Physics said,
So if it's not a fuel source, where is this heat coming from? From drag, and the speeds you would need to heat that bullet up are pretty high (Honest question: How many guns do you know of that shoot a molten bullet?).
Good heavens, Physics. At least five times I described a possible source for heating of the body of the missile. I also posited that the "bullet" might be made of a refractory material. The OP only said that it was a "hard substance."
Primary B,
as already mentioned here by some members requires an sustaining energy source.
Once again: I'm not talking about sending it around the world. I'm talking about a possible short-term boost during perhaps 100 ms of its flight before the projectile cools down.
More:
Even if you were able to get the bullet hot enough if the ramjet without fuel, simple compression, burning of air theory is even plausible once the bullet leaves the barrel it starts to cool down and slow down. We already have that.
I've got an innovative idea. How about putting more energy behind it.
This is not too clear, but once again, I'm not talking about "burning" the air. I don't know where that came from. And there are limits to how fast you can propel a bullet-type projectile from conventional propellants "behind it." (I recognise the sarcasm.)
Atblis:
The bullet is its own fuel.
Now you're getting close. But instead of saying "fuel" (which once again implies compbustion), put it this way:
"The hot bullet is its own source of energy to heat the incoming air."
Sigh.
All I was trying to do is "reverse-engineer" what the boys at Redstone Arsenal might be trying to do, based on the meager information given in the OP:
1. A small R&D shop is assigned the task of fabricating an object which is given as some kind of missile or projectile.
2. It is open all the way from front to back and its internal structure is shaped like what one would expect for a ramjett tube.
3. It is made of some hard material.
4. Rumors have it that it is supposed to increase its velocity.
Now.
What could the boys at Huntsville be thinking?
In doing this kind of reverse engineering I considered the following. (Now actively follow along here, without speed-reading it):
I presented the idea that it could be a simple ramjet which would accelerate this missile after being launched from some projector or another. We can reasonbly presume it was launched from a gun-like apparatus, presumably (again) by conventional powder propellants.
I discounted the idea that the incoming air was compressed and thereby heated, since this would violate the laws of thermodymanics. Many people pointed this out anyhow. Some came up with the idea that the air was heated by some kind of plasma-generating effect. OK, maybe.
Now since this projectile was open at the front, it was possibly not intended to be a "rocket" filled with fuel, like some of the tank rounds where the shell is rocket-boosted after leaving the gun.
What then could propel it?
Several times I brought up the notion that combustion of a "fuel" was not required to heat the air in order to generate a ramjet effect. I gave a fanciful example of an aircraft powered by a diesel generator set which fed power to resistance heaters in the ramjet tube, which is
conceptually possible if not a
practical way of going about things.
I then posed the notion that
if the projectile itself was very hot, a "combustion" source of heat would not be required. The heat energy of the "hot body" ramjet could be transferred to the incoming gases, thereby giving them energy, accelerating them, and providing the thrust.
You will note that there is no violation of the conservation laws here! The energy to accelerate the gases comes from the hot body of the ramjet itself.
OK.
Now the question was, "how could this projectile be heated" in order to provide the energy to the gases "second-hand," so to speak.
(1) It could be heated up before launch.
(2) Other
(3) The hollow cavity could be filled with a substance which burns very hot, which could be ignited from the intitial propellant charge (like a tracer round) and when it burned out, would leave the front of the projectile open and the projectile very hot. Sych a "filler" substance might be a thermite or thermite-like composition.
Air would then enter, be heated
from the now-hot body of the projectile, accelerated out the back (conversionof heat energy to kinetic energy) , and provide thrust, even for a short period of time, thereby enhancing the downrange performance of the projectile.
Just "reverse engineering," which is kind of a mind-reading game anyhow. That's all.
But obviously, based on what was said in all the above, it's all impossible, and the boys at Redstone are just wasting their time, and I am, too, by trying to reverse engineer the problem.
(Kentac, I have stated several times what the source of the energy might be. Re-read the above. Actively.)
I am afraid at this point I have bumped into the limits of my powers of explanation. I can't seem to penetrate the armor of conventional thinking on this one, even though what I am describing is all conceptually possible on a step by step basis.
Not blaming you guys. I'm blaming me.