What features would be the most beneficial for use in space?
So far: >weight reduction reduces cost >self propelled ammunition reduces accidental maneuvering >Hollow points are probably useless unless you want to fight inside without risking damage to station/ship >Long range & scope allows for anti-satellite fire >Bipods will not work in space, would either need a detachable mount, or an underbarrel gyro connected to the rail >if bayonets are used, they'd probably need the ability to retract inwards for storage, then snap forward when released, as there it will be hard to push the gun forward hard&fast enough.
What else should be considered? What is the ideal astronaut loadout?
Another consideration is wilderness survival after touchdown. The Soviets used this triple barreled pistol so that stranded astronauts could kill bears and wolves in Siberia. Top two barrels are 28-gauge shotgun, bottom is pistol ammunition. It came with a variety of ammunition, including 28-gauge flares.
Scopes would have to be different from on earth. Wearing a big helmet means you cant rest your cheek on the stock,or get your face as close. Scopes would probably need to be canted out to the side.
kys space force is sick
Easton White
maybe the scope would only be canted on the eye side but centered on the front. Would use two mirrors to connect the canted end with the centered end, sort of like one side of a binoculars.
pretty good, probably needs a bigger trigger guard likewould be hard to use with gloves
Lucas Lopez
>so that stranded astronauts could kill bears and wolves in Siberia Of course, for a nation whose navy dominates the world's oceans this is less of a concern, hence why there is no real American equivalent to this concept.
Xavier Harris
Probably a self propelled bullet like the gyro gun (i think that's the name, forgotten weapons has one on it anyway) as to minimize recoil that could throw you off...
Body armor could be a pretty important factor since you feel the weight only when moving around but still, how many space battles do you think you'll have? It's much more likely that your eyeballs will explode when your spacecraft gets hit and it depressurizes...
Hell a loaded spring car glass breaker might work as na pretty effective close quarters weapon but you'd have to check if the visors are that weak, they are probably really good polycarbonate that'll just laugh at it although pointy shit is still on the table...
Noah Sanders
Our apollo astronauts carried pic related just in case they landed in central america
>probably something like the gyro gun I agree, and self propelling ammo will be way cheaper to make in the future with 3D printing. >depressurization Good point. In space you have to rely on so much complicated shit just to keep you alive, it might me more effective to focus on breaking equipment rather than killing the guy inside.
Henry Jones
You might not want to damage a ship too bad, might be better to have a boarding party raid the station or whatever, and only damage one door so that most of it can be re-pressurized and commandeered.
Space is a vacuum, so things dissipate heat very slowly. There's no conduction, only radiation.
I'm drinking out of a vacuum thermos right now, actually
Eli Morales
dang that's sweet. sauce?
Landon Flores
lotgh
Alexander Wood
Legend of the Galactic Heroes, best space opera anime ever made. It's a war story told from the perspective of the strategists rather than the soldiers, so its not uncommon to see millions die in a battle.
Julian Sanchez
Oh boy, you are just about to get hooked to the greatest space opera ever.
Legend of the galactic heroes. 110 episodes for the original series alone. Enjoy
Maybe there should be APS on satellites and ships to block little rockets and missiles
kek you could even put them on EVA battle suits for absolute CQB dominance
>Chinese astronaut pushes off the side of his ship and tries to space tackle you >let him tackle you, put him in a hold and activate your chest mounted APS
Unironically something like this. Weight wouldn't be as much of a problem in low-g environments. Watercooled to solve the heat dissipation issue. Hell, you could even used the steam generated by firing the thing as thrusters in space.
For ship-to-ship or station-to-station, I think pic related would be good. you could fire it at someone in a completely different orbit. Ground control would handle telemetry and guidance, assuming we are talking about something in low earth orbit
The fins on the back of the barrel jacket would make you think so, but it's actually watercooled and not forced-air like the lewis gun. According to the wiki, the buttstock is hollow and contains the water for the barrel jacket, and uses the recoil of firing to pump the water around. However the hell that works.
