Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Dumori Jun 5 2008, 08:41 PM

The AK 97 would have 1st been made in 1997 to fir with all other numberings of the rifles or be a bad name for a gun as the AK-105 is already out in the world. What number would the gun have?

links for those unaware of this oversight.
http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/history.html
http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models.html

This little "over site" thing makes the AK 97 seem like a old gun that some how appeared after the rest.

There is the AEK-971
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEK-971

but being close to 100 years old by the time of sr4 I still dont think that this is the right gun. Plus the fact less that 100 where made.

Posted by: Chrysalis Jun 5 2008, 08:44 PM

Most of the guns in Shadowrun are really old guns with bits of plastic glued on to them to look like new guns. AK-97 seemed like a better bet than calling it an AK-47. Same assault rifle just a different name.

Posted by: Jackstand Jun 5 2008, 08:46 PM

The AK-97 probably is just that. An old gun. It's the same design that's been in production for seventy years. Since the Shadowrun timeline diverged with our own in 1989, it's safe to assume that the AK-105, as far as the world of Shadowrun is concerned, never existed.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 5 2008, 08:49 PM

Much like 80s movie props!

Posted by: Ed_209a Jun 5 2008, 08:51 PM

"Hmm, AK-47, our game takes place in 2050, 47+50=97, voila, instant technology!"
-SR1 game designers, long, long ago, far, far, away.


I think of the AK97 as a AK105 redesigned for better production equipment, and designed to be smartgun ready. I have no idea where a weapon probably designed in the 2040s gets the number 97. Maybe it is the 97th design, not the year it was released?

Posted by: Ed_209a Jun 5 2008, 08:51 PM

Mumbles about stupid double posts....

Posted by: Dumori Jun 5 2008, 08:58 PM

Even with that effect the fact remanes that similar guns basically the same thing but light and stronger have been made are now in the 10X series but there was in wikipedia under the name but I can get more info.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 5 2008, 09:00 PM

well if its form the 2040s make it the 87 and you can say it was produced in 2047. an just called the AK-10Xs a glitch in the naming.

Posted by: CanRay Jun 5 2008, 11:59 PM

I just explain that the AK-97 is the AKM (Modernized AK-47) that is designed to use Caseless Ammo.

Done.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 6 2008, 12:13 AM

The 97 does stand for 1997, the year of the weapon's release. It isn't an AK-74M, but is instead a new weapon released in 1997. The AK-101 can't possibly exist since it is chambered in 5.56mm NATO and there is no way in hell that the USSR would use a NATO standard cartridge.

Posted by: Earlydawn Jun 6 2008, 01:41 AM

Caseless assault rifles? In my Shadowrun?


BOO!

Posted by: CanRay Jun 6 2008, 02:04 AM

Thought all the weapons had gone to Caseless Rounds, save for older weapons.

Am I wrong?

Posted by: Earlydawn Jun 6 2008, 02:19 AM

I believe by RAW, you can choose cased / caseless for any weapon in the book.

[Edit: Page 306, under firearms in your hymnal.]

Posted by: Fortune Jun 6 2008, 04:18 AM

Not quite ...

Posted by: Earlydawn Jun 6 2008, 05:00 AM

Seeing as there are no specifications, how else could you rule it?

Posted by: reepneep Jun 6 2008, 05:20 AM

Unlike in previous models, the number on the AK100 series guns doesn't refer to years, its simply a model number. IIRC the AEK971 is a design that the Russian government is toying around with as a possible replacement for the disappointing AN94.

*edit* Those links also missed the AK107 & 108. They are the same basic design as the rest of the 100 series with the addition of an auto-adjusting weight. */edit*

If you don't like the name, you could just call it the AK132 or something like that.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 6 2008, 10:46 AM

I know they missed the 107 & 108 but if you browse a bit more they are easy to find out about. As the USSR never broke up the AK97 could have been made. Also the 10X series has a good number of versions firing none NATO rounds such as 5.45x39mm and 7.62x39mm.

Posted by: CanRay Jun 6 2008, 02:02 PM

OK, I'll figure out how the Caseless/Cased Rounds thing is going to work in my game.

Most likely, it's easier to get your hands on Cased Rounds, which would be "Civilian" rounds, but Caseless, while harder to get, comes in all those fancy types that Shadowrunners love. Not to mention no brass, less ballistics.

But it does help to be able to walk into Bob's Booze and Bullets to pick up some Synthvodka and a brick of .45 ACP.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 6 2008, 05:21 PM

I always ignored the casless rounds thing in SR and just had all weapons be cased like today. The whole entire point of caseless weapons was supposed to be a higher rate of fire, and reducing the possibility that smutz would get into the chamber since the chamber would be closed. Since this isn't reflected in SR3 there's really no reason to say any given weapon is caseless.

Now, if someone wanted to overhaul the firearms rules and worked out different reliability and ROF for caseless weapons, that would be fine. Then we could have our bullets embedded in propellant blocks, which we could finger while Bangles songs play in the background.

Posted by: Kliko Jun 6 2008, 05:25 PM

in sr3 caseless rounds would take less space increasing clip-capacity with x%... They were also an y% more expensive...

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 6 2008, 05:27 PM

Here's a nice background document for people who wanna learn about caseless weapons: http://www.remtek.com/arms/hk/mil/g11/caseless.htm

It always strikes me as kind of poignant how back in the 80s they thought everyone would switch to caseless, before their hopes and dreams got QWERTY'd. When I read Twilight rules about how characters could use G11s in that game which was supposed to have caught on by that time a little tear trickles down the outside of my face.

Posted by: Zaranthan Jun 6 2008, 09:15 PM

I always used them for the fact that they wouldn't leave cases behind on a run. Someone picks up my cases from one crime scene and links them to cases found at another scene, and suddenly my world just got a lot more dangerous.

Posted by: vladski Jun 6 2008, 09:27 PM

Umm, aren't you still gonna be screwed by ballistic evidence on the bullet itself?

Vlad

Posted by: Faelan Jun 6 2008, 09:29 PM

Caseless ammo makes an appearance everytime a new advanced weapons project comes out and the military want to reduce weight or rather increase payload. Looks like it loses again this time it will be to cased telescoped ammunition, along with extensive use of composite materials reducing the weight of the gun.
http://www.aaicorp.com/New/Advancedprograms/html/lighweight_small_arms_technolo.html

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 6 2008, 10:30 PM

Today it occurred to me that if we wanted to make a sensible caseless weapon in terms of the rules, we could say that the Ruger Thunderbolt is caseless.

That's why there's no recoil even though the first burst is apparently akin to a burst of 10mm magnum rounds, but why the recoil gets horrendous with the second burst. Because the rounds are flying out so fast and caselessly that the first three bullets leave the barrel before recoil can really take much of a toll on accuracy.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jun 6 2008, 10:54 PM

Guys, just hark back to 1st ed. It came out in the late 80's. There was no AK97 then, they were just trying to make the ol' Kalishnikov sound modern.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 6 2008, 10:58 PM

That may be true but did they then expect the 97 to be 50+ years old as isn't 1st in 2053 thus making the ak97 56 years old.

Thinking about it that arounf how old the 47 is now so thats ok but in 2071 it is 74 years old.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jun 6 2008, 11:01 PM

I think most people still call thecurrent guns AK-47's

Posted by: Dumori Jun 6 2008, 11:06 PM

Meh being a bit of a Russian weapon nut this fact annoys me for no good reason. I my game it will be the 110/120X make some sense to me people may call it the 97 as the diffresce are minimal but just to keep up with current gun tech.

Posted by: Link Jun 7 2008, 02:48 AM

It lives on in SR (2050 edition)

Posted by: psychophipps Jun 7 2008, 03:50 AM

One thing to keep in mind is that caseless ammo went the way of the do-do as of the collapse of the Soviet Union. The only weapon seriously considered for adoption was the H&K G11 and that idea went out the window when Germany suddenly had a tore up from the floor up eastern half to support. There was a caseless hunting rifle that was made for a bit and it's been discontinued due to lack of interest. I haven't heard anything new about caseless weapons for a quite a while now.
The main reasons for not going caseless are pretty daunting for any military or paramilitary group. You'd have to buy all new weapons and ammunition from specific manufacturers to start. To call this process "expensive" is putting it mildly. Not only do you need the weapons themselves but you need all the replacement parts, guaranteed resupply of these parts, armory courses, guaranteed resupply of ammunition, familiarity training courses, etc, etc...
The cased ammunition is good stuff, really. Every bullet is a self-contained unit. It's largely waterproof, weather resistant, will discharge in a wide variety of conditions and there are a good many manufacturers that do now, or can in short order, make the ammunition you need depending on how standard you want you caliber to be. Even introducing new loads isn't overly hard, as evidenced by the amount of 6.8 SPC and .45 GAP cartridges available in a relatively short period.

Posted by: Faelan Jun 7 2008, 04:47 AM

Check my last post. The US Military was looking at caseless fairly recently. It has been dropped because the developer feels it is a high risk venture. In other words materials technology is not quite there yet to make it affordable. Give it another 10-15 years.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 7 2008, 05:12 AM

The big problem with caseless is that it is fragile compared to cased ammunition. Aside from the issue of cookoff due to high barrel heat, which can be mitigated with some effort, caseless ammo is prone to breaking up under stress and is vulnerable to extremes of humidity.

Posted by: Earlydawn Jun 7 2008, 10:48 AM

Caseless would be pretty scary if it ever hit the civilian market, black or not. Can't imagine the field day homicide would have with no matching slug / casing pair. It's all well and good to say they'd be restricted to the defense sector, but there was a news report of FN Five-seveNs hitting the Mexican black market in bulk and getting used on cops. Showed 'em packed up in the foam-lined individual cases from FN and everything.

Posted by: CanRay Jun 7 2008, 11:03 AM

All you need is one blackmailed (Or bribed, or disgruntled) Quartermaster, and the MilSpec stuff will hit the black market!

Posted by: Zaranthan Jun 7 2008, 11:24 AM

How much ballistic evidence do ExEx rounds leave behind?

Posted by: Naysayer Jun 7 2008, 01:00 PM

If you want to be CSI-entific about it, you could say that every manufacturer adds a specific compound to their explosive rounds to make their rounds traceable and residues of which can be picked up by advanced forensic chem-sniffers in combination with hip contemporary music. All the lab-guy then has to do is determine the caliber based on the size of the wound, cross-check with your alibi with relevant botanic data based on specific climate conditions at the crime-scene, put on his trusty RayBans and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWS7c21jOnI

Posted by: CanRay Jun 7 2008, 03:20 PM

Along with their Insta-Matic DNA machines!

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 7 2008, 04:04 PM

Matching casings is already a crapshoot. Toolmarks left by firearms are neither unique nor consistent so the probabilities of both false positives and false negatives are high enough to give pause to a random match. The same is true with matching bullets, though CSI investigators are unlikely to tell you so. All you have to do is clean your gun between shootings and rifling matching becomes impossible even if a a sufficiently intact bullet can be found.

The only real loss here is that loose casings can't be used to determine the shooter's position, and a smart shooter would collect his casings anyway.

Posted by: CanRay Jun 7 2008, 04:12 PM

Always pick up your brass for reloading! Reduce, reuse, recycle!

Posted by: Zaranthan Jun 7 2008, 07:20 PM

Not every combat ends in 100% NPC fatalities.

IP 1: Lay down suppressive fire against corpsec team packing multiple gyroarms.
IP 2: Second burst of suppressive fire. Hacker opens the maglocked door that you've got your back to.
IP 3: Run to the hills.

Exactly when are you going to go around collecting those forty shells?

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 7 2008, 07:49 PM

Simple, really, you put your smartlinked weapon into a transparent plastic bag before going on the run and don't bother taking it out. All of the casings come with you. You could also just duct tape a bag to the ejection port or, if you want to get fancy, http://www.cactustactical.com/osc/product_info.php?products_id=70

Posted by: Earlydawn Jun 7 2008, 08:07 PM

I'm not implying that a Shadowrunner's ballistics should point to him in a traditional way - the Star does the work on the gun, identifies it as belonging to him, and goes to his house and arrests him. Any Runner worth his salt is either going to be using a stolen gun, or hire a decker to erase any records for a customized favorite that happened into a database somehow. I'm more concerned with the tactical advantage that it could give whomever recovers the evidence. By 2070, the technology will probably be more robust. Here's a for-example.

Continuing a string of runs to lay the groundwork for a future, grand heist, you break into the Ares regional office. Once there, you have your Decker break into the system, and download the shipping schedule for what you want to nab. On the way out, however, you get into a brief, primarily suppressive exchange with CorpSec, and your decker dosen't have time to totally clear his access logs. While the shipment has to go through that day, Ares can now connect you as a member of the same group that performed a similar break-in two weeks ago, in which a mage slung quite a bit of mojo. Although Ares has to send out the trucks, they've used your ballistics to better assess an upcoming threat, and ensured you that you'll have at least an extra wagemage for the final run.

