• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

September is a good time for Stundie nominations

Frankly, if they met, I think Hal would be 100% in the right to go Buzz Aldrin on Yankee 451
 
A revolver operates mechanically to chamber the next round and will do so even if you dry fire it. At least all the revolvers I have ever used.

What we really should be asking is African or European revolvers?:D
Well all the 'automatic revolvers' that I know of (both the Mateba and Webley-Fossbery) are/were European; they relied on recoil forces to cycle.
 
So officials now think they know what caused the massive Rim Fire that almost burnt down my town last week. It was an illegal campfire from a hunter.

Naturally when reading the comments on an article on it people think this is not the case:

There was nothing in season when the fire started. This smells like anti gun garbage. If he was hunting he was poaching.
Personally, I think it was law enforcement burning a grow-op and it got
out of control. Either that or they used a predator drone and are
trying to cover it up.

Typical, the federal government always finds a scapegoat to cover for its total incompetence and mismanagement.
 
About 23,000 - 24,000 people work at the Pentagon. The odds of one or more having wandered onto the JREF isn't all that small. Only a truther would find that unusual (and given his Google stalking of Hal, I'm not the least bit surprised).

There was nothing in season when the fire started. This smells like anti gun garbage. If he was hunting he was poaching.
So he answered his own question?

Personally, I think it was law enforcement burning a grow-op and it got out of control. Either that or they used a predator drone and are trying to cover it up.
1) They don't "burn a grow-op." Only a moron would intentionally start a (freaking huge) fire in the wilderness during fire season.

2) I like how he covered his bases with the "drone" non-sequitur.

Typical, the federal government always finds a scapegoat to cover for its total incompetence and mismanagement.
Because as we know, no hunter has ever accidentally started a huge fire?
 
.....A revolver operates mechanically to chamber the next round and will do so even if you dry fire it. At least all the revolvers I have ever used.

This is only true of a double action revolver. IE, each time you pull the trigger, the revolver fires, then rotates the cylinder for the next round. A single action revolver requires cocking the trigger to rotate the cylinder for the next shot.

What we really should be asking is African or European revolvers?:D

It doesn't matter where they are made, there are only two revolver designs, single action and double action.

Phil
 
I have to wonder if he thinks they are shooting hellfires in the wilderness for no reason.
 
I have to wonder if he thinks they are shooting hellfires in the wilderness for no reason.

I spent a few days in the woods building firebreaks to contain a 500 acre blaze started by an Air Force A-10 that dropped a flare despite being explicitly told not to do so because of the burn index.

Hellfires would be overkill.
 
Last edited:
Philth53 said:
.....A revolver operates mechanically to chamber the next round and will do so even if you dry fire it. At least all the revolvers I have ever used.

This is only true of a double action revolver. IE, each time you pull the trigger, the revolver fires, then rotates the cylinder for the next round. A single action revolver requires cocking the trigger to rotate the cylinder for the next shot.

What we really should be asking is African or European revolvers?:D

It doesn't matter where they are made, there are only two revolver designs, single action and double action.

Phil
Someone just failed their "Geek Credit Check." ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2R3FvS4xr4
 
This is only true of a double action revolver. IE, each time you pull the trigger, the revolver fires, then rotates the cylinder for the next round. A single action revolver requires cocking the trigger to rotate the cylinder for the next shot.
It doesn't matter where they are made, there are only two revolver designs, single action and double action.

Phil
No. Excluding the rare automatic revolvers (like the Mateba and WF I mentioned), both double and single action rely on the firer to rotate the cylinder.
In a 'double action' this is done by trigger pressure, which re-cocks the hammer, rotates the cylinder and drops the hammer; a 'single action' relies on the firer pulling back the hammer ("thumbing") to rotate the cylinder to ready the weapon for firing.
 
What this all has to do with rocketry is, I suspect, the whole "You need something to push against" conundrum they're dealing with over there. He thinks that, since we obviously (to him, at least) need a person to hold the gun for it to cycle properly, we obviously (to him, at least) need something for the rocket to push against.

Where he fails is twofold: Not realizing that, for the reasons we've discussed, an automatic pistol really isn't a good analogy for a rocket, and also not realizing that, if we wanted to, we could design a gun that could fire and cycle under these conditions.

I think the more important failing is that the question actually proves that rockets work. A gun floating in zero gravity won't cycle properly and will instead go flying in the opposite direction from the bullet exactly like a rocket. By trying to claim that a rocket won't work unless you have something to push against, he actually demonstrates that a rocket is exactly what you get if you don't have something to push against.
 
I think the more important failing is that the question actually proves that rockets work. A gun floating in zero gravity won't cycle properly and will instead go flying in the opposite direction from the bullet exactly like a rocket. By trying to claim that a rocket won't work unless you have something to push against, he actually demonstrates that a rocket is exactly what you get if you don't have something to push against.



Good point!


Cue Clueless forums saying, "JREFers think rockets are really just Space Pistols!", or something else sufficiently inane as to allow them to miss the point.
 
Someone just failed their "Geek Credit Check." ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2R3FvS4xr4

Thank you!

No. Excluding the rare automatic revolvers (like the Mateba and WF I mentioned), both double and single action rely on the firer to rotate the cylinder.
In a 'double action' this is done by trigger pressure, which re-cocks the hammer, rotates the cylinder and drops the hammer; a 'single action' relies on the firer pulling back the hammer ("thumbing") to rotate the cylinder to ready the weapon for firing.

I don't have a whole lot of range time with revolvers and have only fired double action. Thanks for the info. Now I want to look into this automatic revolver you speak of.
 
I think the more important failing is that the question actually proves that rockets work. A gun floating in zero gravity won't cycle properly and will instead go flying in the opposite direction from the bullet exactly like a rocket. By trying to claim that a rocket won't work unless you have something to push against, he actually demonstrates that a rocket is exactly what you get if you don't have something to push against.

It pushes againstthe air. No air, nothing to push. Zero Gravity is just a means of suspending the gun in mid air. or, mid space as it were.
 
It pushes againstthe air. No air, nothing to push. Zero Gravity is just a means of suspending the gun in mid air. or, mid space as it were.
I thought gravity was a function of air pressure. No air, no gravity. I am fairly certain that there is a post somewhere around here that pretty clearly establishes this...
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom