@@Gambetdz what are you talkin about we eat animals cuz that's what we're meant to do where are omnivores and if aliens have the technology to go to Earth they are much stronger than us
It might hit a ship! Or a planet behind that ship! It might go off into space and hit something in 10,000 years! If you fire this weapon, you are ruining someone’s day! Somewhere and some time!
I love the graphic of a cartridge flying at planets after “being fired”😂. A message to the animators: When you fire a gun the bullet separates from the cartridge and is the only part that flies out of the muzzle. The spent casing gets ejected when the action cycles.
So glad someone also knew this. It made me cringe so hard when I saw it happen many time. i thought they would have gotten it right like they normally do.
If you fired from your center of mass, the recoil will absolutely send you backwards. But if you fire off center of mass (say with your arms straight out in front so you are aiming down the sight) it will still send you backwards (but at a slower speed) but it will also put you into a spin.
The comparison of range based solely on the gravity differences between the Moon and Earth failed to take into account the practically nonexistent drag the Moon shooter would have. Earth's ranges are both velocity and gravity AND drag based.
Fun fact: Russian cosmonauts used to bring guns with them into space. Not for using in space, but in case they'd encounter any wild beasts while they were waiting to be rescued after their capsule landed somewhere over the Asian Steppe.
The oxygen is contained in the gunpowder, you don't need any air in the cartridge. Air resistance slows down bullets on earth, in space there should be little resistance since you are in a partial vacuum. And, the case stays in the gun, it doesn't go flying around with the bullet.
There is also the other problem not addressed, moving pieces of similar bare metal parts in space cold welds to each other. So, moving parts of the weapon will have to have dissimilar metals where they contact each other or they will need to have a high friction resistance coating on all metal parts that touch each other. On an automatic weapon, that coating would wear away pretty fast. Dissimilar metals will typically have a differing hardness and one would quickly wear down the other.
I love the amazing amount of detail to terminology, I was expecting to hear "clip" and "fully-semiautomatic", but a small nit-pick I could offer is that the animation shown the entire cartridge to be fired rather just the tip that is actually the bullet and not the entirety of the catridge. That being said this is very well thought through I love it.
I find thought experiments are often times educational. This particular scenario required me to think about chemistry and physics. Yes, it may not ever become a real scenario, but it made me think. And yes, I’m a big nerd.
Here’s something interesting. The effective ranges are likely inaccurate. The reason for this is that there is no atmospheric pressure, as well as no air resistance. The velocity of a projectile exiting a firearm by use of expanding gases would likely be higher than normal due to the difference in pressure between the chamber and barrel inside the firearm and outside of it. Some higher powered firearms may even explode when fired due to this fact and would be in need of modification. Barrels would be shot out faster due to the higher velocity projectiles eating at the rifling. Changing the bullets to a harder material would accelerate this further. Recoil operated weapons would likely be unaffected in function, however gas operated weapons would likely either run harshly due to accelerated venting of gas, or would not function at all. Recoil mitigation would become a high priority to reduce unwanted movement while firing in low gravity. So many things to consider. This is what happens when I think too much at 1 in the morning lol.
I personally feel like you missed this one. When you were worried about the bullets coming across million degree solar winds and you used an ultra rare metal to combat this heat flux, bullets need to be cheap and not comprised of rare metals that we will never see again. Also I don’t think solar flares between you and your target a really an issue. I feel like a more practical approach would consist of possibly stainless steel rail guns firing magnetic steel discs. As you only need to tear the space suit not necessarily influct trauma damage. You could use an ultra high velocity with minimal mass. But a larger impact profile. Gyroscopic effect for aim down range and yet still doubt the fire fight would sustain ranges beyond practical ability.
They’ve done this several times. You’d think a channel called infographics would know the most basic things about the topics on which they’re delivering “info”.
It surprises me to know a gun could even be fired in space at all. I was thinking zero gravity would affect where the bullet went how fast and how far before killing your target
You guys left out the small issue of firing a gun in zero G. The fact that you'd spin backwards and lose half the velocity to recoil. In zero G you can't brace against the shot and use your own body to buffer the recoil into the ground. So you'd basically spin backwards, head over heels. Recoil-less guns are pretty much the future of space combat because combustion ammunition doesn't work in low/zero G.
You're failing to take into account the mass and inertia of a human body vs a bullet This is ~60kg of human to push against a few grams of bullet, so almost all of the velocity would be preserved in the bullet, and only a small percentage would be lost due to recoil against the person firing, who would indeed be accelerated backwards but not to a degree that would make you spin like crazy
@@SirRaio uhh, none of that matters much in zero G dude. If you float in zero G and gently poke a surface, you'll start to push off with a surprising amount of speed. Your body is basically weightless so your size and mass are irrelevant. Now try firing a 9mm with all that recoil and no gravity to help pull you down? You'd literally spin in place with some (but not a lot) of speed. This is explained away in The Expanse by the characters using plastic rounds in zero G, for basically no recoil, and also to not perforate ships.
@@timjohnson1199 or you could wear a suit that fires small propulsion rockets when you fire? You absorb the recoil, but the little jets push you back forward?
The Soviets tested an aircraft cannon in Space on Salyut 3, and this is fairly well known. They had a modified Rikhter R-23 cannon onboard, and test fired it when the Cosmonauts had left for safely reasons. So yes, it's possible to fire a gun in space as it's literally been done before.
Isn't it amazing how our earth if filled with all the material properties and resources to do what we do. Most other planets are missing very key resources and many of them.
What about cold welding? Wouldn’t the action of a firearm cycling in a vacuum instantly weld the moving parts together (so long as they were made of metal)?
Another major concern of metal objects in space is vacuum welding. Since there is no gas molecules separating & oxydizing the surface layer, as soon as you end up with two pieces of the same metal touching each other, they'll start fusing on the molecular level, no matter the temperature (asuming it's above absolute zero of course)
Zero gravity will make a noticeable effect on your orientation with a small caliber weapon. However with even moon gravity (1/6th earth) will be handled with a small caliber. If you ramp up the cross sectional decency and power of the weapon, it will drastically cause problems. Not because your arms can’t handle the recoil, but the low gravity firing a .357 Magnum might cause you to backflip half way. A hunting rifle will probably result in catastrophic depressurization of your space suit.
@@ForestTre Recoil is absorbed over time with gas pistons and “felt” recoil is thereby reduced. However you cannot ever break Newton’s 1st law of motion. In that actual recoil will be the same as if the gun had a locking bolt. Like a Remington 700 that doesn’t have a piston system and delivers all of the recoil the instant of discharge. A gas piston and blowback action will spread all the recoil over a few milliseconds. Hope that helps.
Some Russian finally stepping on the moon: Я наконец сделал это, моя мечта сбылась Stray bullet racing across the moon: Im about to end this man's whole career
You have the ability to communicate to a lot of people and maybe bring the REAL narrative and possibly save lives of vets during this tough time. Cowboy up hoss and use this channel to make a difference.
Nice answer , very entertaining but in the same time it is wrong . Bullet's speed buffed , recoil nerfed , air resistance nerfed , recoil when firing in deep space eliminated completely ...
5:04: Wait, what? Are you saying that being drawn into planetary orbit would impart velocity to the bullet? The speed at which objects must travel to remain in orbit is dependent on their characteristics; such object won't, however, somehow gather kinetic energy from having come closer to another body.
Isn’t it possible it would just get pulled to the surface of Jupiter? Wouldn’t the bullet have to be at a very specific trajectory and speed to be locked into orbit? The video made it sound like orbiting the planet was the only option for the bullet.
Got my answer. I genuinely thought the bullet will travel on forever but I did forget about the magnetic pull the rocks and plants have. But hey 👀 wonder how far it would go into space
The cartridge will fire not because of the air in the cartridge, but because explosives require an oxidizer, and a reducer (fuel). It has everything it needs to work in an anoxic enviroment.
No mention of the pressure difference between an atmosphere or a vacuum on the cartidge. And I don't mean lack of oxygen. The bullets would come out at a higher velocity(there is a vacuum pulling on the bullet nose so these ranges need to be re-calculated). Different gun powder would probably need to be used. To get more technical, different types of operation may/may not work. Manually operated would be fine(and so would Gatling) but semi-autos may not work. Gas operated would over pressurize anything at/after the gas block(i think). Blowback would need a different spring rate. Delayed recoil operated might need re-engineering. I'm not an engineer nor a firearms manufacturer so i don't know 100%. I'd like to hear more about this!
@@mrXcreaboXnuggets If so, then they wouldn't post so many videos, with VERY basic, if any, research behind them? Example: This video, the reason guns would work is space is because the powder contains an oxidizer, you don't need air for fire, you need oxidizer. (Fun fact: an oxidizer doesn't even need to contain oxygen, chlorine trifluoride, for an instance is a more potent oxidizer than O2.)
all you would need is a weapon containing two tiny spinning wheels to launch a dart (like a baseball pitching machine). it only needs to puncture the space suit render the combatant unable to remain in the fight
Doesn't matter how heat resistant you make your space gun if they start burning your astrosoldier's hands off and cooking off the rounds in the chamber. The question shouldn't be how heat resistant you can make a gun, but what you can do to expel that heat as quickly as possible in space. One of the best ways I could think of doing this is installing copper radiator fins on the barrel to act as a heat sink and increase surface area for cooling. You could also hook up a can of compressed gas to the gun and blast the radiator fins for quick cooling.
Would they really use tungsten to produce weapons though? Doesn't tungsten have one of the highest weight to volume ratios (apart from radioactive elements)?
Another problem would be 'Vacuum Welding' since small parts tend to weld themselves together in a hard vacuum....Things like springs, etc. would become useless...
Best idea I could come up with would be a air or gas cooled metalstorm system. I would really like to hear everyone suggestions. I am a idea guy, not an engineer.
Small comment/question about the ranges. The ranges given were clearly just an estimation based off of known ranges on earth and the gravity of that particular celestial body, I understand that. But, wouldn't the lack of oxygen in those environments have an effect as well? On the one hand, O2 is burned continuously as the projectile travels down the barrel of a firearm. Sure, there is some in the cartridge, but all of the O2 burned during firing does not come solely from that cartridge. My assumption is that the range would be lessened slightly by this. On the other hand, without an atmosphere like the one here on earth, air resistance and drag on the projectile would be lessened significantly. Likely increasing the range potential. Just some thoughts I had while watching. Love the episode, really fun thought experiment.
Atmospheric O2 has little to no effect on the combustion of the powder. The powder contains an oxidizer, this is the actual reason a gun would work in space, not at all because of a miniscule amount of trapped air.
This is why energy weapons in space rule: a bullet *NEEDS* a certain speed to be deadly but high-temperature energy bolts do damage no matter what speed and affects the area around the impact. Most people seem to forget that while objects in space are dangerous heat is the dangerous, demanding, high maintenance GF that you are *always* obliged to bring since not only does everything we do generate heat but said heat destabilizes and degrades materials very quickly in the void.
In Sci-Fi, sure. In real physics, not quite. I'll assume, that by "energy bolts" you are talking about concentrated plasma projectiles. Plasma would very quickly dissipate. And even if you managed to make it so that it wouldn't, it would still lose it's power to black body radiation. (heat comming off of it as light) Also, its path can be deflected by electromagnets. Lasers, while giving no early warning, meaning you would have to dodge pre-emptivly, their damage can be greatly mitigated by reflective coatings. It's not too much of a problem to get things up to great speeds, and it won't lose effectiveness with distance. On top of that, it you can get an object as light as 10kg to 0.01c, (1% of the speed of light) it will hit like a 107kt bomb, about 5x stronger than the Fatman bomb. A 10t object travelling at the speed of the Parker Solar Probe (192.2km/s) would hit like a 44kt bomb, (about 2x Fatman, or 1g of matter reacting with 1g of antimatter) Explosives also don't require velocity and they don't lose their potency nearly as quickly as heat-based munitions. (months, years or decades,(depending on the type) for noticable difference, instead of fractions of seconds)
Recoil is a momentum transfer phenomenon, and thus mass is extremely important, along with velocity. The basic momentum transfer equation is as follows:
m1v1 = m2v2
Where:
m1 = mass of a 9mm Parabellum bullet = 2.02 g = 0.00202 kg v1 = muzzle velocity of a 9mm Parabellum bullet = 335 m/s
mh = average North American human mass = 81kg ms = average North American spacesuit mass = 127 kg m2 = total spacesuited human mass = 208 kg v2 = recoil velocity of spacesuited human = to be determined
The recoil would be horrendous. You’d have to make sure you’re really anchored down. Guns would be really useful in space because it has good range, it’s easy to make, and it would be useful for defense and offense, which inevitably follows people wherever they go.
Still not convinced that standard ammo would function in a vacuum. Not saying it wouldn't be a fairly straight-forward solution to develop ammo that could work in space, but the bullets that are manufactured at present don't seem like they'd be very reliable. Currently Bullets are not hermetically sealed, so any "residual" oxygen (required for combustion) would gradually vent out of the cartridge while in a vacuum, much like how ammo that's submerged in water will become useless over time (except that being a gas, the oxygen would escape from the cartridge far more quickly than a liquid would seep into it). Yes, a few standard bullets in each batch *might* coincidentally be tightly sealed enough to keep sufficient oxygen inside them to support combustion, but do you really want to go into a fight knowing that upwards of 60-75% of your rounds won't work (and would thus jam your weapon)? I can't imagine that it would be too difficult to produce 'air-tight" ammunition for use in space, but I just can't see how standard ordnance would be able to do so dependably.
Standard ammo would work, it's just that this channel puts a questionable amount of research into these videos. The reason the rounds would work is because the powder contains an oxidizer. It really wouldn't have taken them even 5 minutes to find out that it's not air, specifically, that's needed for fire, it's any oxidizer.
@@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am Ah, okay. That makes a lot of sense - the propellant contains its own oxidizing agent within the powder. That clarifies things. Thanks!
Hey infografics show. Just wanna say amazing work as always. But just 1 thing. When u fire a bullet. The entire cartridge does not fly with it 😂.other than that. Keep up the good and amazing videos
Also, the maximum ranges are if you fire these rounds at a 45 degree incline, not a flat plane. As soon as the bullet leaves the gun if it is level it will drop, that's why you have to aim up a little if you want the bullet to go further.
Wrong! The powder in a case carries its own oxygen for combustion within its composition. The tiny amount of air in the case has nothing to do with the powder burning. Same as explosives tightly packed into a bomb. All the ingredients for the reaction are included within the powder or explosive, including oxygen.
Right… the thing that people would forget is that the person would get pushed back the other way as well. The recoil would only allow one accurate shot.
Hey one vet to the vet at infographics. Thanks for doing a story on the Benghazi anniversary during a time when many Afghanistan vets are hurting, but hey you get to space gun videos. BUD/S 267 here.
Space firearms would most likely have radiators to cool the gun down by emitting the heat away as ifr. And they would probably not use them that much, anyway, since missiles, lasers and bigger railguns and coilguns would dominate.
A stray bullet hitting a passing alien is how an interstellar war is gonna start.