It's a specific example, sure, but given that the megas are shipping packages of massive economic value and have essentially bottomless security budgets relative to a Runner team, I could definitely see them trying to analyze casings to try and build team "profiles". Since most (all?) of the big megas also have some kind of significant defense subsidiary, they may even already own part of the equipment necessary to try it.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 7 2008, 09:28 PM

Case less is also the snipers friend allows the use of semi auto sniper rifles like a bolt action. You don't need to hold the brass for a safe time so they don't see the refection. Flangeable rounds and called shot eliminate the need for ballistic evidence so do explosive rounds.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Jun 8 2008, 02:04 AM

Ballistics still mark the slugs, caseless just means no brass to check for the impact point of the firing pin, but the slug, still has marks.

The ex-governor of New york, Elliot spitzer, when running for governor years ago had a mind boglgingly stupid idea .He wanted to require every freaking bullet to have a code unmber engraved on it, that could be tracked so when you dug the slug out of someone you could, in theory, track down who bought it. Do I have to list all the ways this was f'ed up? He didn't win then and when running later he'd dropped this pin head idea.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 8 2008, 05:01 AM

Well, Dupre probably suggested it to him.

And when I say Dupre, I mean the expensive but small prostitute, rather than the Ultima character.

Posted by: Wesley Street Jun 10 2008, 05:32 PM

I'm not a gun nut but according to news reports like http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288456,00.html over 100 million AK-47s are illegally manufactured every year. That's a 60 year old assault rifle still in use! Since the Shadowrun time line deviates from RL somewhere in the early 90s it's not unreasonable to assume that the Soviet or Russian government (don't remember in the timeline when the first SovGov fell) created a rifle in the late 1990s that became just as cheap and easy to reproduce as at the 47 which then became popular with criminals, mercs, terrorists and rogue states. I wouldn't see a corpsec guard carrying one but a street ganger? Hells, yeah.

Posted by: nezumi Jun 10 2008, 05:43 PM

Seems the answer is pretty simple.

The designers firstly realized that the number should be higher than the previous number, so people know it's the newest and coolest version (keep in mind the sort of twits who oftentimes use these weapons), so they want the number to be above 74, even if it should rightly be 28 or something (2028). On the flip side, 105 and the like sound pretty dorky, and that can't be any good. So rather than tie themselves to the year of design still, they just began making up neat sounding numbers which would move product (the irony of the Soviet gun becoming a capitalist toy...)

On the flip side, you could say that the 97 marks 97 years since the development of the 47 - 2044. This keeps (more or less) to the counting method, just rebaselines, keeps the cool name concerns above, and explains why a 60 year old gun is still so competitive with all the other guns being offered.

Posted by: Naysayer Jun 10 2008, 06:21 PM

So, let's sum up what we've got so far:
- SR developers traditionally aren't super knowledgeable about the finer details of gun-nut-ness.
- The SR timeline deviates in enough places to justify that at some point, some alternate universe russian decided to name the 50-year anniversary edition of everybody's favourite assault rifle the AK-97.
- AK-97, as pointed out by nezumi, sounds significantly more awesome than AK-105, AK-110 and even AK-X.
- Shadowrun and firearms. You know?

So, with these facts in mind, I give you: The Uzi III/Uzi IV, and the HK 227.
Discuss!

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 10 2008, 06:35 PM

Given the age of the weapon, the patent has run out in all reasonable jurisdictions meaning that licensing is a non-issue. This is the same reason that 36 companies produce AR-15 and M-16 variants.

Posted by: nezumi Jun 10 2008, 07:54 PM

That's called micro-stamping, and I don't believe NY was the only state looking at it. There was a bill put to the floor in MD and I believe CA is also seriously considering it (it was shot down in MD at least).

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 10 2008, 08:15 PM

Well if anyone would do it, it would be CA. I heard on the radio this morning that a CA court decided to outlaw home schooling, and that lead to a big backlash from parents.

Posted by: Wesley Street Jun 10 2008, 08:32 PM

Since when are Russians reasonable, comrade? In their minds and according to their laws the Kalashnikov assault rifle is theirs.

Posted by: Chrysalis Jun 10 2008, 08:42 PM

The only assault rifle to feature on a national flag. The AK-47 is a robust rifle and luckily human beings do not change in biology just in our sensibilities on fashion.

