 Guns 101, Confused... |
  |
 Oct 6 2006, 04:26 AM
Post
#76
|
|
|
Runner  Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253  |
Erm, sorta. There are several systems available for reducing the felt recoil of firearms. The first thing to realize is that firearms do recoil equal amounts. In general, the heavier a firearm is, the less recoil you will feel. For example, a pistol chambered in 9mm will have more felt recoil than a (larger) submachinegun also chambered in 9mm. Next, the mechanics of how the firearm works will have some effect on felt recoil. For example, 'gas-operated' weapons tend to have less fell recoil than manually operated (bolt action, etc) weapons firing the same cartridge. Next, you can vent the propellant gasses in a certain direction to help reduce muzle climb. This does not exactly reduce recoil, but does make the weapon easier to control on rapid fire. You can do an google image search fo 'ak74 muzzle brake' for a sample of one of these. Lastly, there is how the weapon is held and braced. A submachinegun fire from a 'straight arm' stance will be much harder to control in rapid fire than one fired from the shoulder. The ergonomics ofthe weapon have some effect here, some weapons are easier to hold on to that others. As a sample, the slightly bent shape of the jatimatic (google image search again) is supposed to help increase controlability. In addition, resting the weapon on a steady surface (wall, tree stump, whatever) can give you more controlability, depending on the weapons design. So a monopod, bipod, of tripod will generally increase the controlability of a weapon in rapid fire.
|
 |
 
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 04:35 AM
Post
#77
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Yes. Generally, recoil compensation works by using the high pressure gases of the muzzle blast and redirecting them in order to either compensate for the rise of the muzzle (in the case of relatively low-powered weapons like pistols and assault rifles) or the rearward thrust of the entire weapon (in the case of very high-powered rifles). In Shadowrun, these types of devices are called Gas Vents. In reality, they're known as compensators or muzzle brakes. Because the gases need to be at fairly high pressure in order to counteract the movement of the barrel, they are not compatible with sound suppressors (silencers), which operate by containing and lowering the pressure of the muzzle blast in order to decrease the sound. Other means of recoil mitigation exist, such as soft rubber pads attached to the stock, internal buffers, and in the case of very heavy weapons, hydraulic buffers and rearward-facing exhaust systems. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 04:39 AM
Post
#78
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 82 Joined: 21-September 06 Member No.: 9,450 |
So you're saying that the gas released to propel the bullet is "recycled" to prevent the muzzle from rising.
I get it. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 04:45 AM
Post
#79
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
it's worth noting that recoil in RL is nothing at all like recoil in SR. in SR, shooting lots of times (eg autofire or burst) makes you less likely to hit, or at least only slightly more likely to hit. in real life, shooting lots of times makes it much more likely that you'll get a hit. not that burst/autofire is more accurate, understand; it's just that you're giving yourself more opportunities to score a hit by firing so many rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 06:23 AM
Post
#80
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 79 Joined: 23-August 06 Member No.: 9,205 |
Probably the most unrealistic aspect of SR autofire is that, in real life, the first bullet is just as likely to hit on-target, whether you're firing on full auto or single shot, all other things being equal (same stance, etc). I've never run a system without modding it, but I'm still working on my SR autofire rules. The main thing is I don't want to make them too complex -- the system's nice and unencumbered, so I don't want to harm that. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 06:26 AM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 79 Joined: 23-August 06 Member No.: 9,205 |
For recoil compensation: the gas vent systems work as described in above posts. For gyro balancing systems, at least the heavier ones, I got the impression they were akin to the smartgun mounts in Aliens. That's based on older editions, though (I'm a 1st ed player who hasn't owned a single SR2 or SR3 book), so I'm not sure what the flavour text on gyro-balancing is nowadays. Certainly, the cybarm gyro mount can't possibly be like that... I'm not entirely sure how it would work. Could someone with more knowledge of gyroscopes comment?
