Guns in Space

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FireArmFan

Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
492
Location
Twin Cities, Minnesota
All right, so the holidays are over and today was the first day of the new semester for my college. One of my classes happens to be astronomy and we were discussing the solar system and the galaxy and what not. I began to drift off and start thinking about other things. Other things beings guns, but then i started to merge my thoughts between outer space and guns and came up with this question.

What would occur if a firearm were fired in outer space outside of our atmosphere? Has there ever been any testings like this in say a low gravity chamber or something?

I don't really have an answer so I'm looking for whatever you can provide.
 
For every action there is an opposite action. In terms of a firearm this means that the explosion and a lack of gravity would mean the bullet left the gun at less velocity(as it would be sending you backwards and the bullet forwards deliverying less total energy forward) and you would be given a nudge in the opposite direction. Of course since your mass is significantly more the bullet would still be shot forward. More powerful rounds with larger kick would have a more pronounced reduction in force relatively and a more pronounced tendency to launch you in the opposite direction. If anchored down the force would be applied to what you where anchored to reducing it that much more.

Propulsion in space is essentialy very slight application of thrust. Firing a projectile would thus alter your course or slow your speed accordinly. Also the speed at which you were moving would be imparted in addition to the speed of the vehicle if shot forward, subtracted if shot backwards, and something in between when shot to the sides. The lack of gravity and air friction would also allow the bullet to essentialy continue forever until it finds itself caught in some sort of gravity or course altering action.

Projectile weapons would be very poor in space for vehicles as every shot would significantly alter the course of vehicles not applying an equal and opposite thrust to counter.
 
Yes.

The "air" for combustion of the powder is contained in the molecules of the powder itself. Firearms will fire even underwater. Even if there were a "leak" in the cartridge, so there was a vacuum in the case, the powder would still burn, since it provides its own "air," or oxygen.

The "air" for the burning is in the form of the three oxygen atoms in the nitrate radical, -NO3, which is attached to the cellulose molecule or the glycerine molecule. (That's why they are called nitro-cellulose and nitro-glycerine.)

In simple terms, disturbing these "nitrated" molecules by means of the primer flash causes a rearrangement of the atoms so that the oxygen is free to combine with the carbon and hydrogen in the glycerine or cellulose to release a lot of heat energy. The resulting high-pressure hot gases push the bullet out of the gun.

The primer also contains its own oxygen, but is sensitive to the firing pin blow, which starts the primer composition burning --quite violently.

Smokeless powders are of two types --"single-based," which means they are nitrocellulose only, or "double-based," which means they are a combination of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine. Ball powders are usually double-based.

If I recall correctly, the double-based Bullseye, which is about the fastest-burning powder you can buy for reloading, contains about 13% nitroglycerine and the rest is nitrocellulose and a small amount of stabilizing chemicals.

The older black powder also contained its own oxygen, but it was not combined directly with another molecule, as with smokeless powder. Its oxygen is contained in the nitrate in the separate saltpeter molecule, potassium nitrate (KNO3) or sodium nitrate (NaNO3). When heat is applied to black powder, the oxygen in the KNO3 or NaNO3 "comes loose" and will provide the oxygen to burn the sulphur and charcoal of the black powder.

The composition of black powder varies, but is basically

73% saltpeter (potassium or sodium nitrate)
15% sulphur
12% charcoal (carbon)

Other "oxidizers," such as ammonium nitrate, NH4NO3, are also used in black powder substitutes and explosives.

The -NO3 radical, containing the three oxygens, is found in most propellants and explosives It is very cheap.

Other radicals, such as the perchlorate and chlorate radicals, -ClO4 and -ClO3, operate in the same way and are also used in propellants and explosives.
 
Last edited:
In terms of a firearm this means that the explosion and a lack of gravity would mean the bullet left the gun at less velocity
Click to expand...

In a vacuum, the bullet would not lose velocity it normally does by shoving past the air normally present in a barrel in an atmosphere. The real question is, does the velocity lost from having less mass to "push" against outweigh the gain from not having to shove through ambient air on its way down the barrel? ;)
 
In terms of a firearm this means that the explosion and a lack of gravity would mean the bullet left the gun at less velocity(as it would be sending you backwards and the bullet forwards deliverying less total energy forward) and you would be given a nudge in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...

Same thing happens on earth, you just don't notice it because when you go backwards from the recoil, you take the earth with you, pulling the target closer to the bullet as you spin the earth in the opposite direction. The earth continues to spin in a direction against the bullet path until the bullet impacts the berm behind the target. At this point the momentum of the bullet leaving is imparted back into the earth, stopping the spin you put on the earth when you fired the gun. Now you have permanently rotated the earth ever so slightly. In fact, the only way to put the earth back to where it was before you fired the gun is to walk down to the berm, find your bullet (hope it didn't fragment cause you need all the pieces), and walk the bullet back to the firing line.

:neener:

It's all relative my friend.
 
Plasma is a state of matter, matter has mass, mass being imparted with velocity has an equal and opposite reaction known otherwise as recoil... ;)

Technically since photons (light) have mass, even a laser cannon would have some recoil...
 
The bullet would zip around the planet as another piece of space junk floating in near-earth orbit. Gravity would slowly pull it down until it eventually comes into contact with air molecules and it would quickly burn up from friction. End of bullet.
 
There was a sci-fi author in the 50's (I want to say H. Beam Piper but not sure) who outfitted his "space troops" with guns that had a rocket nozzle that came out of the back to counteract the firing of the gun. Essentially you tucked the gun under your arm, barrel in one direction and "rocket nozzle" in the other and you fired.

Great concept though I doubt it'd work in microgravity as the forces aren't just straght back and forth plus it'd be a bear to balance. Maybe on the moon or other low gravity though.
 
