Continuity where firearms are concerned.

[Deej]

JohnL wrote:

> Two more;
>
> A character is aiming a semi-auto at someone and when the
> person doesn't do what they're told, the guy holding the gun
> cocks it. Unless I'm mistaken, the majority of semi-auto
> handguns need to be cocked before they can be fired. So they
> were threatening someone with a gun that couldn't currently be
> fired.

Yep, this happens alot in westerns too, with single-action revolvers.

[wickednick]

It would make more sense with a fully auto weapon to lay down supressing fire.

[wickednick]

Here is a favorite one of mine.If someone is threatening someone with a gun and they want to make there threat look serious they will cock the gun.If they make there point they will then holster the gun still cocked and then prociede to run or walk around.
In real life that gun would blow a hole in the guys leg if he started walking around with a fully cocked gun in his holster.

[TheFeen]

People throwing themselves in front of bullets really annoys me. What i mean is 'human shields' when the heroes sidekick leaps into the path of the bullet or postions himself so that he is in front of the hero and takes a bullet for him. This is rubbish as most bullets especially those fired from heavy calibre pistols or rifles would just go straight through the first guy and STILL blow out the heroes spleen.

[SPCFranks]

I know exactly what  you mean. Or goodguys in movies that hold up dead bodies as human shield to M16's or M249's... i mean give me a break. Its going to go through the already dead guy, the goodguy holding the dead guy and anything within 30 yards behind the goodguy.... on another note some movies don't even bother putting magazines in the M16's... i just sit back and laugh.

[ulthar]

wyckednick wrote:


> In real life that gun would blow a hole in the guys leg if he
> started walking around with a fully cocked gun in his holster.


Not necessarily.  I often carry my 9mm Condition 3, 'cocked and locked.'  The Single Action Only (SAO) semiauto's were always carried like this.  Well, if you expected to need it in a hurry, that is.

Cocking a gun before using it is often viewed by the courts as an aggressive act.  If you are ever in a self defense shooting situation, do *NOT* cock your gun before returning fire (unless it is required to do so).

Disclaimer:  IANAL; opinions based on reading about shooting cases in criminal and civil court.

[raj]

Eirik wrote:


> Here's another pet peeve from movies:
>
> I can't stand it when characters are aiming a shotgun at
> someone and then pump it, apparently to emphasize the fact that
> they mean business.  Pumping it like that would eject the shell
> in the chamber... but this never happens.  So that means the
> dumbass is aiming a shotgun with nothing in the chamber at the
> beginning of the scene.

Yes!  That is my biggest peeve.

[Bargle5]

Also many revolvers (I think it's most, but I ain't sure) have what is called a 'drop safety'. This works by blocking the firing pin from striking the cartridge unless the trigger is held back.  Nearly all double action revolvers and some single actions have this feature. This brings up another thing that happens in movies and that is guns going off when dropped. On guns with this safety, that doesn't happen.

[ulthar]

Bargle5 wrote:

> Also many revolvers (I think it's most, but I ain't sure) have
> what is called a 'drop safety'. This works by blocking the
> firing pin from striking the cartridge unless the trigger is
> held back.

That's a good point.  Many semiautos have this, too.  I know my 9mm does.

[Jamtoy]

by: ASHTHECAT

"In "Aliens" after the Colonial Marines get their asses kicked and are taking an inventory of their remaining weapons, Hicks states that each pulse rifle has about 50 rounds each but each rifle fires about 10 times that amount throughout the rest of the film!"

They were supposed to be 10 mm caseless rounds too.  The magazine for their pulse rifles was suppose to hold 100 (Red counter located on the side of the rifle, WHY THE SIDE!!!) yet the magazine was not much bigger that an average paperback novel.

Stargate SG-1- the P-90 is supposed to hold a 50 round magazine.  O'Neill indicates the "shots per second" capability of the gun.  While watching the episode, I did a quick calcuation in my head and determine that they did not have long before they were out of ammo in the gun.  Only a few seconds.  However, during a demonstraition, Sam Carter shoots the thing for nearly 10 seconds without reloading.  Well outside the capacity O'Neill stated

Not hand held weapons but with aircraft I always laugh at how long the guys keep firing their guns.  Example: A-10 Fairchild's main Gatling Cannon can theoretically shoot 6000 rounds a minute.  That's 100 shots a second.  If your ammo belt is, for sake of argument since I don't remember how long the belt is nor the caliber, 15 ft long and the bullets are 1 inch in diameter, you have less than 540 shots.  Less that 6 seconds round.

Maybe someone here knows the actual lengths and sizes and can improve my estimate.

(My edit was to correct a SIMPLE mathematical error.  I divided 6000 by 60 and got 600???  I have a degree in Mathematics and can solve advanced calculus equations but when I'm typing fast I hit just aboiut evrrrry key on the board!!)

Still, in 6 secconds. your out of ammo!



Post Edited (02-13-04 22:58)

[raj]

Of course if you burn through 540 rounds in a second, your barrels are toast.  Real pilots do quick bursts only.

[Eirik]

I heard once that more fake rounds were fired during the filming of The Wild Bunch than real ones were fired during the Mexican revolution.  Maybe the commentator was just kidding.  I have seen characters fire more rounds in a single scene than they would have been capable of physically carring on their person.  Bullets are heavy, especially when you're dealing in hundreds of rounds.

[odinn7]

The main gun on an A-10 is a 7 barrel  Gatling gun in 30mm which is capable of 3,900 rds/min. This breaks down to 65 rds/sec and approximately 9 rds/sec per barrel. If you look at this on a per barrel basis, an Uzi has a higher cyclic rate but when you consider all 7 barrels throwing rounds that size, that fast, it's awesome. Even at this slower rate than Jamtoy had figured, there still wouldn't be 'endless' ammo on a plane like this as they are so used to showing us in movies and on TV. This , along with the point that raj made that sustained fire will toast a barrel makes some of these scenes ludicrous. Then again, how entertaining would movies be if they stuck to the rules of real life?

[Jamtoy]

Thanks odinn7,  I knew someone on this board would know the facts about that cannon.  Any idea how long the ammo belt is for it?

BTW Stargate SG-1 example I gave,  the P-90 is stated to have a 50 round magazine and a rate of 900 rds/min.  900/60=15 rds/sec.  With only 50 rounds, 50/15=3.333 seconds of ammo.  Carter fired a lot longer than that without reloading.

Still cool how it tore the target log up though.

[FearlessFreep]

I'm having a hard time understanding this convesation in the same forum where time travelling cyborgs and killer mutants demon monsters from another dimension are discussed as a matter of course