Is it possible to fly faster than a bullet?

[PythonOne]

I was just thinking about this the other day when i was diving with the MiG-29 and it reached maximum speed and i fired my guns at an object on the ground. Then i thought, for those planes that could fly really fast like the Sr-71 (i know it doesn't have a gun) but if it had one, would the gun even fire at speeds up to mach 3+? (which is around 1020.87 m/s)

[Nasder]

I would say yes.

 

I'm no expert or anything, but since the bullet was in the plane, the bullet is traveling at the same speed as the plane. Then when the plane fires the bullet, it gets extra acceleration from the explosion that forces the bullet out from the muzzle. Then it would go even faster. But like I said, I'm no expert or anything, so please prove me right or wrong you peeps who knows things like this.

[ARM505]

The round will come out the muzzle at the velocity of the plane (x), plus it's own muzzle velocity (y), to give a speed of x+y=z (total velocity).

 

It will however slow down faster initially because of the higher drag at this higher speed through the air. Thus, aircraft do not shoot themselves down the instant they pull the trigger. That would suck.

 

Even a .22 LR round can break the sound barrier, about 1080 ft/second (SL, std day) if I remember correctly. 5.56mm rounds can be around three times as fast. I'm a bit clueless about aircraft cannon shells, but I'd guess a basic muzzle velocity of 1500-2500 ft/second would be in the ballpark. Add that to the speed of the plane, and thats about it.

[Jay]

Not to mention that when travelling M2+ you have to fly at very high alt so drag is higher because of the speed but at the same time lower because of the height of fly. That makes some difference but never so huge to slow down your bullets so quickly to shoot you down. But it's still possible to be bombed out of the sky with your own bombs So suicidal thoughts are always possible to realize

[zaGURUinzaSKY]

The m61 uses (USAF and US Navy) a pgu-28 round since 1988, fast as 3,450 ft/s (1,050 m/s)

[Prophet_169th]

In WW1 didnt they have to change the machine gun because the planes were flying into the bullets?

 

Or was it WW2? I could have sworn I read that somewhere.

[zaGURUinzaSKY]

also see the Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-23 (russian equivalent of m61):

 

Type: six-barrel rotary cannon

Muzzle velocity: 715 m/s (2,345 ft/s)

[Jay]

In WW1 didnt they have to change the machine gun because the planes were flying into the bullets?

 

Or was it WW2? I could have sworn I read that somewhere.

 

I don't recall any info about this but AFAIK there were some problems with machine gun synchronization on some WW1 planes so they simply added metallic plates on the propellers to solve this problem and prevented them from being shot off. In WW2 they've already solved this and used synchronized guns ordinarily. On some planes the gun's barrel was built into the propeller cone so no synchronization was needed here (how simple )

[Rooks]

I think Chuck Yeager in one of his books talked about a guy in an F-86 who shredded his own plane. Correct me if I'm wrong

[159th_Viper]

Courtesy of http://members.ozemail.com.au/~claw/frankenarchive015.htm#20041212-01

 

Spare a thought for these Aces of Old.....Saying that I dare say they would not have wanted it any other way, other that the poor dude who has to have the machine-gun firing between his legs:gun_smilie:

 

Frederick Libby, the first American ace, said of the F.E.2b:

When you stood up to shoot, all of you from the knees up was exposed to the elements. There was no belt to hold you. Only your grip on the gun and the sides of the nacelle stood between you and eternity. Toward the front of the nacelle was a hollow steel rod with a swivel mount to which the gun was anchored. This gun covered a huge field of fire forward. Between the observer and the pilot a second gun was mounted, for firing over the F.E.2b's upper wing to protect the aircraft from rear attack ... Adjusting and shooting this gun required that you stand right up out of the nacelle with your feet on the nacelle coaming [sic]. You had nothing to worry about except being blown out of the aircraft by the blast of air or tossed out bodily if the pilot made a wrong move. There were no parachutes and no belts. No wonder they needed observers.