That's called a recoilless rifle nowadays. Throws HE or AP shell out front, jets gas out back. Gun sits in middle.

Developed in 1945, used to great effect in the Pacific Campaign. Seventy-five mm and 105 mm were the two sizes at that time. Two-man crew (one alone could handle it), one to aim and fire, t'other to load and extract casing. Portable by the two men alone.
 
Same thing happens on earth, you just don't notice it because when you go backwards from the recoil, you take the earth with you, pulling the target closer to the bullet as you spin the earth in the opposite direction. The earth continues to spin in a direction against the bullet path until the bullet impacts the berm behind the target. At this point the momentum of the bullet leaving is imparted back into the earth, stopping the spin you put on the earth when you fired the gun. Now you have permanently rotated the earth ever so slightly. In fact, the only way to put the earth back to where it was before you fired the gun is to walk down to the berm, find your bullet (hope it didn't fragment cause you need all the pieces), and walk the bullet back to the firing line.



It's all relative my friend.
Click to expand...
LOL, so what would happen if you missed your target?! Would the earth always move backwards?:D I guess that's even more of a reason to practice...the earth is in your hands! I like it!
 
Quote:
In terms of a firearm this means that the explosion and a lack of gravity would mean the bullet left the gun at less velocity(as it would be sending you backwards and the bullet forwards deliverying less total energy forward) and you would be given a nudge in the opposite direction.

Same thing happens on earth, you just don't notice it because when you go backwards from the recoil, you take the earth with you, pulling the target closer to the bullet as you spin the earth in the opposite direction. The earth continues to spin in a direction against the bullet path until the bullet impacts the berm behind the target. At this point the momentum of the bullet leaving is imparted back into the earth, stopping the spin you put on the earth when you fired the gun. Now you have permanently rotated the earth ever so slightly. In fact, the only way to put the earth back to where it was before you fired the gun is to walk down to the berm, find your bullet (hope it didn't fragment cause you need all the pieces), and walk the bullet back to the firing line.



It's all relative my friend.
Click to expand...

Actualy since gravity from the earth is constantly pulling at the bullet up to and until it imapacts with something sharing the same gravity without ever leaving the Earth's gravitational pull the net result is about the same, even the air causing friction shares the same gravity as the earth so the net effect is nill unless the round leaves the earth's atmosphere and proceeds to escape orbit.


The bullet would zip around the planet as another piece of space junk floating in near-earth orbit. Gravity would slowly pull it down until it eventually comes into contact with air molecules and it would quickly burn up from friction. End of bullet.
Click to expand...
That is assuming it was fired in orbit of the Earth. I was assuming it was just in space, not necessarily something orbiting Earth. If it was fired from something sitting or outside of direct orbits the round would travel for a long time changing very little perhaps having it's path curve slowly over tens of thousands of miles around things it imparting some pull in various directions.
Eventualy it would probably be pulled into something but that could be tens, hundreds, or thousands of years later depending on luck.

Now explosives however have very odd behavior changes as gravity changes. However they need atmosphere for shockwaves to be transmitted. Shrapnel based explosives however travel a massive distance with decreased gravity and no atmospheric resistance. Explosions in atmosphere but with reduced gravity would be even more powerful as less energy would be expended fighting gravity like on Earth. Here so much energy is expended in fighting gravity and making a crater accordingly, directing most of the force downwards. In say the space station for example where you have nill gravity but artificial atmosphere a small explosion would have much more tremendous effect as the force would be applied in all directions, not primarily downwards.

This is why with very large powerful explosives like Nuclear weapons worth so much per weapon you want an airburst as it makes the most use of the explosive force spreading out and downwards at the same time. A ground level detonation of the same weapon would do far less damage as the explosion would be resisting gravity going perpendicular against it instead of partialy with it. The direct altitude for maximum effect can be mathmaticly equated by someone so inclined.
 
Roadwild17: I remember hearing, the soviets put a few cannons on some of there early space stations incase of an american "flyby".
Click to expand...
Actualy weapons designed to be delivered from space are extremely effective. Take ICBMS for example which have to fly and be detectable going up and down expending massive fuel in the process. Space weapons can simply be dropped and lightly propelled to descend and guided to the target much quicker and more effectively. This is a big reason space weapons are supposedly banned...
The difficulty and expense is getting them up there to begin with. But with more and more satalites and space junk cluttering up the orbit of Earth hiding weapons up there would not be too difficult, especialy if they operate as a useful electronic satellite until needed, which would also make thier deployment more cost efficient. Even private companies put thier own satellites in space.
 
I was assuming it was just in space, not necessarily something orbiting Earth.
Click to expand...

All large bodies have a gravitational pull of some sort. A bullet fired outside Earth's gravitational pull, or with enough velocity to escape Earth's gravity, would then be influenced by the Sun's gravitational force and become a tiny comet orbiting the Sun. Eventually it would problably collide with some other planet or space rock and that would be that.

A bullet fired in interstellar space away from the gravitational pull of any large bodies would just simply travel more or less in a straight line for a *very* long time (perhaps millions or even billions of years) until it eventually collides with something or gets pulled into some star's orbit. Clouds of interstellar gas and dust might occasionally alter the path of the lonely little bullet a bit.

It's lonely out in space. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Time to start new .50BMG mythos
Replies
17
Views
800
MSGT9410
M
T
  • Locked
Guns in Space; Not Such a Good Idea
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
PILMAN
P
B
  • Locked
We really should wait until it's too late
Replies
4
Views
822
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
J
  • Locked
Gun safe modification for limited space. Ideas?
Replies
22
Views
4K
Tokugawa
T
W
  • Locked
Class of mindless sheep
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
pittspilot
P
Back
Top