9mm VS 45ACP for Shooting in Outer Space?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What a coincidence that I ran across this thread;

I was hanging out with a couple of friends on T.A.R.D.I.S cruise night at the Bob's Big Boy, you know, the one near the end of space/time within Dimension 8, when one of our other friends comes suddenly spinning in from Dimension 5 all out of breath and such. He grabs this chick's WhiteDwarf-tini and gulps the whole liter down plasma-brella and all, catches his breath and then proceeds to tell us that he was just chilling in some nebula with his cousin when a few of his cousin's friends shows up. They eventually started wondering about concussion based weapons fired in a zero grav environment. Just then one of the vato's pulls an M92 and says '...you mean like this one...' and another pulls a M1911 and says '...no homes, like this one...'. They start firing at each other. The point at which they were standing was the bullet they fired from the guns, just spinning in place. Each of them, since their mass was greater than the bullets, was each propelled backwards, slamming against the opposite ends of Dimension 5. Stretching that continium to the point where it started to colasped upon itself. It was all our friend could do to quickly get his bagged and sparkin' Tardis off the ground and get anywhere/dimension else before he imploded.


Oh, does THIS only operate near it's planet's name-sake????
 
ttinlv, thats crazy talk. Sonic screw drivers don't work in space. They need an atmosphere.
 
Would the rifling cause the shooter to twist as well?

- Sig
Click to expand...

It does on ground, and as you may have surmised; it's basically imperceptible.

Owing to the low pressures, all the lubrication in the gun is going to boil off, unless it's all teflon or something.

(According to internet-urban-legend-lore, teflon was actually invented for the space program, don't know if that's true.)

Also, there's the issue of thermal shock. There's hundreds of degrees of difference in temperature between being in shadow and in the sun when you're in space, and with the aforementioned lack of convection, this will be rather hard on the gun.

I recommend a compressed-air weapon. Compressed air systems like the thrusters in the MMUs are already well-proven and reliable. They allow the critical moving parts to be completely internal, and will not overheat. Since they will only be venting cold gas, they can be entirely shrouded from the sun.

Now, praytell, what is it that we're shooting at? IIRC, space suits have kevlar in them already to protect against micrometeoroids and other assorted debris, and so should not be considered "soft" targets.
 
Now, praytell, what is it that we're shooting at? IIRC, space suits have kevlar in them already to protect against micrometeoroids and other assorted debris, and so should not be considered "soft" targets.
Click to expand...

I still think skeet on the moon is the winner. Screw Tom Knapp.
 
with all those cratters on the moon, it's for huntin wabbit, shhhh be bery bery quiewit
 
Guns, demolitions, etc "fire" underwater or in outerspace without
outside oxygen. They got that wrong even as late as the sci-fi
TV series Firefly (the Our Mrs Reynolds episode).
Click to expand...

It's entirely possible that Jayne, not being the brightest on the show, did not know that. How many of those here, being in his position, would have done the same thing? (not to imply that those here who believed it are not bright, just ignorant of the chemistry of gunpowder).
 
i'm confused. the first shot would have worked because it was in the suit (and had oxygen) would'nt it? it was the continued fire that wouldn't have happened.

i am not a science geek so feel free to berate me if i am wrong....

and the purplebellies have stolen my sig.
 
Since outer space creates the risk of asphyxiation while increasing the relative internal pressure of the human body by about 15 psi, there is less need for a significant wound channel. Punctures are far more dangerous than on earth. Additionally, the average person in space is likely to be wearing a protective suit that will be at least as strong as body armor. Therefore, the best weapon would be the one that penetrates well. Projectile diameter or expansion are secondary concerns.

Additionally, to avoid being pushed back, you would want minimal projectile weight and recoil. I would think something closer to a 4.6mm or 5.7mm round would be ideal.

Since space has no atmosphere, there is no need to spin-stabilize a projectile to keep the heavy part at the back. So there is no need for rifling. Bullets would travel point forward until they hit a fluid medium- an occupied space suit for example.

And gunpowder does not require oxygen. It contains the oxidating component already and combusts by decomposing to a gas.
 
Don't know if this has come up yet, so I'll just say this. I was thinking about writing an SF story that required firing guns in vacuum. I noticed that someone already wrote that the parts that burn contain their own oxidizing agents and will work.

Sorry Joss Wheddon, I loved the movie Serenity, and I loved the series Firefly, but Jayne didn't have to pack good ole what's her name into a space suit to fire at the electronic net.

When I was researching this I came up with much that proves this point, including a guy emptying a Glock under water! Yep the poor pistol had to hold its breath for the whole fifteen rounds.

Also, did you know that the original NASA astronauts on the Apollo missions were issued 1911s in .45acp.

This isn't the first time the .45acp vs 9mm debate has made it to the Black!:D
 
Easily a .45 +P. Remember that there's no arc when you fire a gun in space. No gravity or air to slow it down or pull it 'earthward' as it were.

Whats really amazing is to imagine firing a gun in space into oblivion. hundreds of millions of miles away it could hit some alien spaceship with the same velocity it had when it left your gunbarrel.

Now that I think of it, it would also probably be a lot more fun to play paintball in space. If only the 0rings wouldn't freeze :D
 
Actually my understanding is that you would be sent at EQUAL speed in the OPPOSITE direction!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
:scrutiny:

Not true, when we sneeze the wind is going about about 300 mph, that has potential to be problematic:rolleyes:... in 10 seconds u would be .83 mile away...

One cool aspect though is that u wouldn't need earplugs or silencers.
 
I can't believe my (semi-infamous) thread has been revived via the "Most Amusing THR Thread" thread. I am honored
Click to expand...

Lol I didn't realize it was so old, someone else revived it and I responded.

We wanted to give it more of the attention it deserves... the thead I mean.
 
... if not exactly humble. Methinks the intention was to amuse ourselves rather than bestow honor on the OP. But you're welcome to feel honored, nonetheless.
 
Gas guns, folks, gas guns. Take a Daisy air rifle, scale up the bullet to about 6-7mm and increase the gas flow to get muzzle velocity up. There's no combustion so there is very little heat (a little from friction). Small tanks provide the compressed gas.


Besides, small arms in space are a relatively moot point. Outer space is SO big that even at 200 yards a man-sized target is nearly invisible. Your target would literally be lost in a sea of black. Any space combat would most likely occur between two spacecraft using gas cannons or missiles. Lasers would work well too, as there is no blooming effect to dissipate energy.
 
From research I did back in the '80's, I would have to go with something like the Armbrust recoilless for a sidearm and a variation on the liquid-cooled Brownings for mounted guns.

More than that would be serious overkill.

Martin Caidin came up with similar answers in Cyborg VII.

-Great sig, Acheron. Mike and Manny Forever!
 
Guys, remember, recoil is a function of conservation of momentum, Newton's First Law.

The formula is MV=MV.
Thus if you fire a gun in space the M(bullet + Gas)(Velocity of bullet + Velocity of the propellent gas) = M(Astronaut + gun, + whatever he is holding)(Velocity). The second velocity is how fast he will be going backwards.

Thus, he will be thrown back just as much if he fires a 1g projectile going 1000m/s as he will be firing a 1kg projectile going 1 m/s.

Its one of the reasons that compressed-gas maneuvering units work. They eject very little mas at very high velocity to affect a change in the astronaut's velocity. A firearm would function no differently. In fact, you could probably use a gun as a make-shift maneuvering unit, if you really needed to.

Also, thermal shock won't be as much an issue. Yes, things in the sun will heat up quickly. But, they won't cool down that quickly unless you, say, douse them with something. Space is mostly empty, and heat needs something to carry it away. Thus with nothing to carry heat away, a hot gun will stay hot a while, regardless if its hot from firing or being in the sun.
 
Last edited:
there are lb-ft and lb-m lbs are used as both a mass and a force. end of that argument please.
Click to expand...

If you are going to end the argument, end it correctly. It's not lb-ft, it's lb-f.

A simple way to think of force and mass is the old trusty equation F=MA. So one lb-f = one lb-m x 1 G. G being the acceleration of gravity (32.2 ft/s^2). Notice where that "slug" definition came from? 1G or 32.2.

1 lb-f = 1 lb-m ONLY at exactly 1G, or basically anywhere on the earth's surface.

As stated mass never changes, but the apparent force can. Put a one pound object on a planet with 1/2 the gravity of Earth, and it will still have exactly 1 lb-m, but only weigh out as 1/2 lb-f.

500 post Karma!
 
I have heard that the US antronauts actually have 45s on the spacecraft as part of an emergency propulsion system (just to move there person around space) :eek:
 
The real problem would be having accurate maps of the universe, unles you'll violate one of the gun safety rules:

Know your target and what is beyond.
Be absolutely sure you have identified your target beyond any doubt. Equally important, be aware of the area beyond your target. This means observing your prospective area of fire before you shoot. Never fire in a direction in which there are people or any other potential for mishap. Think first. Shoot second.

It'll be your fault if your fired bullet travels a few billion light years and hits a sun in another galaxy causing it to go super-nova.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
The Mysterious and exotic Carbon Fiber. What else can we make with it?
Replies
16
Views
1K
petrel800
P
T
  • Locked
Guns in Space; Not Such a Good Idea
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
PILMAN
P
P
  • Locked
Nitro vs BP
Replies
9
Views
651
Mike Irwin
M
S
  • Locked
Reloading in a Vacuum.....
2 3
Replies
54
Views
3K
MErl
M
R
  • Locked
Shooting causing brush fires?
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
MOSINS
M
Back
Top