From today's AOL news
- Thread starter Natasha
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Black Halo
Registered
Decided to look it up and this was posted in glockfaq.com. (The things I look for when I'm bored at work.)
Q: Can I fire my Glock underwater?
A: Just about any handgun will fire underwater -- at least once.
However, firing underwater is NOT recommended because it can have devastating effects on the pistol and the shooter -- a potentially dangerous activity that should only be utilized by trained personnel wearing proper equipment for protection against potential pressure wave effects of underwater detonation. The shock/pressure waves in water can really damage internal organs (ever heard of lithotripsy?). Shooting a pistol underwater can lead to property damage, serious bodily injury or even death.
NOTE: Glock, Inc., specifically disclaims any and all liability from anyone performing or attempting to perform underwater firing with a Glock pistol -- you do so at your own risk.
The Glock 17 may be equipped with an optional set of maritime spring cups for use in water environments. Maritime spring cups are not intended for submerged firing, but for surface use by special ops teams who operate in and around water. The maritime spring cups are two small parts within the firing pin assembly and are not included on any Model 17 sold by Glock (civilians can only get them through 3rd parties). They insure that water can pass by the firing pin within the firing pin channel, thus preventing the creation of hydraulic force within the firing pin channel -- which would slow the firing pin down, causing light primer strikes. With the special cups, the action will cycle reliably while submersed, if a little bit slower. NATO specification ammunition (such as Winchester's Ranger RA9124N) with waterproof sealed primers and case mouths is recommended.
Although you may install the maritime spring cups on any Glock model, *only* the Glock 17 was designed and intended to use the modified spring cups for aquatic firing -- and only then using 9mm ball ammunition to remain within acceptable pressure limits. The foolhardy who insist on living dangerously must keep several things in mind: The Glock 17 must be fully submersed underwater. There must not be any air left within the pistol as the muzzle is pointed towards the surface of the water after submersion to allow the air in the barrel to escape. Use only full metal jacket, ball-type ammunition because the water within the barrel can spread a hollow point out within the barrel upon firing. This increases the bearing surface of the bullet to the barrel and could catastrophically increase pressures. Even if the barrel doesn't burst, the expanded bullet would get even bigger upon exiting into the water and would slow down very quickly while tumbling. Accuracy would be terrible.
The marinized Glock 17 is primarily for use by various Special Warfare units operating in aquatic environments. At least one specialized Scuba diving group regularly uses G17's to dispatch sharks where they dive. The Glock 17 using NATO specification ball ammunition will completely penetrate a minimum of one 1/2" pine board at a distance of ten feet from the muzzle when fired underwater.
Trained personnel who use Glocks underwater know they must obey several rules:
1) use only a Glock Model 17 with amphibious spring cups (reliability issue);
2) use only 9mm FMJ subsonic, sealed primer ammo;
3) completely immerse the pistol and get *all* the air out of the barrel;
4) wear protective ear plugs, gloves, wet suit, face mask, etc.;
5) do not fire near solid objects or in enclosed spaces to prevent return
concussion.
However, any Glock -- even those not equipped with maritime spring cups -- will normally fire while submersed underwater. But doing so may generate excessive internal pressure and may cause the pistol to literally blow up. This is especially true with the use of high-pressure rounds (such as the .40 S&W/357 SIG) or hollow-point bullets.
I recall a reported incident where a Glockster on a boating holiday decided to show some friends how his Glock would fire underwater (because Tommy Lee Jones said so in the movies). He stuck his hand overboard, pulled the trigger and came back with a bunch of shredded plastic and a badly injured hand.
Another reported case was the Glockster who decided to try out his Glock 23 .40 S&W in the swimming pool after seeing pictures of Glocks being fired underwater on the web. He was totally submerged, with the gun, as he fired at a piece of wood on the bottom of his pool. The Glock did fire, the .40 S&W FMJ round left the barrel and went into the wood. The chamber also exploded and implanted shrapnel into his leg. Thinking that the water would muffle the blast, he did not wear hearing protection (the blast is actually about 4 times louder underwater). He is now mostly deaf in one ear and hears high-pitched tones most of his waking life.
As you can see, firing a pistol underwater is a *very* dangerous endeavor.
Several things could happen:
1) the firing pin may be slowed enough to not detonate the primer
(without the maritime spring cups)
2) the pistol could blow up in your hand;
3) the concussion could damage ears, eyes or internal organs;
4) the bullet may not go where you intend it to.
Even if you have the right equipment, know what you're doing and follow the rules -- the risks for underwater firing are minimized -- but not eliminated. Your pistol's barrel could be affected by water obstruction and your body by damaging concussion. By using hollow point bullets (water may cause the bullet to expand in the barrel), high pressure ammo, etc. -- you're asking for an underwater kaBoom! It you fire near solid or hard objects, the bouncing concussion can cause extensive, perhaps even fatal external/internal tissue injury. Why risk it?
Q: Can I fire my Glock underwater?
