Frohickey's comments
about the mid-.40 round based on the .50BMG have hit the 'on' switch in me.
Theoretically speaking, if you were considering at least some of the variables regarding a round of this type, where would you start.
Frohickey mentioned the .338 based on the .50BMG and throat erosion (a real problem). This is due to the velocity increase of expanding gasses through a much smaller hole. The neck acts as a venturi (rocket nozzle?). Burns and erodes the throat of the barrel, at the very least, in that cartridge. (An example off too much velocity, powder, or something).
Question. Given a known case maximum diameter (the .50 BMG, in this example), is there a 'better' neck size (interior dim), than the one used, that yields higher velocity without excessive throat erosion?
Second question. If the answer to the first question is 'yes', then is there an optimal shoulder angle for such a case that a) does not restrict gas flow too much, b) allows 'maximum' powder capacity. etc., etc.
Comment: I think this was one of the reasons that Roy Weatherby used his fairly unique neck design. In addition to avoiding the sharp transition into the neck at the interior of the shoulder than more 'conventional' sharp shoulders do, the longer transition allowed more powder in the case (in addition to the increased length required for the transition to a given bullet O.D.).
I'm not suggesting that this solution is the one to use here. Mainly because I am discussing an existing case, and it would be difficult (if not impossible) to go with Weatherby's solution for your average reloader.
Moving on. How does one come up with 'possible', reasonable answers to the first two questions?
Can you analyze the body of existing case design to find an 'ideal' ratio of neck size (I.D. = caliber) to case O.D., disregarding the actual dimensions of either.
If so, does this lead to a similar analysis of required or optimal shoulder angles?
I would think that we have good boundary conditions already. The existing .50BMG on the one hand, and an unsatisfactory limit on the other (the .338 dimension). Is there an accurate velocity/energy/trajectory solution between these two bounds?
I realize that this may be (and probably is) re-inventing the wheel. But heck, thats what this is all about.