Talk:Firearm malfunction

Very poorly written page

Many of the topics here are incomplete.Digitallymade (talk) 02:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

The first topic is incomplete. There is virtually no mention of the many catastrophic failures that occur such as cross cylinder ignition, bullet setback (explosion of chamber), barrel splitting, primer failure, primer setback, bullet obturation, flame cutting, primer piercing etc. etc.. Negligent discharge is NOT a firearm failure, it's a manipulation failure. Blowing a gun sky high and taking off fingers or a hand due to bullet setback is ALSO not a firearm failure, it's negligent operation. At least one other page covers many of these issues in depth and well, but this page does not. Digitallymade (talk) 02:27, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

The structure of this page makes editing difficult and time consuming with a high probability of error.

This page uses segments from other pages and then rewords them. A better method would be to use section referral which would eliminate the duplications. I would NOT both to edit this page (although I did add a couple of refrences, because of the difficulty of establishing a coherent path in the revelation of data. This page is incomplete in much of it's scope. It is not ordered in a coherent fashion. Because of it's reliance on other pages it creates a high probability of conflicting concepts from one page to another.

It is very incomplete, inconsistent, and inaccurate. I won't touch it other than marking up areas that need improvement, which is all of it and very likely, ever associated page. Digitallymade (talk) 14:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Misuse of {{incomplete}} tag

In the "Hang fire" section, the {{incomplete}} tag is not entirely appropriate, because Wikipedia is not an instruction manual or how-to guide. Any objections if I remove it? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 21:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I have removed the tag, though I may not have made clear that some of the things it asked for are already in the article (so more rewriting may be needed). --SoledadKabocha (talk) 00:00, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Runaway fire?

I've heard of a malfunction specific to firearms capable of fully-automatic operation, called a "runaway" or "runaway fire". Basically, a fully-automatic firearm fails to stop firing after the trigger is released-- say, a soldier has an assault rifle set on full auto. He fires about ten rounds at the target in an extended burst. When he lets go of the trigger, by no fault of his trigger discipline, the gun fires about 7 more rounds after his finger's all the way off the trigger.

What exactly *causes* this malfunction could be any number of things-- a gunked-up trigger group, a malfunctioning sear, an overheated chamber causing cook-off, or a chain reaction of other malfunctions.

What I'm asking, mostly, is "Should runaway fire be included as a section in this article?" -Xterra1 20:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

The scope of the article appears to be "causes other than user error". (i.e. cooking off could be user error - not allowing it to cool, other runaways could be due to poor maintenance). Although I suppose it could be argued that there are some weapons prone to runaways by bad design or manufacture. The real test is: do reliable sources consider runaways to be malfunctions, if so, include, with sources. (Hohum ^@) 22:38, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

You're right, I should probably have considered that. Still, doesn't hurt to hit up the community for advice and possible consensus. -Xterra1 19:06, 27 June 2019 (UTC)