Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53

Thread: Covering the ejection port to catch the live round

  1. #41
    Hokey / Ancient JAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kansas City
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddG View Post
    All else being equal, I'm a believer that the best way to clear a gun is to shoot all the bullets in it.
    -- Shichyeah. I also have a distinct preference for environments where the last instruction is to top off and holster.

  2. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Eastern PA
    So whos to say a round couldnt couldnt go off from hitting a rock or some other object on the deck? I suppose better on the ground than in your hand but... I dont see hows the odds of a detonation would lean more one way or another.

    Seems theres no real right or wrong from all the different opinions about it here. I guess just do which ever method the RO or instructor prefers.

  3. #43
    Member seabiscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    If a round goes off on a rock, it won't be near your hand. And since the gasses won't be contained by a chamber/barrel, the bullet won't really go anywhere.

    Also there aren't sharp pointy things like ejectors on rocks. And the round isn't being pushed back against them by the slide.
    Praise be to the LORD my Rock,
    who trains my hands for war,
    my fingers for battle.
    -Psalm 144:1

  4. #44
    Site Supporter Odin Bravo One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    In the back of beyond
    Quote Originally Posted by seabiscuit View Post
    And since the gasses won't be contained by a chamber/barrel, the bullet won't really go anywhere.
    Oh it will go somewhere.

    Without a chamber and barrel, we don't know which way it will be going, but it will be going there, and getting there in a hurry. I won't get drawn into a theoretical discussion of physics or the geometry of explosives on the internet, but there is a mechanical explosion still taking place. That it was not contained by the device designed to contain it does not make it any less dangerous.
    You can get much more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

  5. #45
    Hokey / Ancient JAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Kansas City
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean M View Post
    Oh it will go somewhere.

    Without a chamber and barrel, we don't know which way it will be going, but it will be going there, and getting there in a hurry. I won't get drawn into a theoretical discussion of physics or the geometry of explosives on the internet, but there is a mechanical explosion still taking place. That it was not contained by the device designed to contain it does not make it any less dangerous.
    You would think, right? I've only seen it with pistol rounds (two .45 ACP rounds, ten years apart) but it does happen, and it is /catastrophically/ disappointing. "Pop." Bullet goes about 2 inches, shower of unburnt powder in the gravel.

  6. #46
    Member seabiscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    I stand corrected. I just figured the energy would be dispersed in flying brass and stuff, since that has less inertia and is more easily accelerated.
    Praise be to the LORD my Rock,
    who trains my hands for war,
    my fingers for battle.
    -Psalm 144:1

  7. #47
    Member seabiscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Here's a video of a shotgun round going off outside a chamber and barrel.
    Last edited by seabiscuit; 12-02-2011 at 01:09 AM. Reason: Added link
    Praise be to the LORD my Rock,
    who trains my hands for war,
    my fingers for battle.
    -Psalm 144:1

  8. #48
    The popular show Mythbusters cooked off .44Magnum and a .50BMG round in ovens and were unable to get them to penetrate significantly without a chamber-like constriction to contain conflagration. Video is here.

    I'd be worried about the high-speed brass and energy released from momentary deflagration more than the bullet. I wouldn't want to be holding the primer and powder when they ignited, in particular.

    I'd think constraining the case in any way, as might or might not happen in the previously discussed ejection-port scenario, would make the results less predictable, too. Here's what happens when the case is constrained on a .22lr (moron alert). Bullet caused "an abrasion" and did not penetrate.
    Last edited by TheRoland; 12-02-2011 at 09:06 AM.

  9. #49
    More on unchambered ammuniton "firing" -- in this case it's from fire, but the damage caused is probably similar. http://www.saami.org/specifications_...tion_Fires.pdf

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    South
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRoland View Post
    The popular show Mythbusters cooked off .44Magnum and a .50BMG round in ovens and were unable to get them to penetrate significantly without a chamber-like constriction to contain conflagration. Video is here.

    I'd be worried about the high-speed brass and energy released from momentary deflagration more than the bullet. I wouldn't want to be holding the primer and powder when they ignited, in particular.

    I'd think constraining the case in any way, as might or might not happen in the previously discussed ejection-port scenario, would make the results less predictable, too. Here's what happens when the case is constrained on a .22lr (moron alert). Bullet caused "an abrasion" and did not penetrate.
    All I can think is the guy in that second video is now telling all of his friends that he has been shot. I also giggled a little when he showed the "bandages" on his gut.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •