So, I did some looking around beforehand, and I noticed that there has been some talk about PB rifling and such, and the usual flamespray of anyone who tries to do so seriously. A couple have brought up the FN303 as the reasonable baseline for why there might actually be a market for such rounds. With that said, I am embarking on a project to bring about ability to load markers with fin-stabilised rounds. As it seems that there is more of a "put up or shut up" metality here, I will endeavor to provide working details and photos for your continued enjoyment. If you would like to give comments or advice, that would be awesome, but please keep the ad hominem attacks elsewhere.

Should one figure out how to reliably load a round repeatably, in semi-auto, possibly with an insert that would enable the marke to still fire a regular ball when needed, I think the stumbling block would be removed from actually using fin stabilized rounds for, at least, woodsball and scenario, if not elsewhere.

Magazine and Feed Elbow:

Magazine Internals and Feed Elbow:

i type slow wrote: how does it connect to the gun?

I am using a 98C feed elbow, as shown, to attach it to a 98 Custom, once the correct tooling is done to the marker. I chose this as a good starting point to prototype my work. Actually, any marker with a detachable feed would work (SIM-4). 98C is just the cheapest/easiest to work with at this point.

what is the magazing made from?

love it so far bty

carl_the_sniper wrote: what is the magazing made from? love it so far bty

Smartalleck answer: Plastic

Honest answer: Probably some type of polyethylene for the internals and a brittle acrylic wannabe for the cover.

I am in communication with the manufacturer, discussing materials. For some reason, companies get all wierded out when you tinker with their products...

Monk wrote: I could see this being used under the gun. like a cyclone turned on its side. Otherwise wouldnt the fins end up in the wrong position?

On the FN303 it is mounted under the gun, sliding up a set of rails, locking into place with the round in line with the bolt. The idea here, since I am not wanting a 303 redux, and it will be rather hard to retrofit markers to that point, is to make a removable magazine mount/feed tube that can be swapped out with a regular elbow (or is still compatible with regular hoppers). 

They way I have this planned out, each round will be fed into the tube already facing the correct direction, and will have some spring tension behind it to keep it facing that was as they move down the elbow. The elbow will have some plastic machined out in the form of grooves, or a flattened aft end, to keep them faced.

I want there to be as little machining as needed on each marker, because it would be far better for them to be able to use both types of ammunition, than just one or the other. 

If I can snag some of the old 303 rounds that they have laying around, I will try to get some pics up to show some relationships.

no i meant what was the magazine origionally?

could you make a thompson style mag? drum mag?

That could be a possibility. Probably most feasable. I am just looking at getting the concept down first.

The magazine is an old FN303 magazine. We have them for less-than-lethal use of force. Rather remarkable tools, if a bit over-engineered. But, then again, the military is using it.  

definatley possible but could take some work

The feed system is interesting, but what about the ammunition itself? There used to be fin-stabilized ammunition, you could stick a stabilizer on the back of a normal paintball and load it single-shot, but they were discontinued since they took forever to load and had a tendancy for cutting people when they were hit. I'm not certain what era of paintball this was, but it it was back in the days of shop-goggles, I guess the getting cut problem isn't an issue anymore.

It would almost make more sense to manufacture a seperate loading device connected to the barrel, so you could cut off feeding from the hopper, clear the weapon, then fire several more accurate shots when extra range is needed, then switch back.

rednekk98 wrote: The feed system is interesting, but what about the ammunition itself? There used to be fin-stabilized ammunition, you could stick a stabilizer on the back of a normal paintball and load it single-shot, but they were discontinued since they took forever to load and had a tendancy for cutting people when they were hit. I'm not certain what era of paintball this was, but it it was back in the days of shop-goggles, I guess the getting cut problem isn't an issue anymore. It would almost make more sense to manufacture a seperate loading device connected to the barrel, so you could cut off feeding from the hopper, clear the weapon, then fire several more accurate shots when extra range is needed, then switch back.

The ammunition itself might not be that big of a problem. There is already tooling availble for fin-stable rounds, but it needs to be tuned for making gelatin-type ammunition, not polystyrene. I am not really trying anything radical, just the (to me) easiest way to get the parts to work together.

You are on to something with the quick switch idea. That is why I decided to use the 98C, because the feed elbow is readily detachable, and can be replace fairly quickly with a standard elbow if needed.

SSOK wrote: Very creative. However, I would just mill out a 98c where the grip out, and have a magazine in there. However, you would need to re-locate the ball latch and you could never use a hopper again.

That is basically what the FN303 has, and I am trying to avoid that at all costs because, as you said, it could never use a hopper again. I want to have the minimum amount of milling done to the actual 98C itself, as I am looking at it being able to use both standard and fin rounds interchangably.

cmts58 wrote: the fins would cut people

Paintballs cut people already. I have the scars to prove it. Without proper PPE, there is always the risk of injury from this type of sport. I am aware of the possibly increased danger due to the fins, but an idea has to be tried before it is judged as a failure.

usafpilot07 wrote: On the point of a Magazine, it seems like that would be much more feasible as to ensuring that the "round" fits into the breach correct each time. If I get a chance, I'll sketch it up in MS_P later.

That would be awesome to see if you do. What I have been able to see so far is that if I were to use the magazine to seat the round into the breach, I would just be modifying the idea from the 303 to fit into a civilian PB marker, and that would ruin the marker for anything other than fin rounds. I would love to see what you are thinking.

brihard wrote: cmts58 wrote: does anybody realize...this is a paintball.refs are not going to allow ANYTHING like this.ever.anything that has the mass to be affected by fins is way to dangerous to shoot at people... Utterly incorrect. Paintballs already have more than enough mass to be affected by fins

The refs will allow what the rules dictate. Thats what the refs do. Will this type of round be allowed immediately after I manage to provide a "proof of concept"? Very doubtful, but it will be there on the table as an option to discuss. What people are and aren't willing to have thrown at their bodies at varying speeds is up for debate, and as long as the safety equipment we have in place is still able to provide the level of protection that is required, then there should not be too much of a brough-haha about actually fielding the paint.

3g is less than 8.5g the fins were originally designed for, but that's why it's called R+D.

what would these fins be constructed out of?

cmts58 wrote: what would these fins be constructed out of?

Gelatin, just like the rest of the shell.

This is the shape of the ammo:

A close-up of an OC round:

FN303 and its "magazine with round in breach" loading style:

That is what I am trying to figure out. If things need tweaked, then you tweak, and see if the finished product is what you need. And then you tweak again if its not.

What hsppens now when someone is throat-shot? Right, they get up, shake it off, catch their breath, and go play another game. Isnt that why there is a market for throat guards, now?

 PBs are designed to break on impact. This will still be the case. I am not trying to use LE rounds for PB; I want to adapt useful military tech so our sport reaps some of the rewards of that money already spent. 

The impact from a 303 round is so traumatic because it is 8.5g of bismuth, plastic and paint hitting you @ 300 FPS. That almost 3x the mass of a standard PB. If the new PB rounds are still 3g, there will be no change in the "intensity" of the impact (F=MxV).

It runs on CA.

The FN 303 is designed to be the premier system for situations requiring a less lethal response. Completely dedicated to reducing lethality and liability, the basis of the FN 303 concept lies in its unique ammunition. The .68 caliber, 8.5 gram projectile utilizes a fin-stabilized polystyrene body and non-toxic bismuth forward payload to provide both better accuracy and greater effective range than other less lethal systems. The primary effect of the projectile is temporary, superficial trauma to help neutralize the aggressor. In addition, secondary effects from the projectiles can be delivered via a chemical payload depending on specific mission requirements. Magazines contain 15 rounds and have a clear rear cover to allow rapid ammunition payload verification. The compressed air-powered FN 303 launcher is designed to fire less lethal projectiles exclusively and has enough air capacity to launch 110 individual shots with an effective range of 50 meters at a point specific target. It is constructed from durable, lightweight polymer offering comfortable ergonomics and an easy to operate safety. Along with the flip-up iron sights is an integrated M1913 rail that can be used to mount red dot sights and other accessories. An undercarriage mount is also available for the M4 and M16 style tactical rifles.

Nope, that would be disasterous. As entertaining as it might be to take your 20-something buddies out and light them up with non-lethal, it would not go over too well with dad who just saw his son get knocked out by one.

The rounds would be completely gelatin and fill, not plastic, metal or other non-PB materials.

The under-slung version of the 303 is nothing more than the standard 303 with the detachable stock removed, and then mounted to the M-16 mounted rail, a la M-203. As handy as it might be on my M-16, it doesn't do anything for me in this design process, as the actual design of the 303 has not changed any.

Either way, new projectiles will have to be developed. The LTL cannot be used for a game, regardless of the item used to launch them. And, if you decide to use the launcher, what good is it without the ammunition it was designed for?

New PB rounds need to be developed for this idea to come to full fruition.

Mostly accuracy. Extra range would be a bonus, but not the driving force behind the idea.

DeTrevni wrote: While this is by far the most successful "fin stabilization" thead I've seen in a while, I would like to point out to participating forumers, ther is an "edit" button.

Yup, there sure is.

Sorry. I couldn't help myself.

/End spelling-Naziing....

Slanted.

I am not dealing with any type of rifling. That is beyond the scope of this project.

Special purpose paint? Yes. More expensive? Yes, probably. I am researching the process to see how I can make this feasable.

The fins cause the round to rotate, or "spin", while traveling thru the air, imparting rotational stabilization on the projectile. The round is accurate, from my own first-hand accounts.

how heavy would the projectile be without the bismuth?could we just use a tweaked version of teh fn round?but im not sure gelatin is the answer.maybe a extremly soft rubber?and are you planning on .68 cal?if you take out the bismuth,it may be like wise to a paintball impact.could you do me a favor?take a round ,remove bismuth payload,and fire into medium.repeat with standard paintball from same distance.record damage.then if that is feasible,we can use the exact design,just construct the round out of a different material.

http://www.impactguns.com/store/818513001984.html - FN 303 Projectile- Indelible Yellow Paint, 150/Box
$302.99

cmts58 wrote: does anybody realize...this is a paintball.refs are not going to allow ANYTHING like this.ever.anything that has the mass to be affected by fins is way to dangerous to shoot at people...

Look, man, I am not trying to bring LTL, or any part of it, into PB. Also, what you are wanting to do would do us no good from the insurance standpoint. Everything is designed around gelatin shells with polyethylene fill. Any deviation from that, and this idea is DOA.

No LTL. 

At this point, it also appears that you are talking out of both sides of your mouth on the issue. I am strictly trying to bring in availible technology, adapted for safe everyday PB use, within the boundaries of the game. If we start walking outside of that ideal, it aint gonna work.

The Innkeeper wrote: DeTrevni wrote: While this is by far the most successful "fin stabilization" thead I've seen in a while, I would like to point out to participating forumers, ther is an "edit" button.   Yup, there sure is. Sorry. I couldn't help myself. /End spelling-Naziing....

Well, I'll be. You're the first person to catch a mistake in one of my posts in a long time. The irony is almost too much to bear...

"the military came to us and wanted a more accurate non lethal system we made a bullet shaped, spin stabilized paintball that far outperformed any equal weight round projectile. "

This quote comes from a reputable source.

DeTrevni wrote: The Innkeeper wrote: DeTrevni wrote: While this is by far the most successful "fin stabilization" thead I've seen in a while, I would like to point out to participating forumers, ther is an "edit" button.   Yup, there sure is. Sorry. I couldn't help myself. /End spelling-Naziing.... Well, I'll be. You're the first person to catch a mistake in one of my posts in a long time. The irony is almost too much to bear...

Being anal is actually useful, every now and then...

What carrier?

The impact should be that of any other PB.

The primary effect is trauma : the shock (15J/cm³) directly neutralizes the aggressor. Secondary effects will be delivered by a chemical payload chosen according to the mission requirements

All .68" projectiles have a 8.5g weight, a polystyrene body and a granular non-toxic bismuth forward payload

Why do you keep going on about LTL?

The only thing that the new rounds would have in common with the 303 LTL is their shape. That's it. Any other comparison is unjustifiable.

the impact as is,isnt excessively(about 250%) that of a paintball.to acheive the impact trauma,fn uses a bismuth forward payload in a polystyrene body.the bismuth gives the round most of its mass.and therefore trauma.i believe that a round with the bismuth removed,will not be that much more than a pb.what i was thinking was a polystyrene cylinder,which the fins will be made of,topped with a stiff gelatin dome,filled with paint.you will still have the range and accuracy.just not the traumatic impact of the LTL round.

p.s.    and,just so you know,alot of our officers say "f it" to the speciaized LTL equipment.we have officers armed with standard paintball markers.one of our privates brings his ion everyday.and we have used that ion numerous times to incapacitate drunken aggressors.im not saying use LTL to play paintball.just use the technology.as you are,with the shape.and maybe more.your job as the researcher,is to keep an open mind. 

Ok.

Now that the topic has come back around, let's go forward:

What the impact stresses from a LTL round are is irrelevant. The round will be produced using contemporary PB manufacturing techniques, using standard shell and fill. The only difference would be the shape. While what you are saying might have the merit of not having to worry about shaping warm gelatin into right angles, I do not think that it would be possible to get any type of plastic into a PB round and still have it be allowed into regulation play.

I had an idea initially of using discarded 303 rounds (they get broken in day to day handling over here) as test rounds once the prototype hopper was finished. I need to get a gram scale to make sure the weight was as close to a PB round as possible, and then check the flight characteristics.

One issue with what you are putting forward is that the breaking strain of the polystyrene would have to match that of the shell, otherwise the gelatin would break on impact, but leave the poly intact, with possible injurious consequences.

BTW, 250% is a lot. Let's ramp the markers to shoot at 750 FPS, and see how many rounds people feel like stepping in front of. I, for one, will pass.

Reply to your post script:

I agree with the "F-it" sentiment with the specialised LTL. Lots of money, little return on investment. Pepperballs in a standard marker would appeal to me more, but they do not see it that way, here.

The tone of your posts was more of a "let's use LTL to play" than an R+D type. I have an open mind, and will gladly take any input that people bring to the table, as long as it is constructive. As someone who is putting information and ideas forward, there is an understanding that not all ideas will be accepted as constructive to the subject, or task, at hand. I have not, and will not, summarily dismiss your ideas or your criticisms.

Same material, different manufacturing processes.

Styrofoam is expanded polystyrene (EPS)

The 303 rounds are extruded polystyrene (XPS), the same material as CD jewell cases.

Awesome.

I'm glad it only took us 4 pages to realize that....

i was hoping to get to five,lol.have all of your posts been in this one thread?

Nope.

I have one in the PB rifling thread.

Don't worry, once I actually am able to get a 98C shipped over, I can appal you all by posting pictures of what it looks like after my Dremel has gotten a hold of it.

Some photos of the initial machining (read: Dremeling):

Magazine tooling:

Backside:

Feed elbow:

Interior still needs milling and honing out:

Hopefully, I get more time to work on it.

Comments are more than welcome.

who is this intruder on our thread,innkeeper?j/k....but this is a serious thread.

great work innkeeper.keep me posted

Brian Fellows wrote: What the hell, man.  I keep thinking you're YWSM.

YWSM?

What the heck is YWSM? I have no idea what that means.

You cannot load a finned PB with a regular hopper, because the round is no longer, well, round. This will provide for a directional feed that guides the rounds into the chamber.

Monk wrote: But the thing is going to get jostled going down the feed elbow.

Paintballs get jostled as they slide down the feed. As long as they stay faced, its not a problem. Also, there will be some spring tension from the magazine that will prevent them from getting obnoxiously out of kilter.

DeTrevni wrote: YWSM is a member here. "You Won't See Me." He has the same avatar.

Perhaps I should change mine, then.

Feed elbow, Mk I:

I went a little overzealous on the tooling, and the upper channel is a bit much. I have another, or I can get some epoxy clay and retro fit it. On that note, since I don't have a large selection of tools, I could use the clay as a smoothing agent for finishing.

Bottom view:

Top View:

Again:

Look at the FN-303. That is exactly what it does, and it is exactly what I am trying to avoid.

The Innkeeper wrote: Look at the FN-303. That is exactly what it does, and it is exactly what I am trying to avoid.

• Which is exactly what it does? (Uses drum as chamber or has a long bolt travel)
• Why, exactly, are you trying to avoid it? (Whichever applies)
  

Drum as chamber.

Avoiding it because it would ruin the marker for normal paintballs.

Right...

Why is there always just "the only way" to do something?

Check, and check.

More of a side mount, I suppose. I am trying to keep it in line with where standard hoppers are mounted now, along with being backwards compatible, to make this idea as palatable (sp) as possible.

I think I have some pics of the relationships.

Of course, if you want to mail me a marker, that would drastically speed up the process...

Pics of the tenative mounting position:

Side view, would be as if sighting down the marker:

Outboard view:

Top view:

I hope this clears some things up.

I have thought of going that path with the system. the only problem that I see for it to become a viable alternative to my original idea is that there is no way to keep the rounds from falling out. It would be a quick switch to change out the magazines in this manner, but without a retetion system, they would just roll out from the spring pressure in the magazine. While I am sure a retention system could be thought up without to much effort, I want to get the principle here taken care of before I worry about something else. That whole "baby steps" thing. I have an idea to keep them from emptying out of the magazine, before they reach the feed elbow, but I think that idea will only be a stop-gap measure for now.

While my friend and I were messing around with the elbow and some FN rounds, they seemed to slide down the elbow fairly easily, in the corrrect positioning, once i managed to file the rough edges from the tooling away. This bodes well that once i can manage to get things sized, milled and polished properly, that it actually has a decent chance of working. Fingers already crossed.

I do not have actual weights of a fully loaded hopper vs. a full 303 magazine, with regular PBs. If you happen to have the time, finding out how much a regulation hopper with 200 rounds weighs would be very useful. Figure the mag and the hopper are the same weight, and the mag carries 15 8.5g rounds. The very rough math yields that the regulation hopper with 200 rounds actually weighs more.

I really don't see SB players ever using this, not with them depleting a hopper in 10 seconds. There would be no use. The volume of paint needed in a speedball match makes this concept DOA for them.

While probably most ideal for the PB "sniper", even those that want a more skillfull version of the game will find this appealing.

Random though/question.

Are you intending to do this only on the Tippmann 98? or are you planning on doing this to other markers as well?

Also, since the modded feed elbow clearly wont hold a regular hopper tightly anymore, why not just make a mounting on the actual mag to go dirrectly into the gun instead of through the medium of the feed elbow? this would reduce more of the "fuzzy" guess work and modding a feed elbow. also it would make the mag not stick out so much.

another thing to consider is just a straight down feed, ignoring the big old drum. many people complain about the target area on the cyclone, while that drum will cause even more problems like that
I know this wont appeal to you probably but I would suggest just a straight vertical tube that you put into your feed elbow.
again I know the idea of a giant tube sticking 6" out the top of your gun doesnt sound appealing, but it makes the idea much easier to produce/manufacture and eliminates alot of stuff that could go wrong.

But this is a very interesting idea that you have. I kinda wonder what sort of range you would get. a bit conserned about what sort of volocity differences you would see if you shot a fin round then a regular round one.