Ian Reed
Ahh thats neat, I see the cap on the bottom of the stock now. >however the hell that works I would guess that the stock slides in and out, and each of those two pipes connecting to the tank has a one-way bypass valve so it cycles the water through like a heart
David Clark
>Long range and scope allows for anti satalite fire Maybe you don't understand just how big space is. For accurate anti satellite fire you need a Very precise turret with all the lovely doodads like targeting computers and an optic capable of resolving targets up to 50 km away. It's more feasible to use a small maneuverable kinetic impactor. Picture something like a space fgm 148
As for personnel weapon systems? A lot of things come into play in microgravity that no one seems to account t for. Ejecting spent casings so they can float around and innevitably fuck with something isnt a good idea, so either we contain casings(not very hard) or use caseless ammunition, Wich gives us weight savings on casings, is cheaper to get up there. Next you've got recoil to consider, unless your braced it's gonna fuck with you (using thrusters to counter recoil is a silly waste of valuable fuel) so you'll probably want some kind of impulse dampener similar to an ak107, combined with a carefully engineered muzzle break ought to do the trick. I'd want as few moving surfaces as possible I side the action. To reduce lubricant loss. Of and youl have to engineer a lubricant that won't boil off in zero atmosphere, so something like NiB parts is a must
Also, heat isn't as huge an issue as some might think, your not magdumping in space unless your fighting point blank, and that engagement isn't going to last long enough for heat to become a huge problem, all you need to do to mitigate it is make the weapon systems combined thermal mass great enough and conductive enough for the heat to dissipate through the entire weapon, rather than just the barrel. Possibly even a liquid cooling system could be implemented, but mass is a major concern for that. Doctrine will definitely favor semi auto, as well placed shots are essential anyway. No one wants Billy badass firing off suppressing fire into space to fuck some shit up 40km away that no one realized was I. The bullet tragectory. Also suppressing fire doesn't work in space so don't even think about it.
Cooper Anderson
>a lubricant that wont boil in a vacuum I actually used to have two drums of this stuff, its called Hyvac Oil. It's what you use to lube up vacuum pumps.
Mason Scott
Maybe ammunition should degrade over time so it eventually reenters, to avoid space junk
Oliver Scott
It is also is supposedly really really cold there.
It doesn't have to that simple, just cut down on surface contact between parts, think almost free floated bolt system with a minimum of guide rod contact. Like using ball bearings instead of flat surfaces. You just want less friction.
Jackson Torres
Meant for
John Baker
is automatic fire even necessary? maybe break action or revolvers are the way to go
Parker Phillips
lads I have the answer >lightweight >caseless ammo >endless conceivable types of ammo >mechanically simple >easily punctures suits, armor, windows, tanks >can be used to hook and retrieve items >Ammo could be explosive >maybe even guided with microjets like those cubesats >Ideal for wilderness survival
only issue is that the bolt wont be stable because there is no air to correct its flight, you will have a bolt thats tumbling all over the place.
Noah Perry
fuck. that's a good point
Samuel Bell
Good analysis, but what do you think of recoiless rifles? I'm surprised no one has mentioned it yet. I'm concerned about the recoiling particles drifting at high speed through space forever behind you, but that's not really nuch worse than the muzzle brake idea you mentioned.
Wyatt Green
do you think its possible to miniaturize that? or would the gas burn your arm if you made it into a pistol?
Brayden Collins
Got proven wrong in one post.
Zachary Rodriguez
Buncha retards around here I swear. Screw your stupid complex meme shit guns, you need something cheap, weak (no overpenetration), low recoil (no strong push backwards), simple, and a speedy bullet hose so you can hit far away targets. So basically an American 180 in .17 HMR with special light bullets designed to disintegrate on impact with hard stuff. Plus it's light already so you can put a heavy barrel on it no problem. It'd have almost no recoil, and it's cheap as shit.
Haven't really thought of a way to do it for handguns, but it makes sense for rifles. Just rest it on your shoulder, bazooka-style. Not sure if any auto-loading system could be invented for this, though.
Thomas Thomas
In case US astronauts land in the wilderness let's just give them an AR-7 survival rifle, and a 12 Gauge of some sort.
Theres also nothing to push it off course from its original release.
Austin Young
>Not sure if any auto-loading system could be invented for this, though. to keep the action simple you could make it a revolving rifle. Equally simple actions, just more of them.
Adapt this for recoiless rounds, it function work the same way
Kevin Turner
How about a gas-based cooling system? The barrel is covered with a jacket filled with gas that gets cycled in and out by a small pump, as the gas cools it gets returned to the jacket. Also, would heat radiation fins be useful?
Brayden Myers
Recoiless is an interesting idea, but it isn't really feasible for anti personnel or a handheld weapon system (see gyrojet) recoiless rounds also carry much more propellant than their equivalent cartridge based round due to the need for adequate exhaust gasses to give the "recoiless" effect. I don't see that being very conducive to a space platform where every gram counts.
