Tubefish.net - Future Weapons: The Kriss .45 Calibre Sub-Machine Gun

Zyamaman	( -46 minutes ago)
Oh, BTW, remember how you said the entire mechanism of the gun is a single object? By that logic the train and the rails are a single object as well. Since it's obviously isn't, we can establish that the body of the gun and it's moving parts (like the bolt) are all different objects.

Zyamaman

( -43 minutes ago)

Listen, I lack the education to point exactly where your logic is faulty (or maybe I'm just not expressing myself properly), but you defy common sense. According to you, this gun CANNOT redirect it's recoil energy, but the fact is that it was built from ground up to be doing just that! If it would NOT be able to redirect the recoil, the gun would NOT be able to shoot bursts and would have to be recocked after every. Since we know it can fire in full auto, your line of logic must be wrong.

dudewhosbored	( -56 minutes ago)
this is revolutionary.

dc46and2

( -47 minutes ago)

Kinetic energy is a vector quantity, so the sum is also a vector. By saying "sum energy of the gun as a whole", I meant the vector sum of all the energy vectors of all the parts of the gun. My argument is that the gun cannot alter its energy vector by applying forces to parts of itself, for reasons already stated. Can a train, by any means, redirect its energy without applying a force to a separate object, such as the rail? I say "no," and if the train cannot do it, then neither can the gun.

Zyamaman

( 9 hours ago)

I never said anything about producing more energy than there is from the recoil. In fact, the sum energy has nothing to do with the issue at hand, because we're talking about the vector of said energy, not how much of it there is. It's simple redirection of kinetic energy by mechanical means - that's all there is to it. That's how trains work - they accelerate in a single direction, and simply use the rails to change it when needed - no additional energy is required to.

dc46and2

( 21 hours ago)

The "triangle part" is a part of the same gun, not a separate object. The gun frame and parts will apply forces to each other, but each force has a reciprocal force, so that the sum of all the forces among all the parts of the gun is zero. Zero force = zero acceleration = zero change in the direction or magnitude of the energy of the entire gun. You are correct to say that energy is redirected INSIDE the gun. However, this has no effect on the sum energy of the gun as a whole.

Zyamaman

( 22 hours ago)

That triangular part to which the bolt is attached, I assume. The bolt pushes backwards, but that triangular part redirects this energy downwards via a set of grooves and other mechanical parts. Since we've already established that this triangular part should be delivering more force than the spring's compression limit, it should slam against the "floor" of the gun, thus creating downward motion. This is all shown in the video, and if it would not have been possible, the gun wouldn't even fire.

dc46and2

( 22 hours ago)

Kinetic energy means mass and velocity. "Redirecting energy" means a change in velocity--acceleration. Acceleration requires a net force. I say net force, because 2 forces may cancel each other. Since every force has a reciprocal force, an object may not accelerate by applying a force to itself or a part of itself. Thus, an object may only redirect its energy by applying a force to a SEPARATE object. To what separate object, does the Kriss' apply an upward force to redirect it's energy down?

Caprow	( 1 day ago)
yea, plus they only use a couple of video clips, he uses the weapon with an aimpoint sight, and in other clips he uses a eotech... in which video clip is he actually shooting one shot to compare with the MP5?

Zyamaman	( 1 day ago)
It's not plausible, it contradicts the data on hand. And why exactly does the concept of redirecting kinetic energy conflicts with your understanding of physics?

Enter a Youtube URL:

Our Sponsors

Sponsors