What will be the official "U.S. Space Force" gun?

Demi-human said:

Really?! Dang! I thought it was cold in on the moon.
Hmm. Unimpeded infrared heat?


I’m still plugging for Photon torpedoes and AR-15s!

Click to expand...

It’s both. Hot in the sun, cold in the shade. That’s one of the interesting effects of having no atmosphere. One of the others is the lack of reflective scatter, so the edges of shadows are extremely sharp. That’s one of the reasons those photos from the moon look so crisp. Anything that’s completely shaded is effectively invisible because there’s no scattered light to illuminate it indirectly.

Sergei Mosin said:

Acme A-1 Disintegrating Pistol as a sidearm, Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator for heavy work.

Click to expand...

Haha! "Where's the KABOOM?" "There was supposed to be an Earth shattering KABOOM!!!"

I don't know, but whatever it is, it better make and earth shattering kaboom!

Bullet trajectory should be nice and flat in a vacuum regardless of what they're armed with. Someone fact check me here...in a vacuum there no means to transmit the shock wave of sound so no need for a suppressor ever?

Bfh_auto said:

But new powders are temperature stabile
I agree with you. When it gets hot, the powder might detonate.

Click to expand...

OK, the problem, as I so poorly tried to explain it, before, is gunpowder needs spark and oxygen, to burn, three sides of the "fire triangle", fuel, O, and heat.
In the vacuum of space, you don't have oxygen, neatly compressed into atmosphere at 14.7 PPSI, like down here, on earth. Even if there is oxygen in the powder, how do we know it will react to less than 0 PPSI, as in a vacuum, like space?

The same way gravity affects recoil, might not vacuum affect firearms combustion paradigm ? There's even the possibility that in that decompressed atmosphere, the explosive properties of gunpowders may be multiplied, since there is no atmosphere
compressing the air, and holding everything within the `14.7 PPSI envelope. We know how brass, steel, and gunpowder react here, on earth, but we are taking for granted the density of our atmospheric cushion, which doesn't exist, in space.

The effects of firing a conventional powder filled cartridge case should be able to be replicated here on earth before anyone gets into a gun battle in the outer reaches of the solar system. Have the Myth Busters ever tested shooting a gun in a vacuum?

Dibbs said:

OK, the problem, as I so poorly tried to explain it, before, is gunpowder needs spark and oxygen, to burn, three sides of the "fire triangle", fuel, O, and heat.
In the vacuum of space, you don't have oxygen, neatly compressed into atmosphere at 14.7 PPSI, like down here, on earth. Even if there is oxygen in the powder, how do we know it will react to less than 0 PPSI, as in a vacuum, like space?

The same way gravity affects recoil, might not vacuum affect firearms combustion paradigm ? There's even the possibility that in that decompressed atmosphere, the explosive properties of gunpowders may be multiplied, since there is no atmosphere
compressing the air, and holding everything within the `14.7 PPSI envelope. We know how brass, steel, and gunpowder react here, on earth, but we are taking for granted the density of our atmospheric cushion, which doesn't exist, in space.

Click to expand...

The potassium nitrate contained in blackpowder creates oxygen for it to burn.
I'm not sure if the same thing is used in smokeless, but it definitely creates its own oxygen also.

Yes, the Mythbusters did test firing a gun in a vacuum. A little shaky to watch (someone recorded it off their television) but here it is. The future of the Space Force is looking brighter.

There is not enough air space in a case for there to be enough oxygen in it to burn rapidly enough to make a firearm work.

All the oxygen necessary for combustion is in the smokeless powder, and is released upon ignition.

Firearms work in space.

Now, how do I reload in orbit?

I’m sure revolvers are a must...

Dibbs said:

OK, the problem, as I so poorly tried to explain it, before, is gunpowder needs spark and oxygen, to burn, three sides of the "fire triangle", fuel, O, and heat.
In the vacuum of space, you don't have oxygen, neatly compressed into atmosphere at 14.7 PPSI, like down here, on earth. Even if there is oxygen in the powder, how do we know it will react to less than 0 PPSI, as in a vacuum, like space?

The same way gravity affects recoil, might not vacuum affect firearms combustion paradigm ? There's even the possibility that in that decompressed atmosphere, the explosive properties of gunpowders may be multiplied, since there is no atmosphere
compressing the air, and holding everything within the `14.7 PPSI envelope. We know how brass, steel, and gunpowder react here, on earth, but we are taking for granted the density of our atmospheric cushion, which doesn't exist, in space.

Click to expand...

The gun powders/propellants contain the oxidizer in it. For black powders it is mostly potassium nitrate. For the smokeless powders it is mostly nitrocellulose, picrates, nitrates and other explosives designed to deflagrate (subsonic burning) instead of detonate (supersonic burning).

Sometimes some detonable explosives are mixed in small amounts (especially for artillery) but this is pretty specialized.

The bottom line is that gun powder/propellants carry their own oxidizer with them so they can burn without any atmosphere. This is just like a rocket-it needs no atmosphere.

However, there are several obvious problems for firing a gun in space: solar heating potentially causing premature ignition of cartridges in the gun, extremely cold temperatures slowing down the reaction, and spot welding of components slamming into each other since there is not a microscopic air layer separating many parts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_cementing.

"This effect was reported to be a problem with the first American and Soviet satellites, as small moving parts would seize together".

In any case, the whole discussion is moot since Space Force personnel will be in offices controlling satellites, not floating around in space shooting anything.

Like I said, I heard straight from the scientists who would likely train these astronauts for space flight (assuming they aren't dead or retired....it was in the early 90s) and who were very much rocket scientists in the NASA training center that a gun would in fact fire in space. They said that it was a common question actually.

Also, some of our military planes fly where there is much less oxygen in the air and the guns function fine, as did the Russian gun that was fired while in orbit, (not that they would tell if it didn't work) as they do under water

Flechette said:

In any case, the whole discussion is moot since Space Force personnel will be in offices controlling satellites, not floating around in space shooting anything.

Click to expand...

True in the immediate future. But it's not really SHTF or some off the wall star trek fantasy either since NASA does have a goal of having men on mars by 2030 and even government officials float the idea of mars on occasion. Deep space, not so much but the moon and mars are not so far off. Why anyone would fight over or in them... who knows. But the same would have been said about barren places we fought over oil too before oil was discovered....... who is to say that some soil sample doesn't reveal something every country wants and ends up fighting over. An elusive element. A new fuel?

In USMC boot camp we had to qual with the M16A1 at 200 off hand, 300 kneeling and sitting, and 500 prone. In the Space Force it will probably be phase plasma rifles at 10 astronomical units.

Tommygunn said:

Handguns, and weapons with short barrels, yes. Longarms ... it's been found the length of most rifle barrels allows enough of a mass of water in to cause real problems with the bullet discharging against that much resistance ... Many rifles might not survive the experience

Click to expand...

Not according to these and Myth Busters. (Myth Busters water testing fired M1 Garand to 6 feet undamaged - Lethal to 2 feet)

"Russia: Unique underwater assault rifle unveiled in Moscow - ... fired underwater or on dry land ... ADS automatic rifle can discharge 5.45x39mm cartridges in both environments ... The ADS boasts improved accuracy and handling when compared to the service-issue, Soviet-designed APS underwater rifle.

The rifle is set to be adopted by the Russian Ministry of Defence for use by Russia's Far East and Black Sea Fleet. It is planned that the rifle will be available for international export."



(At 2:00 minute of video) Russia: Naval troops open fire using underwater machine guns (With what looks like special underwater "dart" ammo)



Firing AK47 under water to test bullet pushing "uncompressible" column of water theory (While bullet exits the barrel, it only travels 5-6 feet)

LaneP said:

rifles at 10 astronomical units.

Click to expand...

As long as it’s Standard/Imperial Astronomical Units or AUs, and not Metric Occupied Universal Space Euro units, MOUSE, I’m fine with that.

Flechette said:

The gun powders/propellants contain the oxidizer in it. For black powders it is mostly potassium nitrate. For the smokeless powders it is mostly nitrocellulose, picrates, nitrates and other explosives designed to deflagrate (subsonic burning) instead of detonate (supersonic burning).

Sometimes some detonable explosives are mixed in small amounts (especially for artillery) but this is pretty specialized.

The bottom line is that gun powder/propellants carry their own oxidizer with them so they can burn without any atmosphere. This is just like a rocket-it needs no atmosphere.

Click to expand...

OK, let's push the cart down hill, this time. As previously acknowledged, the powder will work, the gun WILL fire. WHAT, then, bearing in mind that space isn't this pressurized area, at 14.7PPSI, like Earth's atmosphere. Now, in space, there is ZERO resistance to restrain recoil, cumbustion, pressure. Does the entire firearm explode ? Does the standard force of a single powder load, usually restrained by our 14.7 PPSI atmosphere, get multiplied, by the minimal resistance of the space vacuum ?

LiveLife said:

Not according to these and Myth Busters. (Myth Busters water testing fired M1 Garand to 6 feet undamaged - Lethal to 2 feet)

"Russia: Unique underwater assault rifle unveiled in Moscow - ... fired underwater or on dry land ... ADS automatic rifle can discharge 5.45x39mm cartridges in both environments ... The ADS boasts improved accuracy and handling when compared to the service-issue, Soviet-designed APS underwater rifle.

The rifle is set to be adopted by the Russian Ministry of Defence for use by Russia's Far East and Black Sea Fleet. It is planned that the rifle will be available for international export."



(At 2:00 minute of video) Russia: Naval troops open fire using underwater machine guns (With what looks like special underwater "dart" ammo)



Firing AK47 under water to test bullet pushing "uncompressible" column of water theory (While bullet exits the barrel, it only travels 5-6 feet)

Click to expand...

"Many rifles might not survive the experience," I wrote. And many others might. I've no doubt a rifle designed for underwater use would, as the pressures would be taken into account .... and we all know how robust the AK-47 is.

But some rifles have been fired underwater and not survived the experience.
I just don't want to be around them when they're tested. I'm not enough of an .... "expert" to realistically guess which rifle is more likely than not to survive .... maybe "Mythbusters" knew a lot more about this sorta thing than I do!
O

Dibbs said:

OK, let's push the cart down hill, this time. As previously acknowledged, the powder will work, the gun WILL fire. WHAT, then, bearing in mind that space isn't this pressurized area, at 14.7PPSI, like Earth's atmosphere. Now, in space, there is ZERO resistance to restrain recoil, cumbustion, pressure. Does the entire firearm explode ? Does the standard force of a single powder load, usually restrained by our 14.7 PPSI atmosphere, get multiplied, by the minimal resistance of the space vacuum ?

Click to expand...

Go back to Page Two and read the linked article on the workings of a gun-oriented mind.
Full set of calcuations and the like.

Key item of interest, projectiles have to be limited to under 5400fps or they will exceed Lunar Escape velocity. "Range fan" for a 4000fps projo 5' above Lunar surface at 45º is 320 miles. Level rifle shot using 4000fps projo at 5" ALS hits ground at 3200m.
Another take away, suppressive fires could leave projos in dangerous orbits around the Moon until they hit something. So, military forces might have to tote about a big plate angled at 40-45º behind their advance to catch projos trying to tail chase them.

Remember that mass is conserved. If, in your suit, you mass 100kg, you may only press down on the surface about 16kg (8kg per foot), but you still have 100kg of mass. So, rifle recoil will probably be more about boot traction. In microgravity, you will get issues

As to using a laser on suits--the suits are designed to keep the user reasonably cool, so they are reflective, which is also to limit cosmic ray penetration, too. But long skinny projos--think flechette here--could be a serious nuisance.

Now, where energy weapons will find a niche would be in going against sensors.

crestoncowboy said:

True in the immediate future. But it's not really SHTF or some off the wall star trek fantasy either since NASA does have a goal of having men on mars by 2030 and even government officials float the idea of mars on occasion. Deep space, not so much but the moon and mars are not so far off. Why anyone would fight over or in them... who knows. But the same would have been said about barren places we fought over oil too before oil was discovered....... who is to say that some soil sample doesn't reveal something every country wants and ends up fighting over. An elusive element. A new fuel?

Click to expand...

I am sure that there will be fighting. There always is on a frontier.

However, I think that in space or on other planets the weapons will be larger autonomous robots or manned vehicles. Just like under the ocean, combat occurs there but I do not think many gunfights have occurred at 1000 feet below sea level.

Dibbs said:

OK, let's push the cart down hill, this time. As previously acknowledged, the powder will work, the gun WILL fire. WHAT, then, bearing in mind that space isn't this pressurized area, at 14.7PPSI, like Earth's atmosphere. Now, in space, there is ZERO resistance to restrain recoil, cumbustion, pressure. Does the entire firearm explode ? Does the standard force of a single powder load, usually restrained by our 14.7 PPSI atmosphere, get multiplied, by the minimal resistance of the space vacuum ?

Click to expand...

Many guns have chamber pressures in excess of 4000psi.

14.7/ 4000 = 0.00367, or 0.367%.

So firing a gun in space increases the difference between the chamber pressure and the outside by less than 1%. This is less than a +p round.

Lubrication, cold welding, solar heating, etc. are much higher concerns.

Flechette said:

Many guns have chamber pressures in excess of 4000psi.

Click to expand...

My rifles are in the 55,000psi range, 45 Auto is 21,000. Making the difference even more infinitesimal.

The idea of Cold Welding is a troubling one. A real problem for actual firearms in space. It would be my luck that a Glock would work fine but a M1911 wouldn’t.

I'm watching the Twilight Zone episode "People Are Alike All Over" in which space traveler Samuel Conrad (Roddy McDowall) crash lands on an alien planet. Before venturing out of the wrecked craft into the unknown environment he retrieves his trusty 1911 from a storage box in the space ship

Demi-human said:

It would be my luck that a Glock would work fine but a M1911 wouldn’t.

Click to expand...

As far as the theoretical moon trip.....
If I was told to arm with a handgun for defense and go anywhere on earth to fight I'd take my Glock. I've carried and fired my Glocks in everything from 105+ ambient air temps in sand, -10 in snow, salt water, coastal swamp, mud, freshwater......I trust them.

But if told I was going into unknown extreme temps, unfiltered UV, etc.... I'm sure I wouldnt take the polymer. Maybe a sig 22x. Anodized frame or stainless idk , stainless slide might be less likely to be stuck on the aluminum but aluminum does crack so idk . Hammer fired. I'm not so worried about the heat since it takes 330+ degrees (soldering irons have ruined many a glock around 350) to hurt polymer and by that point nitrocellulose has already cooked off.... But the cold I'd worry about. Glock polymer, which is less brittle in cold but softer in heat than some newer polymers, is rated at -40. Which would be a very very very hot night even on the moon. I'd be highly surprised if it didnt shatter or at the least crack on the first shot.

I wonder what primers would do at -300. Bust and crack I'd think.

So, ultra super magnum primers, an aluminum frame, carbon steel bushing-less slide, nickel plate barrel, titanium, magnesium and beryllium small parts alternating contact materials, thicker chromium springs, and heavily lacquered and severely overloaded ammunition to function at near zero. And perfectly polished to reflect heat.

U.S. star Cocobolo Grips. The 1911 Is the future!
No suppression necessary.


This caustic soup of gases and vapors that instantaneous corrode the surface of pure materials, and rain erosive acid down on most everything else, is actually a great boon upon our technological advancement.
The fine layer of dissimilar matter in the corrosion keeps the nail from forgetting it’s not part of the hammer.
Yea, Air!
Hearing protection recommended...

I am very excited about this. Finally, us Air Force guys have a shot at a branch of service we can make fun of...

Prior to the development of the phase plasma rifle, early US space forces armed themselves in preparation for interstellar defense with British Sten's, as evidenced by this actual, unretouched still from the 1960, space travel themed Twilight Zone episode, "I Shot an Arrow Into the Air"