Blade Runner Blaster Functionality?

I think it's generally accepted that it's a form of revolver. Most reproductions, licensed or otherwise, still use this as a big feature of it. One of the Tomenosuke issues comes with rounds that you can put in the cylinder that swings out. (most people seem to use that little LED rail if they have difficulty with this).

As per the lack of ejector rod, gravity and a couple good shakes. ;)
 
I know it pedantic, but since we've never seen how the gun actually reloads on screen we're left with some options as far as cannon is concerned. Don't get me wrong I like the idea of a futuristic wheel gun. And with the release of 2049, and the number of times K fires without reloading I think there's room for a good old fashioned semantic debate. Personally I think it could be some high capacity revolver like the smith wesson 627 (8 shot), loaded with something capable of putting down a rouge combat model.
 
I think is a revolver because the film is about a detective cop in the scif noir retro style, so it really must be a revolver to suit the character and tone of the film.
It was updating the trusty 1930's detectives revolver to look futuristic but still recognizable. And this also provides a necessary familiar anchor to a film that was a brave mashup of genres for the time. The prop itself is a mashup. It really mirrors the film itself so well.
 
Since the gun is, as I think most of us believe, a rail gun, does it need traditional propellant? That is to say, if we're launching it with magnets, does it need gun powder? I suppose not, and that said, what if there's more than one round in a cartridge? In a neat little line, the firing pin strikes the back, but instead of igniting a propellant, it pushes all rounds forward one position, like croquet.


(drawing not to scale)

But that doesn't explain the muzzle flash, or how the firing pin can push any rounds past the first one.


Hmmm.


Maybe there's some kind of gas behind the last one? But then it all gets used up on that first round. :confused




Maybe there's a powerful blasting cap that's automatically loaded onto the striker (again, by hidden interior features), just powerful enough to push the sudden expansion of gases into the cartridge, moving the rounds forward one position, enough to get pulled and thrown by the magnets. AND, you refill those blasting caps by opening and pulling back the bolt! (maybe, I'll keep thinking about the bolt)
 
I think it's generally accepted that it's a form of revolver. Most reproductions, licensed or otherwise, still use this as a big feature of it.
No, that's your opinion - the revolver aspect is a feature of the PROP, and how it was constructed... and that is what Tomenosuke (and others) have been reproducing - the PROP and the manner in which it was put together. It doesn't automatically mean that's how the gun operates within the canon of the film - as it has been said repeatedly, we never see how it operates as a firearm (other than going off when the trigger is pulled), or how it's reloaded, etc.

By your logic, does that mean that Han Solo's Star Wars blaster loads bullets at the top of the internal magazine via a stripper clip because it's made from a Broomhandle Mauser? No... the PROP was made from a Broomhandle Mauser - in the canon of the film it's a blaster that fires laser bolts. We never see how it works, or how - or even - if it gets reloaded.

One of the Tomenosuke issues comes with rounds that you can put in the cylinder that swings out
ALL of the Tomenosukes (with the exception of the rubber stunt) came with rounds for the revolver cylinder... because they are all replicas of the PROP.
 
Like with most movie productions, I seriously doubt functionality was ever considered beyond making it fire. The trigger assembly as well as the magazine are also from the Steyr-Mannlicher 222 as shown below;
steyr-jagd-midunder.jpg8d831e207de38cadbf8ffea3154b2329.jpgSteyr-Mannlicher trigger assembly 2.jpgSteyr-Mannlicher trigger assemblyjpg.jpgSteyr-Mannlicher magazine.jpgSteyr-Mannlicher magazine 2.jpg

The rifle magazine would not be a reasonable one for Deckard's blaster as the round would enter near the end of the barrel.

As for the function of the bolt, Offworld did this illustration of their idea if the inner workings of the blaster;
bldr_pkd_poster_sm.jpg

I suppose the only thing to be said is that no one is really wrong but no one is really right as there is no explanation fro the makers of the prop. You can decide for yourself how the blaster works.
 
One of the early ideas for FX was it would sort of produce a negative muzzle flash, like an explosion of darkness instead of explosion of light implying something exotic but they abandoned that.
 
As per the lack of ejector rod, gravity and a couple good shakes. ;)
If you actually shoot revolvers you'd know that isn't always gonna happen. Again, fired cases expand in the chamber and soot from using conventional propellants can cause them to stick which is why ejector rods were even invented.
 
One of the early ideas for FX was it would sort of produce a negative muzzle flash, like an explosion of darkness instead of explosion of light implying something exotic but they abandoned that.
I'd like to think that the text "222 Rem." on the bottom of the magazine refers to rem - a unit of absorbed radiation.
In other words, it would be some kind of hybrid between a ray-gun and a slug-thrower.

Notice also that when Deckard attempts to shoot Batty, the projectile causes an explosion: https://youtu.be/zCucXQ3IASs?t=1m7s
 
Dad doesn't like handguns, so we were never taught on them, so I did not know that bit about the expansion. It makes sense though.

I like the idea of the "negative muzzle flash," and can see where it could go wrong, and their not wanting to risk it.
 
I we're counting rounds fired without reloading I think we're gonna have a bad time. There are about zero movies that show realistic ammo usage.
 
Case expansion happens to all brass cased ammunition, not just revolvers.
As to the "negative flash", I believe that only applied to the original concept art "black hole gun". Ditched for impracticality and lackluster SFX, they went with some energy based weapon instead and why target impacts are way more dramatic that regular old bullets and lacks recoil.
 
I we're counting rounds fired without reloading I think we're gonna have a bad time. There are about zero movies that show realistic ammo usage.
I can name a few. From old westerns from the 50s to recent action flicks. But more often than not they pay more attention to weapons with a lower capacity. Modern handguns hold so many you can easily lose count even on a real one.
 
One of the early ideas for FX was it would sort of produce a negative muzzle flash, like an explosion of darkness instead of explosion of light implying something exotic but they abandoned that.

They did it during the Holden/Leon Voight-Kamff scene. Leon was supposed to have smuggled in a off-world backup gun. I think they were calling it a "black hole" gun.
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top