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 07:11 AM
Post
#82
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
there are two ways to look at it. the first is to say the first round fired in a burst is the most likely to be a hit, because that's the round that gets out of the barrel before the recoil has a chance to screw up your aim. this makes sense... if you're using autofire inefficiently. if you've got time to draw a proper bead and really aim at a single target, you might want to consider flipping over to burst or single-shot in most cases. 1-3 rounds is plenty for most people; it's nice to be sure, yes, but you can be just as sure pumping five single shots into a target as he goes down as you could be pumping a full ten-round burst into him. the other way to look at it is that basically every round you fire in a burst will have roughly the same chance of hitting your target. this is, basically, intelligent use of spray-and-pray firing, and is what automatic weapons are designed to do. god didn't give us autofire because he wanted us to put lots of bullets into a target; he gave us autofire because firing lots of bullets at a target gives you a better chance of hitting that target with one bullet. any bullets that hit the target beyond the first are just gravy, an added bonus. in order to use autofire efficiently (and the efficiency i'm talking about here is ratio of guys you kill to guys who kill you), you won't be taking the time to aim properly--not the way you'd aim if you were using single shots, anyway. you get a quick sight picture and you pull the trigger; the recoil rattles the weapon around a bit, and you get a spread of fire vaguely similar in end result (and use) to the cone of pellets that a shotgun puts out. more bullets in the air = more chance of hitting what you're shooting at. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 09:31 AM
Post
#83
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
It's just the use of a rotating object to prevent an object from turning. Take a bicycle wheel for example. Set it spinning. Put a vector force in one direction on a point on the wheel; remember that the force will stay in that direction on that point as it spins. This creates a torque. If it spins fast enough, the wheel will move that force around the wheel... and when it gets to the opposite side of the wheel, the force will be generating a torque in the opposite direction of the torque generated at the original side of the wheel. This force will be somewhat reduced, dependant on how fast the wheel is spinning; the faster it spins, the less the force decreases when it gets to the opposite side. Basically, this effect is (part of) what causes a moving bicycle to be more stable (you've noticed that, right?) and could be how a cyber-arm gyro would work -- a set of weights pops out of the arm on rigid spokes (kind of like a bicycle wheel) and sets to spinning. Trying to "turn" the arm by exterting a torque through the center of the wheel is going to be resisted as the torques shift around that wheel and change direction. It's theoretically possible. I don't know if it's practical though. Go google "angular momentum", if you want to know the physics of it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 09:39 AM
Post
#84
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
more bullets in the air = more chance of hitting something |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 11:44 AM
Post
#85
|
|||||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Yeah. But, see, you point the gun in the right direction before all that "trigger pulling" stuff starts. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 6 2006, 02:10 PM
Post
#86
|
|
|
Old Man Jones Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 |
I had a wag of a physics professor back in college.
He'd pull practical jokes. One such was a small but high powered gyro he could attach inside a suitcase. It had a wireless remote to turn it on and off. So he'd give it to a bellboy at a hotel. Turn it on as they were moving down a hallway. As long as they were headed straight, no problems. As soon as they went to turn a corner, the suitcase would resist turning. Made for a very confused bellboy. :D Technically, with a high enough powered motor, the cyberarm gyromount shouldn't even need to extend the weights out any, just as long as they're spinning. -karma |
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 03:32 PM
Post
#87
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Yeah, but if they pop out and then start spinning, it's so much more bad ass looking. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 03:34 PM
Post
#88
|
|
|
Old Man Jones Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 |
I have this sudden image of a happy sam with his new Cyberarm Gyromount, aiming his weapon and activating the 'mount with glee.