And he was a big warlord or some wimpy prince
Alien life’s matter
Humans are the bad guys thier gona wana eat the aliens like we’re doing all the animals here, aliens prob don’t even hav no weapons maybe
@@Gambetdz what are you talkin about we eat animals cuz that's what we're meant to do where are omnivores and if aliens have the technology to go to Earth they are much stronger than us
It might hit a ship! Or a planet behind that ship! It might go off into space and hit something in 10,000 years! If you fire this weapon, you are ruining someone’s day! Somewhere and some time!
The powder itself has an oxidizer in it, it doesn’t need air in the cartridge. A loose loaded muzzle loader would work in space
Yes, this is the comment I’m looking for
I wondered about that.
amazing he doesn't know that
This is why I stopped listening.
BTW, does the powder used in a muzzle loader not contain salt peter (oxydizer)?
@@izzonj It does, and saltpeter is the oxidizer
I love the graphic of a cartridge flying at planets after “being fired”😂. A message to the animators: When you fire a gun the bullet separates from the cartridge and is the only part that flies out of the muzzle. The spent casing gets ejected when the action cycles.
It's so painful. I thought Infographics would get that right..
Brooo bullets seperate
So glad someone also knew this. It made me cringe so hard when I saw it happen many time. i thought they would have gotten it right like they normally do.
I did to
Haha yeah. There's an action movie that did this too. Ultraviolet I believe. Funny stuff people overlook. Good for a laugh tho.
Never would have asked my self this, until Infographics came around and that question was answered. Thanks
meanwhile, aliens: who tf is shooting at us!
I wondered this by like age 9 lol
Man there was this really good sushi place growing up. Whatever happened
Any who played ghost knows what’s up
@@N3rdmeow
RE: "I wondered this by like age 9 lol"
So did I. And that was in 1956.
This is the most American question i've ever heard.
🤣 you know it
I know right
Mhm
Everyone asks this questions. Americans are last
Tim Curry: I'm escaping to the one place that hasn't been corrupted by capitalism: SPACE!
Space Force: Hold my beer.
I’ve had this Question for a VERY LONG TIME now It’s finally answered “thanks InfoGraphics”
@GODofFUCK source?
I was just thinking bout this in the shower today
@GODofFUCK whys that? Im pretty sure its accurate.
I’m reporting you to the space force task force force
I agree with you on that I think about it since I saw James bond movie
My whole life: "You can't fire a gun in space."
The Matrix Simulation we're all trapped in: "There's been an update."
Sound in space coming soon.
LITERALLY
Did you draw your pfp? If you did, I like it! If you didn’t… I still like it!
@@NicoA223 lol I didn't, but it's a very useful and nice avatar pic for me.
always has been
You can fire a gun but you can't hear the noise if it does fire
I like how the illustrations have the casing on the bullet still after it's fired
I love how they fire the entire bullet, casing firing pin and all. Didn't have your gun expert double check the animation?
Is no physics channel
Wait….
It’s probably just so people can see the difference better
This is really a misleading animation they have used here
The animation is correct.... the casing gets ejected while the bolt gets sent to the rear
I would be more interested on whether firing a gun in space would result in a recoil sending the shooter flying in the opposite direction.
If you fired from your center of mass, the recoil will absolutely send you backwards. But if you fire off center of mass (say with your arms straight out in front so you are aiming down the sight) it will still send you backwards (but at a slower speed) but it will also put you into a spin.
@@zachcrawford5 sooo basicly we need jets strong enough to counter recoil
@@dekomniero7172 most likely the jets would be on the gun not your space suit
Good point! Recoiless gun design,then?
@Slobodan Boban
Sir, you have the coolest name I’ve ever heard.
The comparison of range based solely on the gravity differences between the Moon and Earth failed to take into account the practically nonexistent drag the Moon shooter would have. Earth's ranges are both velocity and gravity AND drag based.
I love that they used outlines of the Covenant Carbine and UNSC Railgun.
Yes we will have a railgun in the 26th century
And the terran marine
same i had a coment about that i also said that it was sad they removed the carbine in infinite bc i always used that gun
Fun fact: Russian cosmonauts used to bring guns with them into space. Not for using in space, but in case they'd encounter any wild beasts while they were waiting to be rescued after their capsule landed somewhere over the Asian Steppe.
4:30 that's not what bullets look like when they shoot out of the gun... 😂
I was so looking for this comment!
Idk Mario's Bullet Bill seems to be at play here 😉
It keeps going and going and going and going, until it hits a solid object.
Mass Effect 3 showed us this.
That was Mass Effect 2
@@bsgfan1 it’s in Mass Effect 3 as well.
Also. Unless you aim at the sun moon or earth the bullet would likely never ever hit a star or planet
@@dearthditch according to the CIA.
And they’re never wrong….
The oxygen is contained in the gunpowder, you don't need any air in the cartridge. Air resistance slows down bullets on earth, in space there should be little resistance since you are in a partial vacuum. And, the case stays in the gun, it doesn't go flying around with the bullet.
There is also the other problem not addressed, moving pieces of similar bare metal parts in space cold welds to each other. So, moving parts of the weapon will have to have dissimilar metals where they contact each other or they will need to have a high friction resistance coating on all metal parts that touch each other. On an automatic weapon, that coating would wear away pretty fast. Dissimilar metals will typically have a differing hardness and one would quickly wear down the other.
Sabots
I love the amazing amount of detail to terminology, I was expecting to hear "clip" and "fully-semiautomatic", but a small nit-pick I could offer is that the animation shown the entire cartridge to be fired rather just the tip that is actually the bullet and not the entirety of the catridge. That being said this is very well thought through I love it.
They also said a 9mm is gonna travel 1900 yds, over a mile, before gravity pulls it to the ground🤣🤣🤣🤣🤦🏼♂🤦🏼♂🤦🏼♂🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
@@napoleonbonerfart278 is it supposed to just stop when going through the atmosphere
also r/emojipolice
Thank god they’re addressing the real questions
I find thought experiments are often times educational. This particular scenario required me to think about chemistry and physics. Yes, it may not ever become a real scenario, but it made me think. And yes, I’m a big nerd.
@@janedoe6181 yeah the way I phrased my comment it probably looks sarcastic but I’ve always personally wondered about so I was hype to watch😂
Aliens: maybe they will bring flowers or other gifts to space
Humans: let's test fire a gun in space. 😂
And space wars
Actually 🤓 human have send something into space which is a some human picture ,song and more
I love how all of these graphics of people using 1911s implies that we’re still gonna be using it when we’re in space.
Well, it's survived 2 wOrLd WaRs so why not a space one too
Here’s something interesting. The effective ranges are likely inaccurate. The reason for this is that there is no atmospheric pressure, as well as no air resistance. The velocity of a projectile exiting a firearm by use of expanding gases would likely be higher than normal due to the difference in pressure between the chamber and barrel inside the firearm and outside of it. Some higher powered firearms may even explode when fired due to this fact and would be in need of modification. Barrels would be shot out faster due to the higher velocity projectiles eating at the rifling. Changing the bullets to a harder material would accelerate this further. Recoil operated weapons would likely be unaffected in function, however gas operated weapons would likely either run harshly due to accelerated venting of gas, or would not function at all. Recoil mitigation would become a high priority to reduce unwanted movement while firing in low gravity.
So many things to consider.
This is what happens when I think too much at 1 in the morning lol.
I personally feel like you missed this one. When you were worried about the bullets coming across million degree solar winds and you used an ultra rare metal to combat this heat flux, bullets need to be cheap and not comprised of rare metals that we will never see again. Also I don’t think solar flares between you and your target a really an issue. I feel like a more practical approach would consist of possibly stainless steel rail guns firing magnetic steel discs. As you only need to tear the space suit not necessarily influct trauma damage. You could use an ultra high velocity with minimal mass. But a larger impact profile. Gyroscopic effect for aim down range and yet still doubt the fire fight would sustain ranges beyond practical ability.
Infographics Show has been cranking out videos covering questions I’ve wondered for years; most notably what getting shot feels like.
Who else hates that the “bullets” are getting shot out and the casing stays with it “not complaining just making a note”
Looks like the animators don't know how guns work. I wonder if I should trust the other claims when nobody in their studio noticed this.
“We shoot the casing with the bullet for 66% more bullet.”
It's like a kindergartener made up the animation.
I like how the casing of the round comes out the barrel lol
They’ve done this several times. You’d think a channel called infographics would know the most basic things about the topics on which they’re delivering “info”.
It surprises me to know a gun could even be fired in space at all. I was thinking zero gravity would affect where the bullet went how fast and how far before killing your target
Back with another banger, good job Infographics Show
*This is a certified non-hood classic!!*
Oversimplified better
You guys left out the small issue of firing a gun in zero G. The fact that you'd spin backwards and lose half the velocity to recoil.
In zero G you can't brace against the shot and use your own body to buffer the recoil into the ground. So you'd basically spin backwards, head over heels.
Recoil-less guns are pretty much the future of space combat because combustion ammunition doesn't work in low/zero G.
You're failing to take into account the mass and inertia of a human body vs a bullet
This is ~60kg of human to push against a few grams of bullet, so almost all of the velocity would be preserved in the bullet, and only a small percentage would be lost due to recoil against the person firing, who would indeed be accelerated backwards but not to a degree that would make you spin like crazy
@@SirRaio uhh, none of that matters much in zero G dude. If you float in zero G and gently poke a surface, you'll start to push off with a surprising amount of speed. Your body is basically weightless so your size and mass are irrelevant.
Now try firing a 9mm with all that recoil and no gravity to help pull you down? You'd literally spin in place with some (but not a lot) of speed.
This is explained away in The Expanse by the characters using plastic rounds in zero G, for basically no recoil, and also to not perforate ships.
None of what u guys are talking about matter this is true dumbest argument ever
You need a gun that would fire 2 bullets in opposite directions at the same time. Okay, there's a couple of bugs to work out with that too.
@@timjohnson1199 or you could wear a suit that fires small propulsion rockets when you fire? You absorb the recoil, but the little jets push you back forward?
Wow...
"Space Cadet" is a real thing...
I've been called this for years...
Never realized..
I was simply.."ahead of my time."
your videos, they're very interesting and many questions that I had were answered by ur videos, thanks.
One correction: Soviet Union's first space station had a 20MM cannon, and I believe they did test fire it at least once.
Oh that's kinda neat
All the cosmonauts travel with side arms also...at least they use too...
The Soviets tested an aircraft cannon in Space on Salyut 3, and this is fairly well known. They had a modified Rikhter R-23 cannon onboard, and test fired it when the Cosmonauts had left for safely reasons. So yes, it's possible to fire a gun in space as it's literally been done before.
One wise man once said:
*It will get to a point were man will use sticks and stones*
no its: I do not know of what weapons ww3 will be fought with, but I do know that ww4 will be fought with sticks and stones
At least you tried
@@Y4735-s8t that guy is wrong!
WW4 would never happen
cuz we all would be dead 😁
Love that the shots fire have the casings too lol
Love this Show _!_
Btw, The Bullet is the things that shoots out, not the brass cartridge with the bullet. LoL
it goes out the ejection port, *as shown in the video*
@@Username-vn1wx the video also shows an entire cartridge being projected out of the barrel.
It's a cartoon. People also have hands instead of circles
Doesn’t this channel show guns a lot? And also talks about physics
Isn't it amazing how our earth if filled with all the material properties and resources to do what we do. Most other planets are missing very key resources and many of them.
I remember that scene in cowboy bebop when Spike uses it to propel himself to safety.
You could also run into an issue with the parts cold-welding together.
What about cold welding? Wouldn’t the action of a firearm cycling in a vacuum instantly weld the moving parts together (so long as they were made of metal)?
Possibly if there were not anything between the metal parts…. Like oil, oxidation, coatings etc.
Wow, interesting…. Hadn’t even thought about that!
Another major concern of metal objects in space is vacuum welding. Since there is no gas molecules separating & oxydizing the surface layer, as soon as you end up with two pieces of the same metal touching each other, they'll start fusing on the molecular level, no matter the temperature (asuming it's above absolute zero of course)
You need very smooth surfaces for cold welding.
Wouldn't you also be Hit by the full force of the recoil when firing a gun in Zero gravity?
Zero gravity will make a noticeable effect on your orientation with a small caliber weapon. However with even moon gravity (1/6th earth) will be handled with a small caliber. If you ramp up the cross sectional decency and power of the weapon, it will drastically cause problems. Not because your arms can’t handle the recoil, but the low gravity firing a .357 Magnum might cause you to backflip half way. A hunting rifle will probably result in catastrophic depressurization of your space suit.
The recoil is the same if the bullet if moving at the same speed.
@@wikilcontainments but what if the gun being fired has a gas piston that absorbs the recoil such as what the Remington 700 has and most AR-15s have.
@@ForestTre Recoil is absorbed over time with gas pistons and “felt” recoil is thereby reduced. However you cannot ever break Newton’s 1st law of motion. In that actual recoil will be the same as if the gun had a locking bolt. Like a Remington 700 that doesn’t have a piston system and delivers all of the recoil the instant of discharge. A gas piston and blowback action will spread all the recoil over a few milliseconds. Hope that helps.
@@wikilcontainments okay well thank you for answering that.
I think this would be a very nice way of introducing the Space Corps or the Space Marines of the world militaries
Some Russian finally stepping on the moon: Я наконец сделал это, моя мечта сбылась
Stray bullet racing across the moon: Im about to end this man's whole career
You have the ability to communicate to a lot of people and maybe bring the REAL narrative and possibly save lives of vets during this tough time. Cowboy up hoss and use this channel to make a difference.
30 seconds up and already 50+ likes. This video is going to be great just seeing that.
I can't believe it, The Infographics Show animated the entire cartridge instead of just the bullet itself being fired... lol
For anyone seeing this, I believe you can achieve your goals, all you have to do is to NEVER GIVE UP
Thank you
You read my mind.
@@spooku245 You're welcome spooku
@@MrKFNeverGiveUp You read my mind too
@@thinkbooth Same to you my friend
Nice answer , very entertaining but in the same time it is wrong . Bullet's speed buffed , recoil nerfed , air resistance nerfed , recoil when firing in deep space eliminated completely ...
5:04: Wait, what? Are you saying that being drawn into planetary orbit would impart velocity to the bullet? The speed at which objects must travel to remain in orbit is dependent on their characteristics; such object won't, however, somehow gather kinetic energy from having come closer to another body.
Isn’t it possible it would just get pulled to the surface of Jupiter? Wouldn’t the bullet have to be at a very specific trajectory and speed to be locked into orbit? The video made it sound like orbiting the planet was the only option for the bullet.
Got my answer. I genuinely thought the bullet will travel on forever but I did forget about the magnetic pull the rocks and plants have. But hey 👀 wonder how far it would go into space
The Infographics Show: "YOU CANT SHOOT A BULLET IN SPACE"
star wars: ima end this man's whole career
I really, really, really, really, really, really love that Celsius is being used.
Imagine having melted glock slides and grip in space.
This statement is made by the 1911 gang
The cartridge will fire not because of the air in the cartridge, but because explosives require an oxidizer, and a reducer (fuel). It has everything it needs to work in an anoxic enviroment.
Imagine a minigun in space..
Imagine liberals actually believe in science
No mention of the pressure difference between an atmosphere or a vacuum on the cartidge. And I don't mean lack of oxygen. The bullets would come out at a higher velocity(there is a vacuum pulling on the bullet nose so these ranges need to be re-calculated). Different gun powder would probably need to be used. To get more technical, different types of operation may/may not work. Manually operated would be fine(and so would Gatling) but semi-autos may not work. Gas operated would over pressurize anything at/after the gas block(i think). Blowback would need a different spring rate. Delayed recoil operated might need re-engineering. I'm not an engineer nor a firearms manufacturer so i don't know 100%. I'd like to hear more about this!
You could've made this into a short and just said "yes, because of the oxygen inside the casing" you would've likely got way more views
These guys aint worried about views lol
@@mrXcreaboXnuggets
If so, then they wouldn't post so many videos, with VERY basic, if any, research behind them?
Example: This video, the reason guns would work is space is because the powder contains an oxidizer, you don't need air for fire, you need oxidizer.
(Fun fact: an oxidizer doesn't even need to contain oxygen, chlorine trifluoride, for an instance is a more potent oxidizer than O2.)
6:06 the first drawing looks a off a lot like the covenant carbine from halo lol
And then the Halo 4 Rail Gun @6:11
You gotta love how creators who have no experience with guns always have images in their videos of bullets with the cartridges still attached 😂
Ahhh yes the Rail gun from halo love it
Tim Curry: I'm escaping to the one place that hasn't been corrupted by capitalism: SPACE!
Space Force: Hold my beer
He really said that lol he's seems to have been very profitable from capitalism what a hypocrite.
@M4A1BestGirl yes, it's important to Always make a political point! That's exactly what the world needs now.
all you would need is a weapon containing two tiny spinning wheels to launch a dart (like a baseball pitching machine). it only needs to puncture the space suit render the combatant unable to remain in the fight
That’s exactly what I was thinking too. There’s no need to damage the body, just damage the space suit.
when the thumbnail is sus
4:18 And I thought the Drill Instructor in Mass Effect 2 was making things up. :D
I love how tungsten means "Heavy Stone" In Swedish. 🤣
Doesn't matter how heat resistant you make your space gun if they start burning your astrosoldier's hands off and cooking off the rounds in the chamber. The question shouldn't be how heat resistant you can make a gun, but what you can do to expel that heat as quickly as possible in space. One of the best ways I could think of doing this is installing copper radiator fins on the barrel to act as a heat sink and increase surface area for cooling. You could also hook up a can of compressed gas to the gun and blast the radiator fins for quick cooling.
Would they really use tungsten to produce weapons though? Doesn't tungsten have one of the highest weight to volume ratios (apart from radioactive elements)?
Dosen't matter if your in space
@@BigeppyFR You still have to deal with inertia so mass still matters somewhat.
Would be great for the bullets.
The infographics show: answering practical questions since 2011
It’s crazy how we haven’t even explored all of the ocean before we decided to go to space
It is easier to go into space than goto the bottom of the ocean. More people has been in space than the ocean floor.
Another problem would be 'Vacuum Welding' since small parts tend to weld themselves together in a hard vacuum....Things like springs, etc. would become useless...
In space, bullet casings stay attached to bullets when fired. Space mechanics are strange indeed.
The Infographics Show is that channel that always answers a lot of my shower thoughts
Best idea I could come up with would be a air or gas cooled metalstorm system. I would really like to hear everyone suggestions. I am a idea guy, not an engineer.
How is an air-cooled weapon going to get cooled by air when there's no air to cool it?
Small comment/question about the ranges.
The ranges given were clearly just an estimation based off of known ranges on earth and the gravity of that particular celestial body, I understand that.
But, wouldn't the lack of oxygen in those environments have an effect as well?
On the one hand, O2 is burned continuously as the projectile travels down the barrel of a firearm. Sure, there is some in the cartridge, but all of the O2 burned during firing does not come solely from that cartridge. My assumption is that the range would be lessened slightly by this.
On the other hand, without an atmosphere like the one here on earth, air resistance and drag on the projectile would be lessened significantly. Likely increasing the range potential.
Just some thoughts I had while watching.
Love the episode, really fun thought experiment.
Atmospheric O2 has little to no effect on the combustion of the powder.
The powder contains an oxidizer, this is the actual reason a gun would work in space, not at all because of a miniscule amount of trapped air.
This is why energy weapons in space rule: a bullet *NEEDS* a certain speed to be deadly but high-temperature energy bolts do damage no matter what speed and affects the area around the impact. Most people seem to forget that while objects in space are dangerous heat is the dangerous, demanding, high maintenance GF that you are *always* obliged to bring since not only does everything we do generate heat but said heat destabilizes and degrades materials very quickly in the void.
In Sci-Fi, sure.
In real physics, not quite.
I'll assume, that by "energy bolts" you are talking about concentrated plasma projectiles.
Plasma would very quickly dissipate.
And even if you managed to make it so that it wouldn't, it would still lose it's power to black body radiation. (heat comming off of it as light)
Also, its path can be deflected by electromagnets.
Lasers, while giving no early warning, meaning you would have to dodge pre-emptivly, their damage can be greatly mitigated by reflective coatings.
It's not too much of a problem to get things up to great speeds, and it won't lose effectiveness with distance.