To get back on topic isn't the HK 227S the FN FAL (also known as the L1A1 Self Loading Rifle or SLR) been mislabeled and jammed with a square magazine with a plastic coverlet?

I would understand that if using 7.62mm rounds a square magazine would jam a lot?

-Chrysalis

Posted by: Faelan Jun 10 2008, 09:46 PM

The AK47's reliability is mostly attributable to its robust extractor and 7.62x39mm ammunition. Larger ammo equals more rim on the casing to grab, and the less it will be affected by foreign material on the the ammunition or in the chamber. Additionally it's assembly is somewhat loose, which is the best way I can describe it. Once again this allows for greater reliability, but don't try to shoot anything with any real hope of accuracy past about 200yds. The AK47 was designed with a conscript soldier in mind. Massed automatic fire was the doctrine and one of the most common firing positions was from the hip while assaulting. It is certainly worthy of its reputation, but lets acknowledge it's weaknesses. A professional would almost never use one if he had a choice. (I am referring to Russian made AK47's, don't even bring up Chinese knock offs. And I am not saying anything about any of the newer AK models, they have certainly addressed most accuracy issues.)

The HK227 actually looks like a crossbreed of an HK G3 Assault Rifle and a HK PSG3 Sniper Rifle on steroids.

7.62 in a square magazine will jam no more frequently than a banana clip. The banana clip was designed to maximize magazine load while minimizing the distance the clip stuck out beneath the weapon.

Most weapon malfunctions occur for the following reasons 1) user error (especially with semi automatic handguns), 2) dirt in the chamber or more appropriately in the extractor causing the casing to remain in the chamber while another round is jammed in (your classic jam), 3) overheated weapon which can result in a cook off and a runaway weapon, 4) defective primer (i.e. a dud round), 5) weak charge resulting in a stovepiped barrel, which if not noticed results in, 6) an explosive failure as a round is fired down the barrel with another round stuck in the barrel, and 7) weak charge may also result in not enough force to push the slide, receiver or similar far enough to load the next round. In my experience those are the most common reasons for malfunctions.

Posted by: CanRay Jun 11 2008, 12:37 AM

Not to mention the extensive field testing the AK-47 went under before being adopted.

Where did they test the first generations of M-16s? A Lab?

IIRC, the Vickers Heavy Machine Gun was field tested by firing it for days before the team finally decided that if it wasn't going to have a problem after all that. And it proved itself in the fields of France.

Find as many problems as you can before handing it to a soldier, no matter how well trained. He will always find more!

Posted by: Faelan Jun 11 2008, 01:36 AM

M16 was tested in Vietnam It failed miserably because well the troops expected it to work. The M14, which preceded it was an incredibly accurate beast of a rifle. Seriously though the M16 is a rifle I love and hate. The only thing I hate is the caliber, because it is the root cause of everything wrong with it. So when I got the extra cash I will be buying one of these http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifle_rec7.aspx. All the ergonomics, and accuracy, none of the problems and more punch.

Posted by: reepneep Jun 11 2008, 07:39 AM

My impression was that the M16's primary problems were overcomplexity and unreliability. Granted you can actually get through a whole magazine without it jamming, unlike with the early versions, but its still a rather temperamental, fragile weapon. The M16 has developed into a decent gun though: accurate, light weight, good ergonomics. It's other problems seriously hamper it though.



I would have thought that a professional would take a gun that would fire every single time he pulls the trigger, and the AK comes closer to that ideal than any other assault rifle. To me at least, that consideration is more important than any other.

'I will be trusting this gun with my life: it damn well better work.'

Also, the gun only becomes genuinely inaccurate at around 300 meters. The vast majority of combat happens inside of that range, so its not as big a deal as most make it out to be.

Posted by: Critias Jun 11 2008, 10:37 AM

I guess we've got an awful lot of unprofessional soldiers over in the Gulf right now, then.

Posted by: Faelan Jun 11 2008, 11:01 AM

The M16 is one of the easiest weapons to breakdown, and reassemble. Always has been. The complexity and unreliability issues came about mostly due to lack of training on the new weapon. The M16a2 and later variants are not temperamental at all, though they do require more maintenance (cleaning) than the AK 47 for instance. I had no problem trusting the M16 with my life in the past and would not in the future, though now that I am a civilian there are other options My issue with extractors is ultimately the underlying cause of any rifle or mg problems in 5.56mm. NATO really needs to get away from this round.



An M16 will fire everytime if you take care of it. The AK does not come closer, it has merely been mythologized into that position. At the time and for many years your comment was true. My list of Assault Rifles or civilian versions of choice that I would pick over the AK are the FN SCARH (7.62mm), the Barrett Model Rec 7 (there was a military version however the US Army declined this option for a 5.56mm rifle and even that is in the air/ model 7 uses a 6.8mm SPC round), and the HK417 (7.62mm). All of them fit the bill.

I am used to plinking targets at 500yds with iron sights, and though the majority of combat occurs under 300m the ability to reach out and touch someone as a group is incredibly valuable especially when the other guy subscribed to that line of thought. I'll take the cake, and eat it too. I can have the best of both worlds.

Posted by: Shiloh Jun 11 2008, 11:10 AM

One problem with the AK is its long clip making firing from prone more awkward.

My read on use of liberated weapons is that most grunts are happy enough with the current issue of the M-16 and don't feel any need for going off the regimental supply chain for ammo. Even Special Forces only use the AK when they're trying to blend in. They're more likely to choose H&K personal weapons than 'liberate' an AK: they don't need the "fires even when it's not been cleaned for 2000 rounds and 6 months in the jungle" because they maintain their weapons, and have the weapon skills to benefit from tight groupings that "proper" engineering tolerances in manufacture can produce.

Posted by: Yoan Jun 11 2008, 01:07 PM

Yes, and I don't want to get all apocalyptic, but when things go from bad to worse, or when you're fighting a low-intensity conflict, or when you're conducting an insurgency campaign: you want something reliable no matter what.

One day, sooner or later, the supply chain and/or logistics of bloated "modern" militaries will break down, and we'll see the average spoiled Western soldier for what he is: a kid who just wanted college money and has 30,000$ of (at that point, non-working or failing) equipment on him.

Posted by: Faelan Jun 11 2008, 01:30 PM

That's just plain offensive. I don't really like being stuffed into a blanket statement like that. I did not serve for the college money, and neither did 90% of the guys I served with (USMC). Even the few who did realized it was not a game. I have trained with at least 25 different countries armed forces both first world and third world, and can say one thing. The quality of manpower is directly related to the degree of training. Of all the armed services I trained with the only ones worth a damn were the UK Royal Marines, the rest of Europe produced essentially lambs waiting to be slaughtered. So I can agree with your point to a degree, except you see every last encounter with the third world fighter indicated to me someone high on motivation (principally being fed) without any real skill, so maybe the Europeans I trained with were not that bad because the level of ability of these third world militaries was absolutely abysmal.

As far as the noble (insert mass sarcasm) guerilla fighter, can only succeed when attacking by surprise, in overwhelming numbers, and with the full support of the civilian population. Individually as warriors they are severely lacking.

No offense to anyone out there who might be serving in a European Service, but my opinions were based on first hand experiences such as, drunk in the field, refusal to perform night patrols or attacks, inability to carry a full combat load, zero security, no light or noise discipline, refusing to perform an amphibious landing (shout out to the Dutch Marines on that one, it still makes me chuckle), essentially if it would get you killed in the zone they did it.

Posted by: Yoan Jun 11 2008, 01:38 PM

Sorry if I offended you. I'm a member of my respective nation's military as well, and I know there are CLEARLY exceptions. I have American friends serving with the US Army and the USMC in Iraq and elsewhere and, clearly, they aren't there for that, either.



And when military or police attack or seize an enemy or suspect, they go in with overwhelming force whenever possible as well. Who wouldn't? That might be the only thing modern military machines and the guerilla force have in common.

As for civilian support, I hope you're not derisive of it: that's how modern warfare works, and will work in future conflicts. It's dirtier, but that's the point.

I'm no friend of the 'guerillas' we find today, but perhaps one day WE'LL be the guerillas/insurgents/freedom-fighters/whatever, and if that's the case: I'd rather go low-tech and grab an AK. We can't rely on military infrastructure and logistics forever. Scheisse happens.

Also, I heard a rumour (can anyone confirm?) that the Dutch military, or Navy, was unionized. I think that explains a lot. I hope I'm wrong.

Posted by: Faelan Jun 11 2008, 01:48 PM

I don't know if they were unionized, but the landing issue was a contractual issue apparently. We never got a really detailed explanation as to why beyond the fact that they refused to get wet, so we chalked it up to the sand in the clit factor.