Then running to retrieve the weapon because the spinning weights impacted the stock and sent the weapon flying. :D -karma |
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 03:42 PM
Post
#89
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 113 Joined: 16-October 03 Member No.: 5,725 |
Yes, those weapons could penetrate plate mail. However, plate mail and other heavy armor had already been made obsolescent by the English longbow. Heavy cavalry (plate mail and lance) was also stymied by infantry squares with pikes. The musket helped kick plate mail out the door, but it was already on the way. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 6 2006, 03:50 PM
Post
#90
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
The longbow could not penetrate the plates of armor, except through massive fluke. All they could hope for was to hit often enough to eventually slip between plates at a joint or in the face. They could injure or kill the horses, however.
Cavalry has always been stymied by infantry brave enough to stand their ground. Pike formations just give infantry a morale boost big enough to increase their probability of doing so. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 05:35 PM
Post
#91
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 113 Joined: 16-October 03 Member No.: 5,725 |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 05:38 PM
Post
#92
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Not all plate armor is (was) created equal. Longbows along with arrows with bodkin points seemed to have worked out at the Battle of Crécy. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 05:53 PM
Post
#93
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...actually, in SR4 the sniper rifle is listed as having a 1.5km maximum range. This is probably where I got the number from. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 06:51 PM
Post
#94
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,150 Joined: 19-December 05 From: Rhein-Ruhr Megaplex Member No.: 8,081 |
Another sniper legend is the finnish Simo Häyhä, who, according to the internet, killed over 700 people during World War II in little more than hundred days. If the story is true :P.
Doesn't explain why french cuirassiers wore their, ehrm, cuirasses even at the beginning of World War I. Another thougth: There are even recoil amplifiers out there :D. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 07:18 PM
Post
#95
|
|
|
Old Man Jones Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 |
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 07:42 PM
Post
#96
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Hahaha. That's awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 08:31 PM
Post
#97
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...i'll have to remember this when the sammie in my campaign gets his hands on an assault cannon for the first time. :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 7 2006, 01:21 AM
Post
#98
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Certainly some cheaper suits of armor were made with plates of unhardened substandard steel that might have been vulnerable to the heaviest armor piercing arrowheads at close range. In Crécy, however, just like in Agincourt (of which I just read a great account in John Keegan's The Face of Battle), archers wreaked havoc on heavy cavalry by injuring and killing their horses. On a muddy field, a violently dismounted, very heavily armored knight with no protection from his fellows is at a pronounced disadvantage. At Agincourt, there was apparently minimal losses on the advancing French infantry from the fire (some of it at very close range) of the longbowmen. RainOfSteel: I find it interesting that the Wikipedia article says contemporary crossbows were as powerful but not "widespread" -- sure, they were only used throughout Europe, while large military formations of longbowmen seems to have been a mostly English (or British) phenomenon. I am not quite prepared to believe the claims of the Archers of Ravenwood and Suite101 articles about perfect penetration of any and all plate armor at up to 100 yards with no citations and with every historical account and serious study I've seen stating very much the opposite.
Style and tradition? Might have been of marginal use vs. shrapnel, and vs. small arms fire at extreme ranges. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 7 2006, 01:37 AM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Protection from arrows was the entire point of plate armor. All things being equal a swordsight in heavy armor is insane. The individual with superior stamina and manuverability will have the advantage.
But, bodkin point longbow arrows can defeat plat armor if they hit at a good angle, as can similar crossbow bolts. Hitting at a good angle when your firing in an arc at distant enemies pretty much a crapshoot. Armor plates present archers with a flat face to aim at. THey are usually angled or curved for good reason. However, at close range, with time to aim, and in the hands of a skilled bowman the arrow will probably penetrate. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 7 2006, 02:05 AM
Post
#100
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
I read the bit about archery at Agincourt again in Keegan's book and a few references elsewhere, and I'll admit that it's more likely than what I said above. But that it will "probably" penetrate seems a bit of a stretch when there still seems to have been rather few casualties in such battles where longbowmen fired thousands of arrows directly at the enemy at ranges well under 100 yards. The curving, though, certainly made a huge difference. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th April 2026 - 09:31 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.