SCUBA w/the Sharks

BarrySDCA · October 7, 2000, 10:48 AM

I SCUBA dive in an area where there are known to be sharks. Does anyone know of a firearm that will work underwater? Does one exist?

Thank you

Paul B. · October 7, 2000, 12:19 PM

Barry. I'm not sure what they call them, bangsticks, I think. You use is with a shotgun shell and hit the shark with it in the head and the shotshell does the rest.
I sawe on in use in a documentary on sharks. Seemed pretty effective to me.
Paul B.

Destructo6 · October 7, 2000, 01:45 PM

Aren't "Bangsticks" NFA items, Any Other Weapon to be exact?

Gregg · October 7, 2000, 02:10 PM

I have read a post elsewhere that claims most firearms will fire under water. The following is from the Glockmeister FAQ: "Q: Can a Glock be fired under water?
A: A specially modified Glock 17 is tested for underwater firing. It is never recommended that you try to fire your Glock under water - the preparation for that task involves a modified gun, special ammo and training."

And I would bet a very good set of hearing protection!

Also from Glockmeister: "Stock Glock factory Maritime Spring Cups are brand new original Glock parts. The maritime spring cups are designed to allow the Glock to be fired under water. We are selling these as a novelty item - we do not recommend that the Glock be fired under water without proper factory training. Firing the Glock under water without proper training can lead to personal injury and damage to the gun. These are guaranteed to be Glock factory original parts." And "These fit all models, but all models are not designed to be fired under water."

I forgot to mention that I have seen photos (don't remember where) posted on the net of someone firing a Glock under water BUT the guy pulling the trigger kept his head out of the water!

[This message has been edited by Gregg (edited October 07, 2000).]

JMack · October 7, 2000, 02:31 PM

I second the above post refering the Glock 17 for underwater shooting, it can be converted to shoot safely with certain spring cups and what not.

Checl out the following link, the guys name is John Leveron and he does some underwater shooting with his G17, he has a ton of info on his page dedicated to shooting the G17 underwater.
http://glock.missouri.edu/glock/glock1.shtml

Good luck man.
~Jason

greg c · October 7, 2000, 02:41 PM

The article mentions that any other pistol besides the 17 generates too much pressure to be fired underwater- why would this be the case in, say, and G19? It would be my CONJECTURE that the pressure generated in this piece would be similar to that of the 17.

LawDog · October 7, 2000, 03:40 PM

Remember that when you're firing a weapon underwater, you're adding the mass of the water in the barrel to the mass of the bullet.

In other words, instead of firing a 124 grain JHP, you're firing a 224 grain JHP...the weight of the bullet (124) plus the weight of the water (100) with the same amount of powder and the same barrel length. (Please note that I am only guessing about the weight of the water.)

This is what leads to your pressure problems, not the design of the pistol.

LawDog

ether · October 7, 2000, 04:57 PM

But wouldn't the water's added pressure outside the bore (surrounding the barrel and the rest of the gun) provide for some equilibrium in this situation? It seems as though it would be much more dangerous to fire the gun when only the barrel was full of water while the rest of the gun was dry. The same holds true for the atmosphere. Gravity and the weight of the air in our atmosphere basically holds our bodies together. We'd explode in a vacuum.

[This message has been edited by ether (edited October 07, 2000).]

C.R.Sam · October 7, 2000, 05:16 PM

Lawdawg got it. Actualy underwater is even worse than full of water but not submerged.

Other than the noise factor I don't think much of tryin to stop a shark with a handgun underwater. Takes very little water to bring bullets to a full stop.

Sam...

greg c · October 7, 2000, 05:20 PM

So wouldn't a G19 have *less* pressure due to less barrel length and hence less water weight?

Libertarian · October 7, 2000, 05:43 PM

I have carried a bang stick when diving in the Gulf of Mexico. The dive shop had no problems with it except to make sure I knew how to use it. One of the sticks was a 410 and the other a .44 magnum. Both were dischaged by pressing it against the target and releasing the striker. The pressure was like a 1911's backstrap safety, holding the firing mechanism from moving unless engaged. (un)fortunately I never had the opporrtunity to use either.

It would have been nice to have had one in Saudi when we went diving in the Red Sea where Tigersharks are plentiful and not the least bit shy. But along with nearly every other right, anything that goes bang is forbidden in that "enlightened" country unless you are a Royal.