A: Just about any handgun will fire underwater -- at least once.
However, firing underwater is NOT recommended because it can have devastating effects on the pistol and the shooter -- a potentially dangerous activity that should only be utilized by trained personnel wearing proper equipment for protection against potential pressure wave effects of underwater detonation. The shock/pressure waves in water can really damage internal organs (ever heard of lithotripsy?). Shooting a pistol underwater can lead to property damage, serious bodily injury or even death.NOTE: Glock, Inc., specifically disclaims any and all liability from anyone performing or attempting to perform underwater firing with a Glock pistol -- you do so at your own risk.
The Glock 17 may be equipped with an optional set of maritime spring cups for use in water environments. Maritime spring cups are not intended for submerged firing, but for surface use by special ops teams who operate in and around water. The maritime spring cups are two small parts within the firing pin assembly and are not included on any Model 17 sold by Glock (civilians can only get them through 3rd parties). They insure that water can pass by the firing pin within the firing pin channel, thus preventing the creation of hydraulic force within the firing pin channel -- which would slow the firing pin down, causing light primer strikes. With the special cups, the action will cycle reliably while submersed, if a little bit slower. NATO specification ammunition (such as Winchester's Ranger RA9124N) with waterproof sealed primers and case mouths is recommended.
Although you may install the maritime spring cups on any Glock model, *only* the Glock 17 was designed and intended to use the modified spring cups for aquatic firing -- and only then using 9mm ball ammunition to remain within acceptable pressure limits. The foolhardy who insist on living dangerously must keep several things in mind: The Glock 17 must be fully submersed underwater. There must not be any air left within the pistol as the muzzle is pointed towards the surface of the water after submersion to allow the air in the barrel to escape. Use only full metal jacket, ball-type ammunition because the water within the barrel can spread a hollow point out within the barrel upon firing. This increases the bearing surface of the bullet to the barrel and could catastrophically increase pressures. Even if the barrel doesn't burst, the expanded bullet would get even bigger upon exiting into the water and would slow down very quickly while tumbling. Accuracy would be terrible.
The marinized Glock 17 is primarily for use by various Special Warfare units operating in aquatic environments. At least one specialized Scuba diving group regularly uses G17's to dispatch sharks where they dive. The Glock 17 using NATO specification ball ammunition will completely penetrate a minimum of one 1/2" pine board at a distance of ten feet from the muzzle when fired underwater.
Trained personnel who use Glocks underwater know they must obey several rules:
1) use only a Glock Model 17 with amphibious spring cups (reliability issue);
2) use only 9mm FMJ subsonic, sealed primer ammo;
3) completely immerse the pistol and get *all* the air out of the barrel;
4) wear protective ear plugs, gloves, wet suit, face mask, etc.;
5) do not fire near solid objects or in enclosed spaces to prevent return
concussion.
However, any Glock -- even those not equipped with maritime spring cups -- will normally fire while submersed underwater. But doing so may generate excessive internal pressure and may cause the pistol to literally blow up. This is especially true with the use of high-pressure rounds (such as the .40 S&W/357 SIG) or hollow-point bullets.
I recall a reported incident where a Glockster on a boating holiday decided to show some friends how his Glock would fire underwater (because Tommy Lee Jones said so in the movies). He stuck his hand overboard, pulled the trigger and came back with a bunch of shredded plastic and a badly injured hand.
Another reported case was the Glockster who decided to try out his Glock 23 .40 S&W in the swimming pool after seeing pictures of Glocks being fired underwater on the web. He was totally submerged, with the gun, as he fired at a piece of wood on the bottom of his pool. The Glock did fire, the .40 S&W FMJ round left the barrel and went into the wood. The chamber also exploded and implanted shrapnel into his leg. Thinking that the water would muffle the blast, he did not wear hearing protection (the blast is actually about 4 times louder underwater). He is now mostly deaf in one ear and hears high-pitched tones most of his waking life.
As you can see, firing a pistol underwater is a *very* dangerous endeavor.
Several things could happen:
1) the firing pin may be slowed enough to not detonate the primer
(without the maritime spring cups)
2) the pistol could blow up in your hand;
3) the concussion could damage ears, eyes or internal organs;
4) the bullet may not go where you intend it to.
Even if you have the right equipment, know what you're doing and follow the rules -- the risks for underwater firing are minimized -- but not eliminated. Your pistol's barrel could be affected by water obstruction and your body by damaging concussion. By using hollow point bullets (water may cause the bullet to expand in the barrel), high pressure ammo, etc. -- you're asking for an underwater kaBoom! It you fire near solid or hard objects, the bouncing concussion can cause extensive, perhaps even fatal external/internal tissue injury. Why risk it?
Someone should write a letter to CNN!. Sounds like crying-wolf to me.
KC_Scubabunny
Guest
Just after 9/11, the Army Corp of Engineers closed scuba diving near all their dams in this area. Most notibly for Missouri divers was Dewey Shorts at Table Rock Lake were most OW check out dives are conducted by LDSs.