Owen Cox
>thinking infantry will battle in space Here's how it will really go down: youtu.be/fXeUkrlxQ98
Maybe in the distant future, but this is more about current technology in orbit, not deep space NPP battleships
Justin Diaz
In space, Weight isn't the problem. It's recoil, Sub-Zero Vacuum, and lack of gravity. We need to give em a Caseless Rifle with as little moving parts that uses some amazing lubricant/heat retention that can punch through other spacecraft/space suits. It'd be better off today to just give them survival guns in case if they land in a forest/isolated areas on Earth.
Caleb Walker
Interesting, but are these *recoiless* recoiless, or just "surprisingly little recoil for a 45mm round" recoiless? In space that's a huge difference
Isaiah Allen
For a system like your describing, you would need cooling fins in the gas section. Around the barrel, but gas has such low heat conductivity that I don't really see the point of adding a big pressure vessel onto the barrel of your gun, it just adds too much stuff to break or malfunction
Adrian Campbell
Also, be sure it's a low recoil round that is braced or has soon good “recoil suppression” tech.
Jonathan Miller
Radiation fins would basically be required, there's no air to wick away the heat so you need additional surface area to get more radiating away
All recoiless rifles have a little push to em, it's never a perfect 1/1 thrust ration, but you could get it close enough that I don't think it would be a problem
Bentley Reyes
Weight counts BIGLY as long as we have to carry it into space on a conventional rocket. Once it's there (or if we develop efficient spaceplanes to get it there), yeah, it isn't a big deal.
Josiah Adams
You don't need to radiate heat if the weapons thermal mass is high enough that the heat dissapates before more is generated (think heavy barrels)
Luke Foster
>so things dissipate heat very slowly no radiation is extremely efficient dissipating heat.
Zachary Torres
Just put the fins on the barrel, saves weight and looks dope as fuck. plus, gas requires pressure-tight hardware and has a very low heat capacity compared to liquids
If your already in orbit the bullets will have enough velocity to greatly shift their orbit, if not give them earth escape velocity relative to your orbit, so bullets coming back around might be an Issue or not, either way their not going to come back down simply by decreasing their mass.
Lincoln Sanchez
Then why not just put the cpu heatsink on the outside of the computer, with no fan blowing air across it? Radiation is the LEAST efficient form of heat transfer
Brayden Roberts
>self propelled ammunition the gasses spewed in all directions from the "rocket" will cause greater issues than a integrally suppressed shot, it has to be internal ammo with a catch for brass and the vents for the suppression will be recoil reducing to prevent spinning the firer into a tumble
Matthew Barnes
if the bullets were to eventually explode, the orbits of each piece would be unstable and eventually reenter. Sort of like the Westford Needles Project
Christian Russell
You probably wont spin if you hip-fire it
Evan Price
A compact surgical laser would work. Theoretically all you have to do is make a large rip in their suit to remove them from combat. The weight of the battery wouldn't be an issue. When everyone starts wearing mirror space suits you switch to harpoons mounted on seats or space razor drones.
Basically zero g Screamers would be fucking terrifying in space and more effective than anything I could try to aim at another person while adjusting flight.
it depends on the temperature you know at low temperatures like your body temperature you barely lose any heat to radiation. a red hot iron on the other hand oh boy.
Anthony Flores
Hollow points would still be legal against your spaceship and your spacesuit. The amount of velocity you need to actually reach your target is insane, even space rockets might not be useful due to the effectiveness /weight ratio. If you fired an AK from low Earth orbit, the bullets wouldn't even de-orbit in a reasonable amount of time.
Zachary Rogers
How well would a big bore pre charged pneumatic rifle work? The recoil is negligible, no heat build up to worry about, lightweight hollow point pellets, and they're fairly simple. The biggest drawbacks I can think of is refilling the rifle and the o-rings need to be lubricated to form a good seal. Another bonus is they already look like space guns.
Just got an idea. Instead of space guns let's either actively avoid space combat, or go hand-to-hand.
Lincoln Rivera
any heat transfer is going to larger if the temperature is higher, but at no point does the object radiate heat more efficiently then transfer by conduction, even to air.
Hunter Torres
>or go hand to hand. Yes we need Panzer Kunst space martial arts.
I wonder if the bullpup design would be easier for them to use? I would assume its difficult to bend your elbow, so having the grip farther from the butt might be an advantage