 

RFC officers demonstrating how to deal with an attack from the rear in an F.E.2b: the observer stands up and faces backwards while holding on to the rearward machine gun for all his life's worth. If the observer is shot or thrown from the plane, the pilot cannot reach the guns and is effectively disarmed. Later models, such as the one pictured, overcame this deficiency by mounting a third Lewis gun in front of the pilot. Here the pilot can be seen aiming his machine gun for the gaps between the legs of the observer and the forward gun.

[Groove]

#1

 

Yes there are jets out there which fly faster than a bullet.

 

SR-71 was a good a example compared to a Ak-47 bullet which has a V0 speed of 710 m/s which is around mach 2.

 

But there are also kinetic projectiles which are faster than every jet out there. You could take a 120 mm tank APFSDS round which has a initial V0 speed of up to 1700 m/s which should be around mach 5.5 and our american friends develop even faster rounds at the moment.

[ALDEGA]

I don't recall any info about this but AFAIK there were some problems with machine gun synchronization on some WW1 planes so they simply added metallic plates on the propellers to solve this problem and prevented them from being shot off. In WW2 they've already solved this and used synchronized guns ordinarily. On some planes the gun's barrel was built into the propeller cone so no synchronization was needed here (how simple )

I believe this was already solved during WWI.

 

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupter_gear

[ARM505]

RFC officers demonstrating how to deal with an attack from the rear in an F.E.2b:

 

Ugh! It's pictures and solutions like this that perpetuates the idea that people of bygone ages were mind-numbingly stupid! Which they weren't no doubt.....but what on earth were they thinking when they came up with this idea?!?!

[159th_Viper]

Ugh! It's pictures and solutions like this that perpetuates the idea that people of bygone ages were mind-numbingly stupid! Which they weren't no doubt.....but what on earth were they thinking when they came up with this idea?!?!

 

I'd rather state that it perpetuates the resourcefulness of the pilots of those years. I dare say you had to make the best out of a very uncomfortable situation and if that was the only way of keeping a Bandit off your six, then so be it;) :)

 

War might have ended very differently if it was not for the trusty F.E.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Aircraft_Factory_F.E.2

[CoNa]

It's physically possible to be hit by your own bullets. Pull the trigger in high climb and let it drop on your head when it comes down, you will have the time to get there.

If you are going M1+ ... it's going to hurt....

[Stealth_HR]

I think Chuck Yeager in one of his books talked about a guy in an F-86 who shredded his own plane. Correct me if I'm wrong

 

Don't know about that incident, but I found this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-11_Tiger

 

Silly, no? :music_whistling:

[Allochtoon]

Ugh! It's pictures and solutions like this that perpetuates the idea that people of bygone ages were mind-numbingly stupid! Which they weren't no doubt.....but what on earth were they thinking when they came up with this idea?!?!

 

It takes a Dutchman to invent a solution (Fokker). It takes a nation to steal them (US). :P

[sp0nge]

If you go into MeINIT and changed the F-16's settings to have "Human Cockpit = yes" you will have the F-16 as flyable with a Su-27 pit. Same applies to all ac but the f-16 and the F-5 can reach speeds up to 3500km/h. Or 3500 watever is down in the bar wen ur in F2 lol.

 

Anyone know what the speed reading is measured in when you're in F-2 or F4, etc.

[ARM505]

TAS

[ALDEGA]

It takes a Dutchman to invent a solution (Fokker). It takes a nation to steal them (US). :P

Actually, Fokker's implementation for gun synchronization used a patented system. He refused to acknowledge this, even after several court rulings (see the Wikipedia article) :D

[Mobius1]

I've heard of guys shooting themselves down on strafing runs because they flew too low and too close to the targets, the rounds would ricochet off the ground (especially dry lake beds) and bounce back up into the belly of the attacking aircraft. :doh: