silly question
- Thread starter CLC
- Start date
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Indeed. The bullet would be effective over virtually any distance, with no gravity or air resistance. Though it would EVENTUALLY slow down since there is a very, very slight content of gases... It would probably make it to the outer solar system though, hit an asteroid or planet or go into orbit around a planet.
The recoil would be the real problem. With nothing holding you in place, even a 22 would set you to spinning around and around. The "rocket effect" from uncorking the barrel with all that pressure behind the bullet would suddenly be very apparent.
The recoil would be the real problem. With nothing holding you in place, even a 22 would set you to spinning around and around. The "rocket effect" from uncorking the barrel with all that pressure behind the bullet would suddenly be very apparent.
If you fired the gun anywhere near earth, the bullet would just end up as another piece of debris in earth orbit. If you fired it far away from earth, it would stay in a large orbit around the sun, and would probably be captured by any planet it ventured near.
The velocity needed to escape the earth's gravity is over 11000 meters per second. For the sun it's 600000 m/s. Handheld guns don't even get close to that.
The velocity needed to escape the earth's gravity is over 11000 meters per second. For the sun it's 600000 m/s. Handheld guns don't even get close to that.
I wont lie, I was in a silly question asking mood and I find this somewhat more entertaining than the same old "should I get X or X?"
.I didn't think of the fact that gunpowder burns in a vacuum, but I was thinking firearms might have an advantage in outer space. I felt like I was missing something and I think this was it HAHA.
Im actually kinda curious if any gov. agency put this to the test. Just sayin
.yes, they'd work in space.
A .22lr gatling gun would make a fantastic anti-satellite weapon if accuracy wasn't an issue. a short burst of .22 lr projectiles made of titanium would be more than enough to destroy the simple components of a satellite and knock the orbit off a bit.
In reality, a killer satellite would calculate trajectories for itself and target, and put a laser on any spot deemed vulnerable, then lock itself on track until the target was damaged beyond use. Since the laser could track the target with absolute accuracy for hours, even, there wouldn't even be a need for a high energy laser.
A .22lr gatling gun would make a fantastic anti-satellite weapon if accuracy wasn't an issue. a short burst of .22 lr projectiles made of titanium would be more than enough to destroy the simple components of a satellite and knock the orbit off a bit.
In reality, a killer satellite would calculate trajectories for itself and target, and put a laser on any spot deemed vulnerable, then lock itself on track until the target was damaged beyond use. Since the laser could track the target with absolute accuracy for hours, even, there wouldn't even be a need for a high energy laser.
I’m not the world’s smartest person, that’s a given. But how can a firearm work in outer space? It requires combustion. Combustion needs three things, fuel, oxygen and a heat source. We have the fuel, gunpowder. We have the heat, the primer. But we don’t have oxygen, or do we? Granted, there is oxygen present when the cartridge was loaded, if it was loaded on the planet. There would be a certain amount of oxygen present in the gun powder itself I’m sure. But if you exposed a cartridge to the outer space, wouldn’t the oxygen inside the cartridge case disperse to at or near zero presence? With no oxygen in the case, the gun powder would not burn. Or am I proving, yet again, I’m not the world’s smartest person?
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The gunpowder carries the oxidant or the chemical bonds that release energy when hit by the primer flame.
Some Soviet satellites supposedly carried guns to shoot other satellites. If true, I don't know.
Also, this was a topic discussed quite a bit on the Internets a long time ago when forums first started (along with underwater Glocks). Use the Goggle and search it.
Some Soviet satellites supposedly carried guns to shoot other satellites. If true, I don't know.
Also, this was a topic discussed quite a bit on the Internets a long time ago when forums first started (along with underwater Glocks). Use the Goggle and search it.
Mike38 - the fallacy of your thinking is believing that only oxygen in gaseous form is needed for combustion. Oxygen comes in many forms only one of which is as a gas. There is far more oxygen by weight in solid or liquid form on earth than there is as a gas in the air.
Black powder has its oxygen in the mixture in the form of potassium nitrate which has a lot of bonded oxygen in it. Black powder will burn just as readily in the vacuum of space as it does on earth. (In addition sulfur is an "oxidizer" as well, but we won't get into that.)