On top of that, it you can get an object as light as 10kg to 0.01c, (1% of the speed of light) it will hit like a 107kt bomb, about 5x stronger than the Fatman bomb.
A 10t object travelling at the speed of the Parker Solar Probe (192.2km/s) would hit like a 44kt bomb, (about 2x Fatman, or 1g of matter reacting with 1g of antimatter)
Explosives also don't require velocity and they don't lose their potency nearly as quickly as heat-based munitions. (months, years or decades,(depending on the type) for noticable difference, instead of fractions of seconds)
In addition to the horizon issue, the solar wind is so diffuse that it could not affect the structural integrity of a bullet...
Recoil is a momentum transfer phenomenon, and thus mass is extremely important,
along with velocity. The basic momentum transfer equation is as follows:
m1v1 = m2v2
Where:
m1 = mass of a 9mm Parabellum bullet = 2.02 g = 0.00202 kg
v1 = muzzle velocity of a 9mm Parabellum bullet = 335 m/s
mh = average North American human mass = 81kg
ms = average North American spacesuit mass = 127 kg
m2 = total spacesuited human mass = 208 kg
v2 = recoil velocity of spacesuited human = to be determined
m1v1 = m2v2
m1v1/m2 = v2
v2 = m1v1/m2
v2 = (0.00202 kg)(335 m/s)/(208 kg)
v2 = 0.003253365 m/s RECOIL VELOCITY
It would make the speed constant
“This guns been working in space?”
“Always has been”
The recoil would be horrendous. You’d have to make sure you’re really anchored down. Guns would be really useful in space because it has good range, it’s easy to make, and it would be useful for defense and offense, which inevitably follows people wherever they go.
Unfortunately, you neglected to take into account that 5.56mm and 7.62mm rounds are jacketed. Copper-covered lead.
I've always wanted to know what would happen if you did this thanks for answering my questions!
Modern gunpowder is self oxidizing. It's why you can still fire bullets underwater. No atmospheric oxygen required
Still not convinced that standard ammo would function in a vacuum. Not saying it wouldn't be a fairly straight-forward solution to develop ammo that could work in space, but the bullets that are manufactured at present don't seem like they'd be very reliable. Currently Bullets are not hermetically sealed, so any "residual" oxygen (required for combustion) would gradually vent out of the cartridge while in a vacuum, much like how ammo that's submerged in water will become useless over time (except that being a gas, the oxygen would escape from the cartridge far more quickly than a liquid would seep into it). Yes, a few standard bullets in each batch *might* coincidentally be tightly sealed enough to keep sufficient oxygen inside them to support combustion, but do you really want to go into a fight knowing that upwards of 60-75% of your rounds won't work (and would thus jam your weapon)? I can't imagine that it would be too difficult to produce 'air-tight" ammunition for use in space, but I just can't see how standard ordnance would be able to do so dependably.
Standard ammo would work, it's just that this channel puts a questionable amount of research into these videos.
The reason the rounds would work is because the powder contains an oxidizer.
It really wouldn't have taken them even 5 minutes to find out that it's not air, specifically, that's needed for fire, it's any oxidizer.
@@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am Ah, okay. That makes a lot of sense - the propellant contains its own oxidizing agent within the powder. That clarifies things. Thanks!
Hey infografics show. Just wanna say amazing work as always. But just 1 thing. When u fire a bullet. The entire cartridge does not fly with it 😂.other than that. Keep up the good and amazing videos
You learn only from your mistakes and failures. Don't let your failures weigh you down. Good day
8:02 I love how Mercury has a little face
Also, the maximum ranges are if you fire these rounds at a 45 degree incline, not a flat plane. As soon as the bullet leaves the gun if it is level it will drop, that's why you have to aim up a little if you want the bullet to go further.
Definitely looking forward to this scenario on the next Expendables
_As _*_NOTHING_*_ flies or floats in a vacuum, there is the impossibility of an astronaut floating in a vacuum firing a gun._
4:27 Since when did a complete cartridge get discharged from a gun? 🤔
0:42 i love when doge is on the rocketship
Infographics answering questions we didn't know we had
Wrong! The powder in a case carries its own oxygen for combustion within its composition. The tiny amount of air in the case has nothing to do with the powder burning. Same as explosives tightly packed into a bomb. All the ingredients for the reaction are included within the powder or explosive, including oxygen.
Right… the thing that people would forget is that the person would get pushed back the other way as well. The recoil would only allow one accurate shot.
Hey one vet to the vet at infographics. Thanks for doing a story on the Benghazi anniversary during a time when many Afghanistan vets are hurting, but hey you get to space gun videos. BUD/S 267 here.
I totally thought this video was going to be about recoil in low gravity.
If I understand thermodynamics enough, the heat from detonation would also heat up the gun, with nowhere to displace the heat.
Space firearms would most likely have radiators to cool the gun down by emitting the heat away as ifr.
And they would probably not use them that much, anyway, since missiles, lasers and bigger railguns and coilguns would dominate.
Here’s another good question Will grenades and explosives packed with oxygen be much more deadlier with a wider range without Air and less gravity?
The explosion would be much worse but the fragmentation would be much more deadly