They had opened it back up to divers as of two weeks ago when my husband was there. He is back down there this weekend. Actually calling me in an hour or so, I wonder if they have heard of the most recent warning and made any move to limit diving this time.
The rational used to close Dewey Shorts was that if a underwater bomb was to explode the dam then it would flood and kill thousands of people in the Branson, MO area. Any of you who have ever been to Branson, MO can pass your own judgment on whether or not that is a tragic loss but the ironic thing is that they never closed the dam to traffic. A fertilizer bomb like the one that took out the OK City Federal Building in a large truck seems much more likely to me than a underwater bomb but the Army Corp of Engineers must not have seen that as a "likely threat".
I will let you know if any closure occurs this weekend as a result of this latest warning.
KC_Scubabunny
They had opened it back up to divers as of two weeks ago when my husband was there. He is back down there this weekend. Actually calling me in an hour or so, I wonder if they have heard of the most recent warning and made any move to limit diving this time.
The rational used to close Dewey Shorts was that if a underwater bomb was to explode the dam then it would flood and kill thousands of people in the Branson, MO area. Any of you who have ever been to Branson, MO can pass your own judgment on whether or not that is a tragic loss but the ironic thing is that they never closed the dam to traffic. A fertilizer bomb like the one that took out the OK City Federal Building in a large truck seems much more likely to me than a underwater bomb but the Army Corp of Engineers must not have seen that as a "likely threat".
I will let you know if any closure occurs this weekend as a result of this latest warning.
KC_Scubabunny kodiak
Guest
If it wasnt for the media we wouldnt have anything to worry about.
ara: 
ara: 
100days-a-year
Contributor
A Glock will shoot a bulllet 10' under water and penetrate what?That is such BS ,No bullet will travel that far underwater with any velocity.I and most of my spearfishing friends have had a chance to shoot a powerhead underwater.From 38 spec to 357MAX to 223 ,44Mag and 444 Marlin .None will travell further than a few feet.As far as the "pressure wave" being dangerous that's even stupider.They only way to be harmed by a gun underwater by a pressure wave is have it shot 6" from your ear.I hope who ewver wrote that on the Glock site was sacked. As far as terrorists using Scuba to conduct attacks,one need look no further than our own special forces to see that it could be a valid threat.Perhaps a 50 megaton "deterrent" planted a Mecca and timed to go off the next time we get any terrorist attacks would convince all those peace-loving Saudis to police thier vermin a little better.
Scubaroo
Contributor
100days-a-year,
How long is the "barrel" on a powerhead? I've never physically handled one, but it's possible that the projectiles aren't reaching their maximum potential velocity being fired from a powerhead, as a projectile only accelerates as long as it is contained in a barrel while propellant is burning to produce gas expansion. If the bullets are popping out the end of a 2" tube, they'll be going a lot slower than if they came out of a 5" or 6" glock barrel, so it is possible that the figures stated are correct. This is just conjecture however. I know from years of assisting my father handload ammunition for hunting and target use that there are "sweet" loads for particular barrel lengths, eg a 22" versus a 24" barrel cannot necessarily achieve the same FPS for the same load of powder, so it makes sense that a powerhead cannot achieve the same max velocities of a pistol.
How long is the "barrel" on a powerhead? I've never physically handled one, but it's possible that the projectiles aren't reaching their maximum potential velocity being fired from a powerhead, as a projectile only accelerates as long as it is contained in a barrel while propellant is burning to produce gas expansion. If the bullets are popping out the end of a 2" tube, they'll be going a lot slower than if they came out of a 5" or 6" glock barrel, so it is possible that the figures stated are correct. This is just conjecture however. I know from years of assisting my father handload ammunition for hunting and target use that there are "sweet" loads for particular barrel lengths, eg a 22" versus a 24" barrel cannot necessarily achieve the same FPS for the same load of powder, so it makes sense that a powerhead cannot achieve the same max velocities of a pistol.
Scubaroo
Contributor
kodiak
Guest
I think that an attack from scuba divers would be kind of far out there, for any populated areas, it would take boats and alot of equipment that would be some what noticable. And there are alot of eyes and ears out there paying attention to whats going on on our shores. I dont beleive that it is anything new because of 9/11 either.
100days-a-year
Contributor
Bengiddens,not even 2".I'll give you a hint tho .Water is 800 times denser than air so assuming a coeficient of drag corresponds in a linear fashion to density(it doesnt)A bullet would have to have sufficient velocity at 8000' to penetrate this pine board....not very likely with a 9mm or any other pistol ammo.I could do the actual math but it'd be a drag.My annecdotal evidence is this less that 5' for pistol and still less than 10' for rifle ammo.Another good example would be distance travelled in a gelatin block which has a more similar density to water.I believe thier intent would be much more sinister than just popping out of the water with guns blazing tho.
Similar threads