Russell92 · October 7, 2000, 05:55 PM

get a Glock 17 with a Maritime spring cup on it and it will work underwater. do not use JHP ammo underwater though. the best ammo is probably really fast FMJ.

dZ · October 7, 2000, 08:10 PM

a pistol fired under water will only have ~15 feet of range, and not much velocity.
Me doubts any scuba diver is going to be shooting any sharks with a pistol.

there is an HK underwater pistol on www.HKpro.com but i think thats for pinking mammals.

if you bangstick a shark, doesn't that attract other sharks?
http://www.beco-products.com/about_beco.htm

i'll take mine in 50bmg! http://www.beco-products.com/images/...t/MVC-230X.JPG
http://discountdivers.com/fx/gary.bandstick.html

dZ

dZ · October 7, 2000, 08:24 PM

http://www.HKpro.com/peleven.htm

DougB · October 8, 2000, 03:59 AM

I also scuba dive. I've seen bangsticks in various calibers advertised in a scuba magazine within the past couple of years. I think it was in one of the free "California Diving" newsprint magazines they give away in dive shops, but I'm not positive. I didn't see any indication that they were in any way restricted.

I don't think bangsticks get much press because: (1) most major scuba magazines are too "environmentally concious" and "enlightened" to condone harming sea animals (even if they are about to eat you), and (2) Anything that gives the impression that sharks (or anything else) might harm divers may scare off potential customers for all the dive equipment, travel, and training that are the bread and butter of these publications.

That said, I don't really think sharks pose much of a danger to divers, and on the very rare occassions when they do attack, I understand they usually hit once, very fast, out of nowhere. People survive attacks because the sharks often don't come back after they figure out you weren't a seal. I'm not sure how useful a bangstick would be unless you are baiting sharks or something. But it would be comforting at times.

I've also heard that the Glocks can be adapted for this. And even if the range is only a few feet, it might beat a bangstick - which requires contact, and gives you one shot. I read somewhere of a diver off northern California who carried a Glock diving.

Doug

BigMike · October 8, 2000, 10:41 AM

I think DougB got it right. I got certified as a NAUI Open Water 1 while living in Washington(Puget Sound). I learned about bang sticks, but the instructors who taught our group (former Navy divers, no SEALS) said that most sharkes don't bother you. Further, they said that if a shark does approach you they do it slowly and it is easy to punch them on the snout. They thought bangsticks were unnecessary and dangerous, and anything you would need a bangstick for is a drop in the bucket compared to ALL THE OTHER potential problems that would most likely happen to you. If you run into a Great While or a Tiger Shark, well then yer just gonna get munched regardless of a .44 mag bangstick

Mike

VictorLouis · October 8, 2000, 06:17 PM

The latest in this subject was just recently used at the Games in Sydney harbor. It is a module that secures to your air bottle(s), and a hand-held remote conncected with a thick cable to the module. When the remote button is pressed, the module sends out a burst of electrical current, which all sharks are apparently hyper-sensitive to.

The sharks do an instant 180, even when enticed by a diver holding onto a large, bloody piece of fish! I also saw this unit on "Real TV"(?), where it was demo'ed against the Great
White. It diverted them just the same as the littl guys that occupy the harbor where the swimmers competed. Alas, the cost and availability of the unit was not discussed on either program.

dZ · October 8, 2000, 10:24 PM

i have wondered about color as a deterent,
most sea creatures do not bother sea snakes

yellow & red striped neoprene?

dZ

DougB · October 9, 2000, 03:33 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dZ:
i have wondered about color as a deterent,
most sea creatures do not bother sea snakes

yellow & red striped neoprene?

dZ[/quote]

Actually, I think there is some evidence that yellow ATTRACTS sharks. I've seen yellow dive equipment referred to as "yum yum yellow" (implying that it might invite shark bites).

Doug

October 7, 2000, 10:48 AM	#1
BarrySDCA Senior Member Join Date: September 3, 2000 Posts: 175	I SCUBA dive in an area where there are known to be sharks. Does anyone know of a firearm that will work underwater? Does one exist? Thank you

October 7, 2000, 12:19 PM	#2
Paul B. Senior Member Join Date: March 28, 1999 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 3,802	Barry. I'm not sure what they call them, bangsticks, I think. You use is with a shotgun shell and hit the shark with it in the head and the shotshell does the rest. I sawe on in use in a documentary on sharks. Seemed pretty effective to me. Paul B.

October 7, 2000, 01:45 PM	#3
Destructo6 Senior Member Join Date: March 18, 1999 Location: Nogales, AZ USA Posts: 4,001	Aren't "Bangsticks" NFA items, Any Other Weapon to be exact?

October 7, 2000, 02:10 PM	#4
Gregg Member Join Date: February 12, 2000 Posts: 94	I have read a post elsewhere that claims most firearms will fire under water. The following is from the Glockmeister FAQ: "Q: Can a Glock be fired under water? A: A specially modified Glock 17 is tested for underwater firing. It is never recommended that you try to fire your Glock under water - the preparation for that task involves a modified gun, special ammo and training." And I would bet a very good set of hearing protection! Also from Glockmeister: "Stock Glock factory Maritime Spring Cups are brand new original Glock parts. The maritime spring cups are designed to allow the Glock to be fired under water. We are selling these as a novelty item - we do not recommend that the Glock be fired under water without proper factory training. Firing the Glock under water without proper training can lead to personal injury and damage to the gun. These are guaranteed to be Glock factory original parts." And "These fit all models, but all models are not designed to be fired under water." I forgot to mention that I have seen photos (don't remember where) posted on the net of someone firing a Glock under water BUT the guy pulling the trigger kept his head out of the water! [This message has been edited by Gregg (edited October 07, 2000).]

October 7, 2000, 02:31 PM	#5
JMack Senior Member Join Date: August 15, 2000 Posts: 250	I second the above post refering the Glock 17 for underwater shooting, it can be converted to shoot safely with certain spring cups and what not. Checl out the following link, the guys name is John Leveron and he does some underwater shooting with his G17, he has a ton of info on his page dedicated to shooting the G17 underwater. http://glock.missouri.edu/glock/glock1.shtml Good luck man. ~Jason

October 7, 2000, 02:41 PM	#6
greg c Senior Member Join Date: May 23, 2000 Location: Phoenix Az Posts: 113	The article mentions that any other pistol besides the 17 generates too much pressure to be fired underwater- why would this be the case in, say, and G19? It would be my CONJECTURE that the pressure generated in this piece would be similar to that of the 17.

October 7, 2000, 03:40 PM	#7
LawDog Staff Emeritus Join Date: September 15, 1999 Location: Where am I going? Why am I in this handbasket? Posts: 4,194	Remember that when you're firing a weapon underwater, you're adding the mass of the water in the barrel to the mass of the bullet. In other words, instead of firing a 124 grain JHP, you're firing a 224 grain JHP...the weight of the bullet (124) plus the weight of the water (100) with the same amount of powder and the same barrel length. (Please note that I am only guessing about the weight of the water.) This is what leads to your pressure problems, not the design of the pistol. LawDog

October 7, 2000, 04:57 PM	#8
ether Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 2000 Posts: 169	But wouldn't the water's added pressure outside the bore (surrounding the barrel and the rest of the gun) provide for some equilibrium in this situation? It seems as though it would be much more dangerous to fire the gun when only the barrel was full of water while the rest of the gun was dry. The same holds true for the atmosphere. Gravity and the weight of the air in our atmosphere basically holds our bodies together. We'd explode in a vacuum. [This message has been edited by ether (edited October 07, 2000).]

October 7, 2000, 05:16 PM	#9
C.R.Sam Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 1999 Location: Dewey, AZ Posts: 12,858	Lawdawg got it. Actualy underwater is even worse than full of water but not submerged. Other than the noise factor I don't think much of tryin to stop a shark with a handgun underwater. Takes very little water to bring bullets to a full stop. Sam...

October 7, 2000, 05:20 PM	#10
greg c Senior Member Join Date: May 23, 2000 Location: Phoenix Az Posts: 113	So wouldn't a G19 have less pressure due to less barrel length and hence less water weight?

October 7, 2000, 05:43 PM	#11
Libertarian Senior Member Join Date: October 26, 1999 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 2,117	I have carried a bang stick when diving in the Gulf of Mexico. The dive shop had no problems with it except to make sure I knew how to use it. One of the sticks was a 410 and the other a .44 magnum. Both were dischaged by pressing it against the target and releasing the striker. The pressure was like a 1911's backstrap safety, holding the firing mechanism from moving unless engaged. (un)fortunately I never had the opporrtunity to use either. It would have been nice to have had one in Saudi when we went diving in the Red Sea where Tigersharks are plentiful and not the least bit shy. But along with nearly every other right, anything that goes bang is forbidden in that "enlightened" country unless you are a Royal.

