 The sound of the round |
  |
 May 23 2004, 08:57 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 334 Joined: 17-November 03 From: Texas Member No.: 5,828  |
Another recent thread has me thinking about the rounds my character typically carries. I like for my rounds to add to power, so typically I would chose EX, Hollowpoint, or Glazer rounds. I have been using hollowpoint rounds for a while now, for the simple fact that with a suppressor the whole system is pretty quiet. Then I started wondering: just how loud is the explosion generated by a glazer or EX round? It hasn't been mentioned by anyone as a disadvantage: is that because it's being overlooked, or is it really not much of an issue? Is it any louder than a round simply slamming into a wall or door?
|
 |
 
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:11 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Glazers don't explode. They're not going to be much noisier than most rounds, and doubtful anything can really tell them apart from sound of the impact alone.
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:16 PM
Post
#3
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 334 Joined: 17-November 03 From: Texas Member No.: 5,828 |
:huh: Now I'm really confused.
CC, p. 38 So is the "explosive"-ness more like a HP expansion, or is it a bit of plastique? Edit: I'm aware of the difference between Glazer rounds (shadowrun) and glaser rounds (Real life). I know a glaser won't make any explosion. I had never really thought of glazers being related to glasers .... |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 23 2004, 09:31 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
I had always assumed they'd used the Z rather than an S (Glazer/Glaser) to avoid copyright infringement, and that theoretically they were identical.
The only time that i've ever had to worry about the noise a round makes is using suppressed weapons at a decent distance (what with gunfire being awfully loud and all, and even suppressed weapons producing a noticeable amount of noise). I'd always figured that explosive rounds sounded like pull-pops or popits (those little firecrackers that you yank a string out of or throw at the ground really hard to make go off), since the explosive charge can't be much more than that, and it IS inside of a large wad of meat when it goes off, quite often. |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:36 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
I pretty much assumed that Glazer was used in plasce of Glaser for copyright reasons as well, even if it wasn't really necessary. Past that, I tend to glaze over, no pun intended, every time the word explosive pops up in canon. It's generally a big warning sign that thinking's not welcome.
And, yeah, while I've got no practical experience with explosive rounds detonating, for anything smaller than an HMG round, I doubt you'll be running into any problems. And, once you're running at that level, who cares about suppression? |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:53 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Here's a Marine Corps demo video of the Barrett M82A1A SASR. They shoot at a bunch of targets with the Mk211 MOD 0 High Explosive Incendiary Armor Piercing (HEIAP) round. It's kind of difficult to separate the sound of the rifle's report from the target impact on the safe, but it's the best real-world example I can think of at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:57 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
No small arms round really explodes, even EX or EXEX ammo, it's really just an impressive fragmentation. How much of an explosive can you fit in a snall arms round anyway? Answer: about jack squat.
This was even directly addressed in the shadowtalk of an older sourcebook. |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:58 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
You might want to watch that video, then.
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 10:03 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Tangent: is there any good way to make a round basically coated sodium in such a way that the sodium would be exposed within the target?
~J |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 10:07 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
Why not just use Phosphorus rounds?
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 10:09 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
What I said was almost a direct quote from I think the Street Sammy Catalog. And I dont consider a Barrett a "small arms round" :P
The shell alone is what, 650-700 grains? |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 10:36 PM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Shell? The total weight of the .50BMG MK 211 MOD 0 cartridge is 1765 grains, of which 233 grains is the propellant and 671 grains the projectile, which leaves 861 grains for the case and primer. I'm pretty sure it is a "small arms round", because it's fired from a rifle. It has 13 grains (less than a gram) of Composition A-4 explosive. Not a big boom, but enough to make noise certainly. On the other hand, a 600-800 grain bullet hitting a steel plate at 2500+fps will make one hell of a noise regardless of any explosives present. And at 233gr of propellant vs 13gr of explosives, I really wouldn't worry about the noise made by the latter. If ammunition existed for large-caliber pistols, rifles or especially shotguns where explosives made up a very large part of the bullet weight (5-10% plus), those might make significantly more noise than other bullet types when they hit stuff. However, such ammunition doesn't exist because it's impractical (explosives aren't dense enough), and thus I would personally not worry about it except in extreme cases. Just remember that just about any bullet of significant size will make a lot of noise when it hits something hard. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 24 2004, 12:41 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 403 Joined: 27-August 02 From: Scotland Member No.: 3,175 |
I thought explosive rounds were outlawed aaaaaages ago along with blinding lasers, various chemical and biological weapons, etc. I mean genuinely explosive ones, not just those that fragment very nicely. This isn't so?
Perhaps I should go and watch that video.. |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 02:41 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
Ehh... it's one of those borderline rounds. .50's been in use in antiaircraft systems, heavy machineguns, bomber tail guns... the .50 BMG rifle is a relatively recent innovation. They make rifles that fire 20mm, as well. I don't classify 20mm as a small arms round. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 24 2004, 02:43 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 407 Joined: 22-March 04 Member No.: 6,183 |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 24 2004, 03:03 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Guys, 20mm grenades != 20x83mm.
