If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Coolest picture of a gun fired underwater you'll see all day. In related news: Yes, you can fire a gun underwater   (io9.com) divider line 53
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

8212 clicks; posted to Geek » on 29 Sep 2012 at 5:37 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-29 05:34:24 PM
It's all fun & games until the pistol explodes in your hand.
 
2012-09-29 05:42:30 PM
Comment above based only on the picture in TFA. At least the guy who made the video took proper safety precautions.
 
2012-09-29 05:43:41 PM
This wouldn't have happened if underwater was armed.
 
2012-09-29 05:44:29 PM
as i recall, it's not so bad provided you make sure the barrel's filled with water, and you're okay with the whole process being incredibly violent and a little painful.


years back the russians actually built a whole set of underwater-capable guns. there was a multi-shot pistol that looked like a pepperbox gun as i recall, and a variable-fire rifle designed around the AK action.

the ammunition was very different, as normal bullets aren't very stable in water for various reasons. these were way longer and used cavitation to keep velocity up. really cool stuff tho.

world.guns.ru
 
2012-09-29 05:51:36 PM
I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?
 
2012-09-29 05:54:16 PM
The thing that bothered me was the fact that they were firing blindly (it appeared) into the woods. Sure, the water slowed the bullet down considerably, but still...
 
2012-09-29 05:54:35 PM

Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?


All the oxygen required is in the potassium nitrate (KNO3) of the gunpowder.
 
2012-09-29 05:55:24 PM
ah, here we go. this is the pistol the soviets made back in the 60s, with the funky super-long bullets they were using.

world.guns.ru


from what i understand, the newest version of their underwater-capable guns use ammunition externally indistinguishable from normal ammunition, but with a much longer bullet for stability(hint: it is set very deep in the case, the base of the bullet is near the primer).
 
2012-09-29 05:59:13 PM

Phaeon: Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?

All the oxygen required is in the potassium nitrate (KNO3) of the gunpowder.


potassium nitrates aren't used anymore in modern powder because of the enormous quantity of solid residue it leaves(which is one of the major sources of 'smoke' in the older black powder gunpowders).

but technically, yes, that's exactly how it works, there's plenty of oxygen bound up in the propellant.
 
2012-09-29 06:07:36 PM
Guns & Ammo did this back in the 80s, if I recall correctly.
 
2012-09-29 06:24:28 PM
Firing your load in water gets kinda messy
 
2012-09-29 06:47:16 PM
Of course you can fire a gun underwater... the oxidizer is already in the powder. The only issue is striking the back of the cap strong enough to set it off. You night not be able to go full auto underwater but semi auto should work pretty well.

Now, the range you get off the gun is probably not very good or accurate but at the same time it will go farther than if you fired from Air into water
 
2012-09-29 08:19:51 PM

Ed Finnerty: This wouldn't have happened if underwater was armed.


+1 internet to you sir.
 
2012-09-29 08:21:01 PM
What accurate thermochemistry on Fark!? Goo on y'all.
 
2012-09-29 08:22:31 PM

Aikidogamer: What accurate thermochemistry on Fark!? Goo on y'all.


Good that is.
 
2012-09-29 08:40:54 PM
All guns can fire underwater, but only once until the barrel is flooded, special guns used by spec ops have pumps that allow for multiple use.

Also to the person who wrote the article. Sorry there is no explosion in a gun barrel. Its gas buildup by the powder burning that expels the bullet, which is where that bubble come from, expelled gas. The noise made by the gun is caused by both the gas escaping and the bullet breaking the sound barrier as it leaves the gun (the sparks seen coming out of the barrel when firing is the remnants of the fire that created the gas being expelled with the gas
 
2012-09-29 08:53:12 PM
Yes, you can fire a gun underwater

You can fire a gun in a vacuum as well.

Explosives act by oxidizing much more rapidly than normal combustion and releasing a large quantity of gas at high pressure, creating a shock wave as the do so.

Normal fuels, like wood, don't have the oxygen required to burn in their molecules already. That's why you can put out a wood fire by smothering it with water. They get their oxygen from the air, a necessarily slow process.

Explosives, on the other hand, have their oxygen in their molecules in an unstable fashion. When the right even triggers oxidization, say a primer going off, they already have all the oxygen they need so it happens regardless of the outside conditions.

I learned this when I wanted to see if TNT would work in space.
 
2012-09-29 09:05:28 PM

buttery_shame_cave: Phaeon: Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?

All the oxygen required is in the potassium nitrate (KNO3) of the gunpowder.

potassium nitrates aren't used anymore in modern powder because of the enormous quantity of solid residue it leaves(which is one of the major sources of 'smoke' in the older black powder gunpowders).

but technically, yes, that's exactly how it works, there's plenty of oxygen bound up in the propellant.


I've never heard of this. What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?
 
2012-09-29 09:13:43 PM

kyleaugustus: I've never heard of this. What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?


Same thing that happens anywhere else.

BOOM.

That's why the Russians, back in the Cold War, used to send up a .50 cal with their boys.
 
2012-09-29 09:22:00 PM

doglover: kyleaugustus: I've never heard of this. What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?

Same thing that happens anywhere else.

BOOM.

That's why the Russians, back in the Cold War, used to send up a .50 cal with their boys.


I'd heard of a Soviet spy station with some 20mm cannon, but I'd always expected it had some kind of oxygen supply. And the cosmonauts keep a shotgun or two on board their capsule after a landing far off course that left them in danger with the wolves.
 
2012-09-29 09:36:42 PM

Aikidogamer: What accurate thermochemistry on Fark!? Goo on y'all.


I'd rather not be goo'ed on.
 
2012-09-29 09:39:03 PM

kyleaugustus: I'd heard of a Soviet spy station with some 20mm cannon, but I'd always expected it had some kind of oxygen supply.


Something to light up any pesky Yanks. I forget exactly.

But no, you don't want to fire anti-materiel weaponry in your pressurized habitat. You also don't need to waste precious oxygen on explosives as they're already bearing the atoms they need to work. As long as they don't get hit by a solvent which changes the molecule, they'll work anywhere.
 
2012-09-29 09:52:47 PM
In related news: no shiat subtard.
 
2012-09-29 10:23:53 PM
Oh really, care to try with my flint lock musket?
 
2012-09-29 10:30:37 PM

Yakivegas: Guns & Ammo did this back in the 80s, if I recall correctly.


Is this the old dude version of saying "repost" on reddit?
 
2012-09-29 10:36:13 PM
kyleaugustus

What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?

home.earthlink.net

Pesky recoil.
 
2012-09-29 11:06:21 PM
Does anyone know if Treyvon could swim?
 
2012-09-30 12:20:32 AM
holy shiat I just learned something on fark.
 
2012-09-30 12:39:37 AM

theresnothinglft: You night not be able to go full auto underwater but semi auto should work pretty well.


Looked to me like the semi-auto they fired came pretty close to getting a stovepipe jam. Seems the resistance of the water means the shell casings aren't being ejected forcefully enough.
 
2012-09-30 04:45:11 AM

kyleaugustus: doglover: kyleaugustus: I've never heard of this. What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?

Same thing that happens anywhere else.

BOOM.

That's why the Russians, back in the Cold War, used to send up a .50 cal with their boys.

I'd heard of a Soviet spy station with some 20mm cannon, but I'd always expected it had some kind of oxygen supply. And the cosmonauts keep a shotgun or two on board their capsule after a landing far off course that left them in danger with the wolves.


It was a 3 barrel gun they had for survival.
Link
 
2012-09-30 05:11:24 AM

Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?


www.badhaven.com

You get dressed up, you get taken someplace nice.
 
2012-09-30 07:39:39 AM

doglover: Yes, you can fire a gun underwater

You can fire a gun in a vacuum as well.

Explosives act by oxidizing much more rapidly than normal combustion and releasing a large quantity of gas at high pressure, creating a shock wave as the do so.

Normal fuels, like wood, don't have the oxygen required to burn in their molecules already. That's why you can put out a wood fire by smothering it with water. They get their oxygen from the air, a necessarily slow process.

Explosives, on the other hand, have their oxygen in their molecules in an unstable fashion. When the right even triggers oxidization, say a primer going off, they already have all the oxygen they need so it happens regardless of the outside conditions.

I learned this when I wanted to see if TNT would work in space.


Working in space has a few more issues than working in a vacuume.

For me, I think the temperature shifting would prevent most semi automatic guns from working properly.
Several hundred degrees in the light, a hundred below in the shade, that's bound to seize up any closely fit bits of metal.

/my bet is that revolvers and bolt actions will find many new fans among spacemen.
 
2012-09-30 10:18:48 AM

way south: For me, I think the temperature shifting would prevent most semi automatic guns from working properly.
Several hundred degrees in the light, a hundred below in the shade, that's bound to seize up any closely fit bits of metal.



I was thinking that the extreme cold might make the gun's parts brittle.
 
2012-09-30 10:43:24 AM
Looks like a snow cone. OF DOOM
 
2012-09-30 10:50:50 AM
You know how I knew Subby didn't watch The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly?
 
2012-09-30 10:52:47 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-09-30 11:58:30 AM

Chevello: way south: For me, I think the temperature shifting would prevent most semi automatic guns from working properly.
Several hundred degrees in the light, a hundred below in the shade, that's bound to seize up any closely fit bits of metal.


I was thinking that the extreme cold might make the gun's parts brittle.


Not likely. Space is much more empty than it ts cold.
 
2012-09-30 01:44:35 PM
s7.postimage.org
 
2012-09-30 04:27:41 PM

kyleaugustus: buttery_shame_cave: Phaeon: Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?

All the oxygen required is in the potassium nitrate (KNO3) of the gunpowder.

potassium nitrates aren't used anymore in modern powder because of the enormous quantity of solid residue it leaves(which is one of the major sources of 'smoke' in the older black powder gunpowders).

but technically, yes, that's exactly how it works, there's plenty of oxygen bound up in the propellant.

I've never heard of this. What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?


They should also work in a vacuum, for the same reason, as long as the structural integriy of all relevant components remains within tolerances. A mechanical firearm does not need an external supply of oxygetn to work, because the charge includes its own, so long as the shell retains its integrity. (I imagine that water infiltration of the shell might change this, but I don't really know that.)

Other than the components of the charge being compromised, what could change its ability to fire would be some change in the structure of the firing mechanism that would prevent it from igniting the primer, such as sufficient impedence to slow the bolt and firing pin below minimum striking velocity. (Which would happen in water beyond a certain depth, all other factors being equal.) In a vacuum, for example in space, dramatically unequal heating and cooling on different sides of the firearm could conceivably distort the mechanism beyond tolerance, so that it will not operate properly. But the vacuum by itself shouldn't have any notable effect.
 
2012-09-30 04:28:19 PM

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: kyleaugustus: buttery_shame_cave: Phaeon: Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?

All the oxygen required is in the potassium nitrate (KNO3) of the gunpowder.

potassium nitrates aren't used anymore in modern powder because of the enormous quantity of solid residue it leaves(which is one of the major sources of 'smoke' in the older black powder gunpowders).

but technically, yes, that's exactly how it works, there's plenty of oxygen bound up in the propellant.

I've never heard of this. What would happen in firing these in a vacuum?

They should also work in a vacuum, for the same reason, as long as the structural integriy of all relevant components remains within tolerances. A mechanical firearm does not need an external supply of oxygetn to work, because the charge includes its own, so long as the shell retains its integrity. (I imagine that water infiltration of the shell might change this, but I don't really know that.)

Other than the components of the charge being compromised, what could change its ability to fire would be some change in the structure of the firing mechanism that would prevent it from igniting the primer, such as sufficient impedence to slow the bolt and firing pin below minimum striking velocity. (Which would happen in water beyond a certain depth, all other factors being equal.) In a vacuum, for example in space, dramatically unequal heating and cooling on different sides of the firearm could conceivably distort the mechanism beyond tolerance, so that it will not operate properly. But the vacuum by itself shouldn't have any notable effect.


Sorry for typos. My non-see-through cat is 'helping' me.
 
2012-09-30 08:50:22 PM
Ice cream co-OH GOD MY MOUTH!!
 
2012-09-30 08:50:51 PM
 
2012-09-30 09:08:01 PM

lamric: Another article with better pictures


He also tried it with a glock?

Brave man...
 
2012-09-30 09:53:05 PM

malaktaus: Yakivegas: Guns & Ammo did this back in the 80s, if I recall correctly.

Is this the old dude version of saying "repost" on reddit?


Pretty much. It's not news it's fark...
 
2012-09-30 11:09:12 PM
I knew there were specialized pistols for underwater use, I never would have guessed an unmodified semi auto would have worked so well
 
2012-10-01 12:56:41 AM

Vertdang: Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?

[www.badhaven.com image 400x225]

You get dressed up, you get taken someplace nice.


Thing that always bugged me about that: after making so much out of the fact that he's only supposed to get ONE shot, he gets two.
 
2012-10-01 08:06:22 AM

fusillade762: Vertdang: Yaxe: I thought you needed oxygen to fire a weapon?

[www.badhaven.com image 400x225]

You get dressed up, you get taken someplace nice.

Thing that always bugged me about that: after making so much out of the fact that he's only supposed to get ONE shot, he gets two.


I always just assumed there was enough residual oxygen in the suit, and he would have kept pulling the trigger either way.
 
2012-10-01 10:41:25 AM

way south: doglover: Yes, you can fire a gun underwater

You can fire a gun in a vacuum as well.

Explosives act by oxidizing much more rapidly than normal combustion and releasing a large quantity of gas at high pressure, creating a shock wave as the do so.

Normal fuels, like wood, don't have the oxygen required to burn in their molecules already. That's why you can put out a wood fire by smothering it with water. They get their oxygen from the air, a necessarily slow process.

Explosives, on the other hand, have their oxygen in their molecules in an unstable fashion. When the right even triggers oxidization, say a primer going off, they already have all the oxygen they need so it happens regardless of the outside conditions.

I learned this when I wanted to see if TNT would work in space.

Working in space has a few more issues than working in a vacuume.

For me, I think the temperature shifting would prevent most semi automatic guns from working properly.
Several hundred degrees in the light, a hundred below in the shade, that's bound to seize up any closely fit bits of metal.

/my bet is that revolvers and bolt actions will find many new fans among spacemen.


This I know about -

he way you could get around the temperature shift is by covering the gun in the thermal foil that NASA uses for spacecraft, which is absurdly reflective.This would prevent the fine parts in the gun from having issues due to sunlight or the shade.The main problem is that space is an absurdly good insulator (nothing to radiate the heat into) so after firing the gun a dozen times the gun would start to melt.

You'd have to redesign air cooled and gas action guns (like an M16) to work mechanically or have some other cooling mechanism.
 
2012-10-01 11:39:36 AM

Yaxe: way south: doglover: Yes, you can fire a gun underwater

You can fire a gun in a vacuum as well.

Explosives act by oxidizing much more rapidly than normal combustion and releasing a large quantity of gas at high pressure, creating a shock wave as the do so.

Normal fuels, like wood, don't have the oxygen required to burn in their molecules already. That's why you can put out a wood fire by smothering it with water. They get their oxygen from the air, a necessarily slow process.

Explosives, on the other hand, have their oxygen in their molecules in an unstable fashion. When the right even triggers oxidization, say a primer going off, they already have all the oxygen they need so it happens regardless of the outside conditions.

I learned this when I wanted to see if TNT would work in space.

Working in space has a few more issues than working in a vacuume.

For me, I think the temperature shifting would prevent most semi automatic guns from working properly.
Several hundred degrees in the light, a hundred below in the shade, that's bound to seize up any closely fit bits of metal.

/my bet is that revolvers and bolt actions will find many new fans among spacemen.

This I know about -

he way you could get around the temperature shift is by covering the gun in the thermal foil that NASA uses for spacecraft, which is absurdly reflective.This would prevent the fine parts in the gun from having issues due to sunlight or the shade.The main problem is that space is an absurdly good insulator (nothing to radiate the heat into) so after firing the gun a dozen times the gun would start to melt.

You'd have to redesign air cooled and gas action guns (like an M16) to work mechanically or have some other cooling mechanism.


I hadn't even thought about cooling in a vacuum.
Because of the gas tube in the M-16, you'd probably get fifty shots or so. but it would absolutely melt through the hand guard without some way to radiate that energy.
Offhand maybe something like the fin design of the Lewis gun might buy some time (proving that George Lucas was right) but you'll definitively need to push some air or something over that just to get through the first magazine.
 
2012-10-01 02:27:22 PM
George Lucas was right in the idea that guns in space would look like WW1 and WW2 artillery. That would probably be the most effective type of weapon system up there. The guns just need a reflective shielding on one side and a heat sink on the other and that the shield rotates to reflect the sunlight while the cold side can heat sink into space.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report