Overwhelming numbers and overwhelming force are different, but I get where you are coming from, and no I never had the pleasure to play with the Canadians.

Fire a Soviet Era AK and tell me yo really trust it. I'll stick with the three I mentioned in 7.62mm, not bad for shooting game either if the logistics breakdown

Posted by: CanRay Jun 11 2008, 01:56 PM

Just thought of something, when it comes to a rifle that's proven itself in the test of time, nothing beats the Short-Magazine Lee-Enfield.

Canadian Rangers prefer it over anything else, from my understanding.

1895 to Today. Nothing beats that testiment. And it sure will be able to outrange any assault rifle on the market, and, in trained hands, can impersonate a "Machine Gun", as Germans attested in World War I!

Posted by: Shiloh Jun 11 2008, 01:59 PM

Okay, so you're a guerilla defending your home in the continental mainland of America. You don't have a supply train. What calibre of ammunition is going to be easier to scavenge: 5.56mm NATO or 7.62 short Russian? You'll have to kill the Chinese (who else has the personnel to try and hold down the States?) oppressor to get hold of their ammo, but there's bins of 5.56 around.

Even once you're an insurgent, you retain your weapon skills and discipline, so you still don't need the "ruggedness" and associated sloppiness of the AK... It's easier to steal/cadge/scavenge a can or two of gun oil and some pull-throughs than clips of enemy ammo.

Posted by: Yoan Jun 11 2008, 02:08 PM

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-enfield.htm

To Shiloh:

Points taken, I suppose I missed the obvious points-- I'd still recommend hoarding acquired/'liberated' munitions and slowly integrating it into my force pool, but this is Shadowrun 4th edition and not Advanced Squad Leader meets "Be your own Guerilla Warlord v2010" (or: Guerilla Logistics, v0.4)... unfortunately.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 11 2008, 03:55 PM

Insurgency in the Continental US is far more likely to be by labor unions against corrupt corporations, such as the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain, or concerned citizens against corrupt police officers as in the case of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29. Invasion is unlikely, but the usurpation of local government by strong-men is still possible.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 11 2008, 05:52 PM

From playing Operation Flashpoint I learned that Russians forget you were there if you dive behind concealment for 5 seconds. This enables you to carefully crawl back to exactly where you were last time and shoot him when he's looking the other way.

Posted by: Ed_209a Jun 12 2008, 02:05 PM

No doubt brain damage from all the vodka and extreme hazing.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 12 2008, 04:53 PM

"Yevgeny! Stop punching the damn recruits in the head until they black out! Their complete lack of short term memory is losing us this war!"

Posted by: Shiloh Jun 12 2008, 06:07 PM

All the more reason to favour a domestic round then... there won't *be* any AKs and 7.62 short to 'liberate'.

Posted by: Yoan Jun 12 2008, 06:44 PM

Ok, fine. I hate you all.

*Storms off.*

Posted by: Earlydawn Jun 12 2008, 10:31 PM

Curious (and offensive!) statement at best. Time and time again, U.S. infantry turn down our "fancy toys" like the much-touted Land Warrior system for lighter weight, more reliable equipment. There's a reason they still get trained on map and compass before you get the GPS. The main advances in infantry since the Vietnam era that stick with me are better carrying gear, lighter weight equipment (makes room for more ammo!), and more effective "first strike" weapons like anti-tank equipment, where the situation is usually hit-or-die.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 12 2008, 11:22 PM

Was the M16A1 responsible for funky Vietnam era music?

Posted by: Faelan Jun 12 2008, 11:52 PM

No I think it was Heroin that pulled that off.

Posted by: Zaranthan Jun 13 2008, 03:37 AM

No way, man! It was the http://"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hSW67ySCio...

Posted by: psychophipps Jun 13 2008, 04:30 AM

What killed the original M16 was the US Army, to be honest. The US Army spent so much time and energy fighting the new weapon that Robert McNamara thought that the request by the Dept of the Army for a chromed barrel was just another stalling tactic. The Army also had swapped the clean burning stick powder of the original design for dirtier ball powders that gave better long-range ballistics in arctic conditions. The lack of effective corrosion resistance and the dirtier powders resulted in many of the earlier M16s jamming in the jungles of Vietnam (which in all honesty is about the single worst place for a rifle to be if you're discussing reliability anyway). Once effective cleaning kits were issued and the soldiers were trained to use them, the issues with the weapon largely disappeared.
Of course, the weapon has henceforth been colored by the brush strokes of this pissing contest between the McNamara's Wonder Kids and the Dept of the Army which has earned this excellent weapon a bad reputation for reliability.
Proponents of the M16 series include various US, Israeli, and United Kingdom special operations forces who, while having the pick of basically any weapon they wanted, selected the use of the M16 to be used in their world-wide mission locations. The fact that these men, and sometimes women, specifically selected the M16 series over a great many other great weapons out there for use in their limited support, often behind the lines, and everything we have for this mission is on our backs and LBE speaks volumes as to the true level of reliability and effectiveness of this weapon system.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 13 2008, 05:15 AM

Do you have any sources to cite? I'm not saying this as a challenge. Instead, I'm really interested in history and would like further reading.

Posted by: Faelan Jun 13 2008, 10:50 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle

I know don't ever use wikipedia, however this article is actually pretty damn accurate.

@psychophipps as previously stated the reliability issue was and is 90% user failure, combined with 10% weapon design (it does get dirty quicker than most). I certainly never had a problem trusting it.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 13 2008, 11:40 AM

what UK force uses the m16? The SAS use what ever they feel like depending on the misson really but they might use the m16 the SBS use some funky guns including a foldeable sky that is poket size if my source is right. The enfeild 85 is used heavily. I'm just cureipus at what park of the British armed forces use the M16.

Posted by: Shiloh Jun 13 2008, 01:36 PM

The SAS, the SBS. Tend to choose M16 variants for personal weapons, with the underbarrel grenade launcher almost ubiquitous, rather than one or two per squad. They use the Minimi SAW in higher than normal proportions too.

They both use whatever they think gets the job done best, including SMGs and, I suppose, 'funnies'.

Our 'more elite' formations (paras and RM) just use the standard issue SA80, same as our line infantry battalions.

Posted by: psychophipps Jun 13 2008, 06:05 PM

As stated before, the SAS and SBS have used this weapon for quite a while now. The SAS has used the M16 extensively at least since a photo of a 4-man 1964 cross-border patrol in Borneo. The weapons were still being manufactured by Armalite and probably didn't have the powder swapped as had happened with the US M16 with the associated disastrous results.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 13 2008, 08:37 PM

The SBS use lots of guns really but i didn't know about the M16 but i manly read up on the sub to boat/land raids where ligher weapons are need like Mp-5s. I know about the SA80 (witch isn't that good my dad was in the navy and work as faslane or how ever you spell it as well as a few ships and he didn't like that gun even with his 70%+ average).

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jun 14 2008, 12:06 AM

Didn't the SA80 have a reputation for the magazine falling out during Gulf War I?

Posted by: Dumori Jun 14 2008, 12:23 AM

Yep that the one I still dont think they fixed that at least not when my dad was still in service.

Posted by: Shiloh Jun 14 2008, 10:44 AM

They fixed that with the A2 (I think it was) revision. The weapon in service now gets a thumbs up from the people actually using it in south Asia and the Middle East. Yes, it was crap in GW1, fit only for deployment in Germany, but it's been quite severely revised in its 20 year life. I found some quite glowing stuff from combat soldiers by Googling. I gather the M16 is simpler to field strip though, still.

Posted by: Dumori Jun 14 2008, 11:12 AM

Ah yes i forgot the brought out the A2. But I still know of a lot of actions where the M16 wasn't used. Btw dose any pne know if theres a folding/colappesable version of the SA80 (may not be a SA80 but nor can i find any folding weapon in sevis in the British army) I remember being told about one in use at a range but I cant fined any recored of its existence.

Posted by: psychophipps Jun 14 2008, 12:03 PM

Considering how the entire action of the rifle is in the butt stock, I would think that a collapsible stock would be pretty hard to manage with a SA80. If you look at the lower receiver you will see that the butt plate and the pistol grip are all of one piece making a collapsible stock feature all but impossible.

Posted by: Shiloh Jun 14 2008, 03:18 PM

I't s a bullpup so that you don't need to collapse the stock. It's already over 20cm shorter than an M16 while having a longer barrel. As pschohipps says, the structure pretty much precludes the stock folding any. You could have a model that folds in front of the pistol-grip, I suppose, but it wouldn't be operable in that configuration. You could shorten the barrel, and then you'd get the L22 carbine variant, issued to crews.

It's a battle rifle; concealability isn't an issue, and it's already a handy size.