Do you think that weapons technology will ever progress to a point where guns will have no recoil? And just for the sake of a valid argument lets exempt the guns that use magnets to fire.
-
-
that wud cause alot of inbalance well i can agree that the engies smg wudnt have recoil but how about the heavy mg? -
I think he means in the real world.Originally posted by dtneter View Post
How long do you expect the world to carry on using bullets? Soon we will be using energy beams or somthing, hopefully there woud be no recoil on those :)Comment
-
There is already a fully functioning rail gun in the US, but not for defence or army purposes.Comment
-
That's not physically possible. Newton's third law.Comment
-
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."Originally posted by Digital-Boy View Post
But that doesn't mean that the reaction has to be recoil. Look at a recoilless cannon for the "simple" solution to that problem.
The energy that creates the recoil will have to be handled somehow, but that doesn't mean we have to violate any of the laws of physics.
And energy weapons doesn't accelerate any mass, so Newtons third law isn't an issue.Comment
-
Maybe if we put a string tied from the front of the rifle to the soldiers trigger finger and when he fired, the string would pull it down...Comment
-
Could work?... maybe, a cheap recoil dampening mechanism!
Good idea.
I think yes... sooner or later we won't have recoil on the weapons... it's only a matter of time... for example they're Sniper rifles now, in .50 cal, that "feel" like a lesser caliber weapon, with muzzlebrakes, recoil paddles, etc... so it's possible than on the future shooting will be like we do now with our mouses/joysticks... click and go :pComment
-
Cool, just wanted opinions. And for all of those nay-sayers how about this?
Warning: This is a commercial, But its F'n cool!!!!
One handed shotgun
Granted this shotgun does have recoil (as you can see) so it doesnt prove that you can completely remove recoil from the equation.Comment
-
I do not believe that a coilgun mechanism would produce recoil, as the force propelling the ferric projectile doesn't have physical properties that apply to recoil. It's "pulling" it more than shooting it.Comment
-
You are still accelerating mass, so you have to pay the Newton fee.Originally posted by blank1 View PostComment
-
Only if no bullets are used ie a gun that fires off intense laser beams or sth, then yeah possibly; otherwise no, the gun itself would be too bulky to effectively use if you added all types of recoil-reducing equipment...now if you're talking about something like a heavy machine gun encampment (needs setting up), then probably.Comment
-
I'm no expert but I am pretty sure they are used against enemy's missiles. The rail gun shoots the missile in mid air with such energy (heat energy?) that the missile simply explodes.Originally posted by <TlXl> vika09 View Post
There are anti recoil mechanisms already out there. I saw some models of a weapon almost identical as to an AK47 (it was an AK version just different number) with almost no recoil. Don't be surprised to see a recoilless gun within 50 years.Comment
-
Meh, I'm sure someone will figure out a way to use the opposite reaction to fire another bullet or something...Comment
-
That would be the AK-107 or 108. They use a piston in the front to act as a counter balance to the actual recoil.There are anti recoil mechanisms already out there. I saw some models of a weapon almost identical as to an AK47 (it was an AK version just different number) with almost no recoil. Don't be surprised to see a recoilless gun within 50 years.
Comment
Comment