October 7, 2000, 05:55 PM	#12
Russell92 Senior Member Join Date: January 29, 2000 Posts: 646	get a Glock 17 with a Maritime spring cup on it and it will work underwater. do not use JHP ammo underwater though. the best ammo is probably really fast FMJ.

October 7, 2000, 08:10 PM	#13
dZ Senior Member Join Date: May 31, 1999 Location: Exiled, Fetid Swamp, DC Posts: 7,548	a pistol fired under water will only have ~15 feet of range, and not much velocity. Me doubts any scuba diver is going to be shooting any sharks with a pistol. there is an HK underwater pistol on www.HKpro.com but i think thats for pinking mammals. if you bangstick a shark, doesn't that attract other sharks? http://www.beco-products.com/about_beco.htm i'll take mine in 50bmg! http://www.beco-products.com/images/...t/MVC-230X.JPG http://discountdivers.com/fx/gary.bandstick.html dZ

October 7, 2000, 08:24 PM	#14
dZ Senior Member Join Date: May 31, 1999 Location: Exiled, Fetid Swamp, DC Posts: 7,548	http://www.HKpro.com/peleven.htm

October 8, 2000, 03:59 AM	#15
DougB Senior Member Join Date: July 2, 1999 Posts: 838	I also scuba dive. I've seen bangsticks in various calibers advertised in a scuba magazine within the past couple of years. I think it was in one of the free "California Diving" newsprint magazines they give away in dive shops, but I'm not positive. I didn't see any indication that they were in any way restricted. I don't think bangsticks get much press because: (1) most major scuba magazines are too "environmentally concious" and "enlightened" to condone harming sea animals (even if they are about to eat you), and (2) Anything that gives the impression that sharks (or anything else) might harm divers may scare off potential customers for all the dive equipment, travel, and training that are the bread and butter of these publications. That said, I don't really think sharks pose much of a danger to divers, and on the very rare occassions when they do attack, I understand they usually hit once, very fast, out of nowhere. People survive attacks because the sharks often don't come back after they figure out you weren't a seal. I'm not sure how useful a bangstick would be unless you are baiting sharks or something. But it would be comforting at times. I've also heard that the Glocks can be adapted for this. And even if the range is only a few feet, it might beat a bangstick - which requires contact, and gives you one shot. I read somewhere of a diver off northern California who carried a Glock diving. Doug

October 8, 2000, 10:41 AM	#16
BigMike Senior Member Join Date: October 16, 1999 Location: North Central/Panhandle Florid Posts: 569	I think DougB got it right. I got certified as a NAUI Open Water 1 while living in Washington(Puget Sound). I learned about bang sticks, but the instructors who taught our group (former Navy divers, no SEALS) said that most sharkes don't bother you. Further, they said that if a shark does approach you they do it slowly and it is easy to punch them on the snout. They thought bangsticks were unnecessary and dangerous, and anything you would need a bangstick for is a drop in the bucket compared to ALL THE OTHER potential problems that would most likely happen to you. If you run into a Great While or a Tiger Shark, well then yer just gonna get munched regardless of a .44 mag bangstick Mike

October 8, 2000, 06:17 PM	#17
VictorLouis Senior Member Join Date: January 12, 2000 Location: Arizona Posts: 2,302	The latest in this subject was just recently used at the Games in Sydney harbor. It is a module that secures to your air bottle(s), and a hand-held remote conncected with a thick cable to the module. When the remote button is pressed, the module sends out a burst of electrical current, which all sharks are apparently hyper-sensitive to. The sharks do an instant 180, even when enticed by a diver holding onto a large, bloody piece of fish! I also saw this unit on "Real TV"(?), where it was demo'ed against the Great White. It diverted them just the same as the littl guys that occupy the harbor where the swimmers competed. Alas, the cost and availability of the unit was not discussed on either program.

October 8, 2000, 10:24 PM	#18
dZ Senior Member Join Date: May 31, 1999 Location: Exiled, Fetid Swamp, DC Posts: 7,548	i have wondered about color as a deterent, most sea creatures do not bother sea snakes yellow & red striped neoprene? dZ

October 9, 2000, 03:33 AM	#19
DougB Senior Member Join Date: July 2, 1999 Posts: 838	<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dZ: i have wondered about color as a deterent, most sea creatures do not bother sea snakes yellow & red striped neoprene? dZ[/quote] Actually, I think there is some evidence that yellow ATTRACTS sharks. I've seen yellow dive equipment referred to as "yum yum yellow" (implying that it might invite shark bites). Doug