Handheld weapons in space? - General

[QUOTE=Zemog;22394559]Guns won't work in space. They require oxygen to ignite the cordite, or gunpowder if you want.[/QUOTE] The oxygen is into the explosive part of the cartridge, as somebody already stated

One word..Gundams.

[QUOTE=Zemog;22394559]I only read the OP, someone probably already said this, but W/E; Guns won't work in space. They require oxygen to ignite the cordite, or gunpowder if you want.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3l1.html"]A conventional bullet has oxidizer inside the shell, it does not require atmospheric oxygen in order to fire. However, conventional handgun lubrication oil will boil away in vacuum, leaving a gummy mess. Unless special lubrication is used, the handgun is likely to jam. This is mentioned in The Venus Belt by L. Neil Smith, and also includes a mention of the effect of a 200 degree thermal shock the weapon undergoes when moved from sunlight into shadow. Thermotolerance of all components in the gun are important, many mechanical devices really don't like the idea of going from room temp to -60°F over a short period of time. The weapon might work shortly after it was brought out of the airlock, then suddenly seize up. [/URL] However, it does go on to say this; the lubrication issue isn't as bad as first thought. [quote=Atomic Rocket]While thermal expansion might indeed be a problem, lack of lubrication probably isn't on the timescales important in a gunfight. The mechanisms of basic firearms are sufficiently simple that they will generally operate just fine without any lubrication at all, or even when coated inside and out with dust, grit, or mud. Lubrication serves only to reduce wear over the long term. One of the favorite "torture test" approaches used to demonstrate the durability of a firearm, in fact, is to disassemble the gun, clean all the parts with a degreasing agent, reassemble it, and put a few dozen rounds through it. (See e.g., XD Torture Test -- scroll down to "The Chemical Degreaser Test".) A revolver, in particular, has only three or four moving parts and should operate under almost any conditions. [/quote]

I just realized it'd technically be possible to shoot yourself in the head if you fired a weapon on the moon at the right angle. I mean.. it's damn near impossible but if you had the right angle plus little resistance on the bullet on a small planet you could arc it around the whole planet back to you. That would suck.

[QUOTE=JeffmA;22395852]I just realized it'd technically be possible to shoot yourself in the head if you fired a weapon on the moon at the right angle. I mean.. it's damn near impossible but if you had the right angle plus little resistance on the bullet on a small planet you could arc it around the whole planet back to you. That would suck.[/QUOTE] Not sure if you could. Anyone know what the escape velocity of the moon is? Actually fuck it, it would take too much time to work out and there are too many variables.

Guns are unreliable in space god damn, they have grease and oils and these substances would fuck up in space. Moving parts in the fucked up temperatures of space is a bad idea. You need electronic firing. A regular hand gun or rifle will not work in space. Atleast it wouldnt work efficiently and would probably break down after 1 shot, possibly none. What good is a gun with a locked up firing pin?

[quote]We already have the technology for pew pew zappy guns, but the power packs are the size of a sedan, if not larger. What we need are better batteries. [/quote] The trouble with that is that any battery that has enough energy density to be useful for that purpose goes up with enough force that one might as well stick it in a scored metal casing and throw it at the enemy. In my opion, coventional chemical ballistics are perfectly suffient for the job. In fact, the recoil is likely overstated.

[QUOTE=Jeep-Eep;22412690]The trouble with that is that any battery that has enough energy density to be useful for that purpose goes up with enough force that one might as well stick it in a scored metal casing and throw it at the enemy. In my opion, coventional chemical ballistics are perfectly suffient for the job. In fact, the recoil is likely overstated.[/QUOTE] I stated earlier that recoil will be negligible, especially if you're braced against cover. Lasers are probably better suited to speciality applications because of their ability to do things like kill a person through their armour without damaging their armour bar a few scorch marks. A high power pulse laser could be used to kill the crew of a ship or orbital station while only slightly damaging the structure itself.

Railgun > Laser.

Oh. So you did, roflcakes. Rate me bad reading. :sigh:

It would be pretty funny to watch some dumbass try to use a machine gun in low gravity and send him self spinning off into the distance though.

We have barely only just got into space and your thinking about shooting things already?

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;22380774]Why can rockets move then? Hint: Add liquid oxygen to the explosive.[/QUOTE] I was watching a show about this the other day, to allow the solid fuel to burn in the vaccum of space they oxidise it causing it to release oxygen when burning.