Firearms In Space - General

[QUOTE=Miktor.;27244713]Like when someone is pulling your arms and legs at the same time. Or well, something like that. I can't explain it, but it's been thought of before what happens when two black holes meet each other. I don't know what the conclusion is though.[/QUOTE] That'd be pretty freaking weird.

Russians strapped AA to the side of a space station? Awesome.

I had this same conversation with a few friends one day. The friends I argued with were in higher level math and science classes than me. They assured me guns could not fire in space due to no oxygen. And they call me the idiot.

[QUOTE=Stalk;27239148]Railguns & photon beams would be alot more efficient to use in space.[/QUOTE] correct me if i'm wrong but todays "railguns" (naval) has more recoil than the guns firing regular shells. wouldn't that mean that hand held railguns, when they are developed would have more recoil than a regular weapon [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] they also damage the rails a lot when fired

[QUOTE=ThatHippyMan;27239514]And far, far cooler.[/QUOTE] IRL they would be on an invisible wavelength so you couldn't see them though

[QUOTE=Fetret;27241787]Great post and hopefully will clear some people's misconceptions (but I doubt it). But still, I think overheating would be a problem. You never seem to address overheating. Radiation seems to work well, but it does not actually cool out the barrel fast enough to allow continous firing. Near absolute zero of space doesn't mean anything when there is nothing to take away the heat from the gun. Humans are supposedly able to survive in vacuum of space for upto 90 seconds, which includes exposure to the cold (assuming you will be shielded from radiation/sun), the body doesn't instantly freeze and loses heat quite slowly, think how a gun barrel would act after recently firing. Other than that you are quite right about plastic guns fracturing and rays of the sun destroying/warping guns.[/QUOTE] In space you'll have about 15 seconds before you pass out, if you have no airs in your lungs. You die in about 2 minutes. I seem to have overestimated the radiation, for a human it would take hours to start freezing throughtly when it recives no radiation. Guns are made of metal and metal would [I]I think[/I] cool well faster than a human body. But I don't think fast enough for sustained fire. Plus with lubrication, I underestimated it as well. As soon as the gun grinds off it's layer of oxygen between parts, the two pieces of metal simply become one. It's an intresting property metals gain in space: they merge into one. On earth this is pervented thanks to the layer of oxydized metal ontop of the metal, but in space metal has no oxygen to work with. It also happens on earth when you place two very flat glass panels together.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;27253315]In space you'll have about 15 seconds before you pass out, if you have no airs in your lungs. You die in about 2 minutes. I seem to have overestimated the radiation, for a human it would take hours to start freezing throughtly when it recives no radiation. Guns are made of metal and metal would [I]I think[/I] cool well faster than a human body. But I don't think fast enough for sustained fire. Plus with lubrication, I underestimated it as well. As soon as the gun grinds off it's layer of oxygen between parts, the two pieces of metal simply become one. It's an intresting property metals gain in space: they merge into one. On earth this is pervented thanks to the layer of oxydized metal ontop of the metal, but in space metal has no oxygen to work with. It also happens on earth when you place two very flat glass panels together.[/QUOTE] This is all assuming that the weapons are still made as here on earth. If someone were to design a firearm for space they would probably solve that issue by making the components out of a self lubricating material or coating items in something like teflon. Once again cooling would probably be solved by some other non-traditional method, maybe even going back to the barrel jackets of world war one in a sense.

I think spacecraft would explode too. Sure, there isn't any oxygen in space. So what? Star Wars/Star Trek sized spacecraft probably have enough oxygen and volatile materials inside of them for an explosion.

I'm doing them based on your regular gun you find in the stores now. Like you go take a CZ.75 and fire it in space or something. But I would't know, I've been failing at physics for 3 years straight.

[QUOTE=RubberFruit;27238566]There would be gravity unless in totally 'Middle of fucking nowhere' space.[/QUOTE] You know, this guy is actually right, you're always exposed to gravitational fields, even your own. [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=cqbcat;27253386]I think spacecraft would explode too. Sure, there isn't any oxygen in space. So what? Star Wars/Star Trek sized spacecraft probably have enough oxygen and volatile materials inside of them for an explosion.[/QUOTE] So whenever someone fires a gun, the atmosphere catches fire? lol wut.

[QUOTE=bravehat;27254512]You know, this guy is actually right, you're always exposed to gravitational fields, even your own. [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] So whenever someone fires a gun, the atmosphere catches fire? lol wut.[/QUOTE] He is right but that doesn't mean they do anything significant. If you fire a gun, the bullet won't start orbiting the gun DUE TO THE GRAVITATIONOL FIELDS, no it'll have little to no effect on it. Guns mass is simply too small to create any significant gravitational field, so is space stations and spaceships mass. They don't really affect anything enough to take into consideration on current topic.

[QUOTE=Killerelf12;27248287]That'd be pretty freaking weird.[/QUOTE] Not really, we would probably just see two black holes fuse together like drops of water on a car wind shield, but the full process would be that their gravity wells would fuse together and the singularities would probably do the same. [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;27254539]He is right but that doesn't mean they do anything significant. If you fire a gun, the bullet won't start orbiting the gun DUE TO THE GRAVITATIONOL FIELDS, no it'll have little to no effect on it. Guns mass is simply too small to create any significant gravitational field, so is space stations and spaceships mass. They don't really affect anything enough to take into consideration on current topic.[/QUOTE] Yeah but larger surrounding masses would have an effect, such as nearby planets and the like, any nearby debris. But assuming you have some awesome piece of hypothetical space that is completely empty then sure gravity takes no effect.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't guns rely on air pressure to chamber the next round? So would you only be able to fire one bullet?

No they don't. Pump, bolt and lever action work completely mechanically and so do recoil operated weapons. Gas operated uses the expanded gases to push back a rod in the gas tube that circles the action.

[QUOTE=X-Neon;27254606]Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't guns rely on air pressure to chamber the next round? So would you only be able to fire one bullet?[/QUOTE] what The force of the recoil or the pressure of the expanding gas released from the explosion of the cartridge cycle the action in your typical automatic firearm.

[QUOTE=X-Neon;27254606]Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't guns rely on air pressure to chamber the next round? So would you only be able to fire one bullet?[/QUOTE] Some do bult some rely on springs and mechanical force, you'r thinking blowback guns (I think, or is that paintball guns?)

The thought of Soviet Cosmonauts in space with 23mm antiaircraft guns just game the biggest fucking boner ever. [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=bravehat;27254738]Some do bult some rely on springs and mechanical force, you'r thinking blowback guns (I think, or is that paintball guns?)[/QUOTE] No, none use air pressure for any reason. Except maybe those old air guns the French (correct me if I'm wrong) used in the 1700s.

[QUOTE=mugofdoom;27254759]The thought of Soviet Cosmonauts in space with 23mm antiaircraft guns just game the biggest fucking boner ever. [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] No, none use air pressure for any reason. Except maybe those old air guns the French (correct me if I'm wrong) used in the 1700s.[/QUOTE] Nah I'm talking about using the propellant gases to chamber a new round, not actual atmospheric pressure.

[QUOTE=bravehat;27254807]Nah I'm talking about using the propellant gases to chamber a new round, not actual atmospheric pressure.[/QUOTE] Actually I don't know why I quoted you, I meant to quote the guy you quoted. Fuck I need to stop posting at 4:30 in the morning.

Once you jizz in space, it keeps going 'til it hits something. That can be a ship. Or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in ten thousand years. If you jizz in space, you are ruining someones day, somewhere and sometime.

[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;27253315]It also happens on earth when you place two very flat glass panels together.[/QUOTE] No. When you place two flat glass panels together on Earth, they stick together because of atmospheric pressure. The smoothness of the surfaces ensures that there's no pockets of air left between them, and that there are no ways for air to get between them. If you try to separate them by pulling them apart, you're trying to create a vacuum between them, and the atmospheric pressure pushes them back together. However you can still easily slide them apart.

[QUOTE=ThePuska;27256362]No. When you place two flat glass panels together on Earth, they stick together because of atmospheric pressure. The smoothness of the surfaces ensures that there's no pockets of air left between them, and that there are no ways for air to get between them. If you try to separate them by pulling them apart, you're trying to create a vacuum between them, and the atmospheric pressure pushes them back together. However you can still easily slide them apart.[/QUOTE] my chemistry teatcher taught me that the glass actually merges. Thanks, I stand corrected. LOOK WHAT YOU HAVE ´DONE TO OUR SCHOOLS, SOVIET BASTARDS

Rate me dumb please for reading this

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;27243636]The real issue would be finding a way to counter act the recoil of the weapons, since firing the weapon would push the user back with the same amount of force it used to propel the bullet. Of course this is assuming we're using typical fire arms and not a gyro pistol, rail gun, or other type of weapon.[/QUOTE] all of those have recoil if you're firing a solid projectile at high speed, the thing that fired it will experience an equal and opposite reaction no matter the method used to fire the thing.

[QUOTE=Mega1mpact;27239015]i quote: priboy you mean pipboy?[/QUOTE] Wait how can it have a range of up to 3000m? theres no friction in space shouldnt it have unlimited range? Also everyones saying about chambering the next round, you can you know just pull the slide/charging handle or is that too much effort?

[QUOTE=Swebonny;27244213]To prove it I'm just going to show the things ThePuska talked about. The momentum created by a bullet with the weight 5 grams and the velocity 1000 m/s is only 5 kgm/s. p = mv -> 0.005 * 1000 = 5 kgm/s. Now what speed can that bullet give a person in space wearing an EMU suit? Suit weight = 115 kg, add the person, let's say 80 kg = 195 kg. Now how much speed will 5 kgm/s give an 195 kg heavy astronaut? 5 kgm/s = 195 * V V = 5/195 = 0.0256 m/s So, not really sending you deep deep into space, but giving you a slight push. 2.5 cm / s is still noticeable.[/QUOTE] Would this mean a gun and a ammo can of two hundred or so rounds could be used to manoeuvre yourself short distances? [editline]7th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=mastermaul;27254700]what The force of the recoil or the pressure of the expanding gas released from the explosion of the cartridge cycle the action in your typical automatic firearm.[/QUOTE] This, but remember that the gun is going to cool slower in space, so full auto will over heat the gun faster than usual and is a very bad idea if you're not braced against something to stop yourself spinning.

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;27260268]all of those have recoil if you're firing a solid projectile at high speed, the thing that fired it will experience an equal and opposite reaction no matter the method used to fire the thing.[/QUOTE] True. You can't get rid of recoil, but the point with gyrojets is that you can decrease the recoil by making the projectile self-propelled. Also the energy carried by a kinetic projectile increases quadratically while the recoil increases only linearly as a function of its muzzle velocity. By increasing velocity and decreasing projectile mass so that their product remains the same, you can keep the recoil the same while increasing the potential damage the projectile can cause. This isn't that feasible in atmospheric conditions because air resistance tends to destroy and slow down really small and fast projectiles, but I imagine it could work better in space.

-snip I didn't read-

Didn't the astronauts of the Apollo missions carry a Colt .45 pistol, in the event that if they had no way to propel their spacecraft, they'd use the recoil from the gun to push it forward?

[QUOTE=Run&Gun12;27262364]Didn't the astronauts of the Apollo missions carry a Colt .45 pistol, in the event that if they had no way to propel their spacecraft, they'd use the recoil from the gun to push it forward?[/QUOTE] What the fuck am I reading?