Another fallacy that a lot of folks believe about smokeless powder is that it requires oxygen in any form to explode. It does have oxygen in the compounds that make it up, but it's not there to oxidize the "fuel". The nitro-compounds don't actually burn, it is their instability that causes them to decompose extremely rapidly into more stable compounds, most of which is in the form of a high volume of gases (mostly nitrogen and carbon dioxide).
The nitro-compounds will indeed burn in air (I've seen sticks of dynamite burning in a campfire with no detonation), but that is not the same effect as the rapid decomposition that propels a bullet down a barrel. It's a different type of "burn" entirely.
Concerning primers - for gunpowder, the primer delivers the flame that lights off the powder, and for smokeless powder, the primer delivers a very high velocity shock wave that sets off the powder. The primer yields two very different forms of ignition.
Black powder has its oxygen in the mixture in the form of potassium nitrate which has a lot of bonded oxygen in it. Black powder will burn just as readily in the vacuum of space as it does on earth. (In addition sulfur is an "oxidizer" as well, but we won't get into that.)
Another fallacy that a lot of folks believe about smokeless powder is that it requires oxygen in any form to explode. It does have oxygen in the compounds that make it up, but it's not there to oxidize the "fuel". The nitro-compounds don't actually burn, it is their instability that causes them to decompose extremely rapidly into more stable compounds, most of which is in the form of a high volume of gases (mostly nitrogen and carbon dioxide).
The nitro-compounds will indeed burn in air (I've seen sticks of dynamite burning in a campfire with no detonation), but that is not the same effect as the rapid decomposition that propels a bullet down a barrel. It's a different type of "burn" entirely.
Concerning primers - for gunpowder, the primer delivers the flame that lights off the powder, and for smokeless powder, the primer delivers a very high velocity shock wave that sets off the powder. The primer yields two very different forms of ignition.
Ok, another fallacy rears its ugly head. 
I keep seeing folks thinking there is no gravity in space. Couldn't be further from the truth. At the distance from earth that satellites orbit, the earth's gravity is almost as strong as it is on the surface. It's the forward velocity of the satellite that keeps it from falling to earth (in fact it is always falling, but the forward progress prevents it from leaving a stable orbit).
You cannot escape gravity anywhere in the entire universe. It is everywhere, it's weak, but it is relentless.
I keep seeing folks thinking there is no gravity in space. Couldn't be further from the truth. At the distance from earth that satellites orbit, the earth's gravity is almost as strong as it is on the surface. It's the forward velocity of the satellite that keeps it from falling to earth (in fact it is always falling, but the forward progress prevents it from leaving a stable orbit).
You cannot escape gravity anywhere in the entire universe. It is everywhere, it's weak, but it is relentless.
Gosh darn if you're not right Mal. But for gravity, we'd probably have planets colliding all the time in Gawd's galactic billiard table.
That Rooskie gun looks very useful. If you can't shoot 'em, you can go machete crazy on them. Massacre on Soyuz - coming to a theatre near you.
That Rooskie gun looks very useful. If you can't shoot 'em, you can go machete crazy on them. Massacre on Soyuz - coming to a theatre near you.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Ok, another fallacy rears its ugly head.
I keep seeing folks thinking there is no gravity in space. Couldn't be further from the truth. At the distance from earth that satellites orbit, the earth's gravity is almost as strong as it is on the surface. It's the forward velocity of the satellite that keeps it from falling to earth (in fact it is always falling, but the forward progress prevents it from leaving a stable orbit).
You cannot escape gravity anywhere in the entire universe. It is everywhere, it's weak, but it is relentless.
Mal,
It depends on where in space you are.
Satellites that Orbit farther and farther out need less and less velocity to stay in orbit.
Technically, the Earth's gravitational field is lower at the top of a mountain then it is at sea level.
If one wants to be really picky, there would technically be gravity no matter where you were in space because your body would create a very small gravitational field, as would actually the bullet and the gun.
Also, in theory, gravitational fields extend out forever. So, there really is gravity everywhere.
Certainly within the solar system there is gravity everywhere.
If you were, for example, halfway between earth and mars I'm not sure if the sun's gravity would be enough to bring a bullet back before it exited the solar system in theory. Probably it would but that's just a guess.