The XM29 is not firing the same stuff as the Bradley AFV. [edit] Whoops. Could've sworn the Bradley had a 20mm cannon, not 25mm. This post has been edited by Arethusa: May 24 2004, 06:46 AM |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 03:44 AM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
The .50 BMG (12.7x99mm), along with all other .50 caliber cartridges, are classified as small caliber munitions by most NATO-affiliated militaries. The "borderline" would be 20mm, where cartridges begin to be classified as medium caliber munitions.
There are direct fire 20mm cannons (NTW20, RT20, M61 Vulcan, etc...) and there have been indirect fire 20mm grenades. The XM29 OICW is apparently in the process of being scrapped in favor of two separate systems. The XM8 (lightweight rifle) will be developed by HK, while ATK and HK together are developing a shoulder-fired, 25mm air-bursting grenade system called the XM25. The Bradley's M242 Bushmaster chain gun fires a 25mm cannon round (direct fire). The 20x83mm MG151 is also a direct fire cannon round. |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 06:27 AM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
Aerotek makes a 20x83mm antimateriel rifle, which is what I was referring to.
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 11:57 AM
Post
#19
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Outlawed, no. Their use can be considered to be against the international laws of warfare, however.
As I'm sure the acute among you figured out, nobody pays any attention to this. Maybe it's even been erased since. All small-caliber cannons fire ammunition which is completely against this resolution, not to mention grenade launchers of all kinds. "To employ arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury" is quite clearly not allowed, however, but this is only an issue when you could have killed the enemy soldier some other way and decided on the superfluous (in this case the MK 211 MOD 0). The fact that it's incendiary isn't a problem: "Incendiary weapons do not include [...] Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armour-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities." as per Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which may be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate Effects and Protocols. Ie this isn't so. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 24 2004, 12:15 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,451 Joined: 21-April 03 From: Austin, TX Member No.: 4,488 |
From what I understand (no first hand experience), even a silenced or supressed gun firing makes a pretty loud noise. It's just that the silencer/supressor masks the sound so that you can't really tell it's a gunshot. I remember reading somewhere that a silenced handgun round in reality sounds like a hardback book falling on the floor, not the little *PIFT* sound they make in movies (kinda like how a real gun sounds more like a *CRACK* than a *BANG*).
Also, most "explosive" rounds aren't explosives but a specific kind of fragmentation. Supposedly one of the best rounds currently made for getting a certain kill is a water-filled round, which is a hollow-point round filled with a small amount of water then sealed with silicone. The round stays intact until it hits something, but then it bursts and spreads out (unlike a hollow point round, which spreads as it goes through the air). This sort of round will supposedly vaporize a watermellon (and thus a human head) at about 100 yards. Again, this is just stuff I've read over the years. Take with a grain of salt and let the more knowledgeable correct me where appropriate. The Abstruse One |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 12:15 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 626 Joined: 1-March 04 Member No.: 6,112 |
What the hell? That makes no sense whatsoever. No injury is superfluous in a war...
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 12:50 PM
Post
#22
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
No first hand experience on suppressed gunshots here either, but my understanding is that they indeed mask the sound, and they lower the sound pressure by dozen or couple of dozen dB. It does make it less noisy, and the "release" type sound doesn't travel as well and is less distinctive. In most situations, even the suppressed gunshot would probably be noisier than the bullet hitting something. In some situations, such as when the shooter is some distance away and/or fires a very well suppressed weapon (this is pretty impressive, for example, considering that most rifles create around 150-160dB), a bullet hitting something hard (especially metal) might cause more noise than the shooting. In these cases, the little bang of the tiny amount of explosive in some (fictious) bullets would not make a significant difference.
Well, yeah. I suppose it would only come into play when you have the chance of killing someone by putting a small hole in him or blowing him up and scattering the remains in a square kilometer. A particular soldier would never be accused of such a thing, probably, but an entire military system might. Instead of attacking a platoon of infantry fortified in a village with a company of mechanized infantry, bombing the place into smithereens with a couple of weeks of continuous flights of strategic bombers might be considered "superfluous injury". |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 24 2004, 03:14 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
No, I'd call that Operation Iraqi Freedom
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 04:04 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,751 Joined: 8-August 03 From: Neighbor of the Beast Member No.: 5,375 |
The US Army is not a scaple. Its a broadsword...
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 04:26 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 16-February 04 From: Ohio, USA Member No.: 6,083 |
If you can find someone that can shoot a 50 BMG cartridge in a rifle that weights less than 20lbs and without the aid of either muzzle break or automatic action from a standing position and remain standing without any broken bones then I will consider it a small arms cartridge. I have fired some big cartridges in my time and the idea of shooting a cartridge with over 12,000ft-lbs of muzzle energy from my shoulder does not give me warm fuzzy feelings.
mcb |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th April 2024 - 11:05 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.