the AR 15 platform evolves for those of us in free states and they will have to rely on firearms with manually actuated feeding for self defense needs in the future.

[Chameleox]

Not a gunsmith or an engineer, but...

Making such a system into a semi-auto as you suggest would add a bit of complexity to the firing process, especially if you try to remove ejection from the sequence. You have basically 3 options:

1. The spent casing has to leave (an ejection process- which you don't seem to want). In the case of a rotating clip, this could be done. This would also almost necessitate some sort of recoil/blowback, gas, or piston operating system.

2. The round is removed from the mag/clip, sent to a chamber, and fired. The spent casing then goes back into the mag/clip. This could potentially make it more complex. The round has to be pushed forward, fired, and extracted back to the mag or cylinder before it can rotate. Add in the cylinder rotation, and that's a lot for even a double action pull. Since the process all has to complete before the cylinder cycles, the energy to rotate the cylinder has to be stored somewhere until the end of the process, or stored in the magazine itself, via spring tension. This makes the magazines more complex (or at least as complex as an AR mag), which you again commented on. Some devices, like 40mm less lethal launchers, use a wound-spring system to move cylinders without needing to manually work it. Not a great system.

3. Make the magazine double as the chamber like a revolver, but this would make the cylinder heavy since it has to support the firing of the cartridge, and you'd have a revolver-carbine. With a detachable mag option, you'd be carrying a lot of extra weight per mag, what wasn't ammo. With either detachable cylinders or a speed loading system, this might be your best bet.

This system relies on a rotating magazine or clip, with a set circumference. The magazine is set to rotate a set number of degrees before it locks in place for firing or feeding. If the cylinder is off a couple degrees and can still fire, it can cause severe issues. It also has a set circumference for the "mag well". Thus, you're stuck with a specific max capacity for magazines and the firearm itself, unless the timing can be user-adjustable (complexity and $).

If someone made an 1855 Carbine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_revolving_rifle), that used updated materials and fired a more modern round (think Leverevolution -rimmed spitzers, or moonclips, and some big-azz speedloaders), I'd be all over it if the cost was reasonable, which I doubt it would be. It would be a curio though, with utility for hunting or less than optimal defense scenarios (you'd be hard pressed to find an advantage over a shotgun, lever gun, or a neutered semiauto, in ban states). I'm not sure the juice is worth the squeeze. Or I can be dead wrong.

I'm reminded of a post from a couple years ago, where someone was talking about the Chiappa revolvers, which fire off the bottom cylinder, thus mitigating the bore axis issue. Another member opined that the concept was cool and certainly unique and well thought out, but is akin to a finely tuned prop plane; past its time for fighting purposes.

But this is how great things happen.

[Tacti-square]

Thanks for the feedback, great replies. It makes more sense to me why this design was never taken better advantage of. I guess magazine-fed systems are just plain better.... :lazy2: