 SR4 Firearms: Caseless and Cased on one weapon? |
  |
 Apr 15 2005, 09:32 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Great Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222  |
Combustible cases are a reality for tank guns -- for example, the 120mm L44/M256 of the M1A1/A2 Abrams and Leo 2s through to 2A5 and the 120mm L55 of the Leo 2A6 both use combustible cases. They have also been developed and are used in auto-loading field howitzers (at least 130mm and 155mm guns) as well as some other tank guns. However, AFAIK, all those designs have a metallic case base.
|
 |
 
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:43 PM
Post
#27
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
So the question is, what would make the small-arms industry embrace such a concept? Is there some concrete benefit to using combustable cases that'd still be valid when scaled down to firearm sized rounds? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:48 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,978 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New Jersey, USA Member No.: 500 |
The reality is that caseless weapons look unlikely to take off.
Nobody but the military would have a valid, legal need for them. These days, civilian sales keep a gun alive on the market, with military sales helping launch. I could see the manufacture of caseless small-arms (particularly handguns and anything nominally civilian-available) being banned by any government worth the title. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:52 PM
Post
#29
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
Ah, but this is Shadowrun. With the rise of Megacorporate power and the decline of nation-states, are there any governments worth the title by the 2050s-2070s? :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 09:54 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,978 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New Jersey, USA Member No.: 500 |
<Points at General Colloton in RA:S>
I would imagine, yes. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 10:09 PM
Post
#31
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Nope, none that I know of. Which of course doesn't mean there isn't one, just that it isn't blaringly obvious if there is. I was just pointing out that "vaporizing cases" do exist so they don't need to be developed from the ground up. Of course we'd need much more advanced material technology to get rid of the metal case base -- otherwise you're still stuck with having to eject something from the breech after firing. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 10:41 PM
Post
#32
|
|||||||||||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
I should point out here that while a firearm using caseless ammunition would likely be more expensive to produce than a cased ammunition firearm of similar performace (especially if you intend to take advantage of a high ROF mode like the G11), caseless ammunition would be much less expensive to mass-produce, as there are no metallic components short of the bullet itself, and production is totally automated. Cases don't have to be drawn and formed, which leaves out the second most expensive component of the cartridge, and less people in the production line lowers costs.
That would all depend on the intended purpose of the firearm. A caseless firearm does not necessarily have to take advantage of the high ROF that caseless was initially developed for. The difference in capacity really doesn't have much to do with the ammunition itself; in the case of the G11, the increase in capacity was due mostly to the design of the firearm and how ammunition was fed into it. For example, the FN P90 has a significant capacity advantage over other SMGs due in large part to the layout of the magazine and action, and it uses cased ammunition. There are other advantages to caseless, particularly a savings in weight (a soldier can carry more of it) and the cost of ammunition production (somewhere in the range of 1.5 to 2 times the amount of caseless cartridges for the same cost as a comparable cased cartridge, IIRC).
I don't disagree with the idea that there should be two separate models of firearms here. But again, high ROF and ammunition capacity would have more to do with a drastic change of firearm design that the ammunition type by itself.
You'd have to show a significant improvement performance in some area, which, at the small arms scale, I'm afraid this concept wouldn't really offer over other technologies like polymer cased or caseless.
Not that caseless hasn't already accomplished. The only possible benefits I can think of would be A) the metallic base acting as a breech seal, which could make the firearm significantly easier to engineer than a caseless firearm, and B) it would also act as a heat sink, albeit a small one. Actually, that feature right there is what makes cased ammunition more viable that most others. The case itself absorbs a good deal of heat and removes it from the weapon. With caseless or a case that's designed to combust, that doesn't happen and the weapon itself has to absorb that heat. Coincidentally, that was one of the major hurdles that the G11 had to overcome. Some say it never did. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Apr 15 2005, 10:57 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 468 Joined: 17-March 05 Member No.: 7,185 |
I know that many people on dumpshock loathe the flechete pistol but considering it's a nod towards Neuromancer I'm wondering if there would be a realistic market for flechete submachineguns and assault rifles.
While game mechanics wise the shotgun sort of takes this role the whole concept of the weapon is significantly different. Could there be room for a canonical weapon with submachinegun and AR ranges that uses flechete rules but no shotgun spread type rules? |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:01 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Resident Legionnaire Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,136 Joined: 8-August 04 From: Usually Work Member No.: 6,550 |
Actually, some people will load revolvers with birdshot (like first round birdshot followed by slugs) for home-defense usage....
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:04 PM
Post
#35
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 858 Joined: 25-August 03 From: Braunschweig, North German League, Allied German States Member No.: 5,537 |
That's the big advantage of bolt-action rifles and revolvers: You decide when (if) the case is ejected. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:06 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 858 Joined: 25-August 03 From: Braunschweig, North German League, Allied German States Member No.: 5,537 |
I can't remember the name right now but there's one company IRL that produces a caseless hunting rifle line. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:06 PM
Post
#37
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 468 Joined: 17-March 05 Member No.: 7,185 |
While I can see that being a variation of a pistol like shotgun (even though it seems like that would be hell on the rifling of the revolver barrel) it doesn't really get into the concept of firing a hypersonic dart rather than a chunk of lead. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:16 PM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Resident Legionnaire Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,136 Joined: 8-August 04 From: Usually Work Member No.: 6,550 |
Hmmmmm... Steyr ACR I believe? Cancelled I believe? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:19 PM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:21 PM
Post
#40
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 468 Joined: 17-March 05 Member No.: 7,185 |
Yeah but the OICW XM-29 is functionally cancelled as well. It's not that a flechette rifle doesn't show potential it's just that within current technology the flechette projectile doesn't show enough of an improvement over conventional weapons to make them a realistic alternative. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:24 PM
Post
#41
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
They do claim some benefits. Primarily due to less moving parts and less time between trigger pull and the load firing. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:29 PM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Resident Legionnaire Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,136 Joined: 8-August 04 From: Usually Work Member No.: 6,550 |
Ok, so it was cancelled, I couldn't remember.
I don't know exactly what could make them any more plausible. Really you have to look at what you're trying to achieve with a flechette AR or SMG, which is (accuracy?). If better training is a cheaper way to increase accuracy, then you're out of luck. Then you also have to look at the flechette itself, and it's expected terminal effect in comparison with what your looking to replace. edit: I do think that there will always be a market for niche firearms, and in the 50-odd years leading up to shadowrun, I don't see any reason why there might not be one or two caseless or flechette weapons on the market, given a good bit of technological advancement. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:31 PM
Post
#43
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Nothing over this, however. A major advantage over the Voere is that the EtonX can be handloaded and chambered for much more powerful cartridges. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:34 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 468 Joined: 17-March 05 Member No.: 7,185 |
Well the flechette design of the Steyr ACR does appear like it offers pretty decent improvements over a standard cartridge in terms of velocity and armor piercing it's just that it doesn't offer enough advantage to make them cost effective to switch to.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 15 2005, 11:41 PM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Well, it also offers significant disadvantages in terms of terminal performance. Flechettes are the kind of thing that can really fuck you up in the long term but can potentially do fantastically little to impede your immediate combat performance. Given that the current 5.56x45mm already has an immense wealth of complaints and issues raised about its terminal effectiveness, the early-mid 90s craze over small bullets is pretty solidly on its way out.
And I, for one, welcome out new 6.8mm SPC overlords. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 17 2005, 04:15 AM
Post
#46
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 118 Joined: 20-June 04 Member No.: 6,423 |
If DARPA is to believed, enhanced lethality caused by increased velocity through case combustion. One of the things that has been tossed around is that the XM8 is that the XM8 will use a combustible case round, in addition to the current standard issue rounds, and the M8 carbine will achieve the same accuracy, range, and casualty production with the cartridge as with a M4 carbine firing current ammo, even though the M8's barrel is two inches shorter than the M4's. The thing is that ammo program was developed seperately from the XM8 program, so it's thought that the combustible case ammo can be used in M16-based rifles and the new SCAR rifle. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 17 2005, 04:27 AM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
I just hope that SR4 has enhanced firearms realism, and fixes the damage codes so that SMGs and machine guns and assault rifles are actually, like, really really deadly compared to heavy pistols.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 17 2005, 07:04 AM
Post
#48
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
I could see that as being the perfect selling point, actually. Even if there's only a slight increase in muzzle velocity, give the small-arms industry's marketing departments just the right set of market conditions to exploit, such as the initial wave of goblinization, where there would be a public perception that you'd need every last ounce of extra stopping power that you could squeeze out of your firearms in order to be able to drop that troll, and it falls well into the realm of possibility that combustible case ammo could gain a significant market share. Of course, it's not too much of a stretch to envision a game mechanic that supports the above fluff. In SR1-3 terms, I wouldn't be above giving cased rounds a -1 to Power off of the standard combustible case "caseless" rounds. The beauty of it though, is that you wouldn't have to have the mechanic to make the fluff work, since really it's not whether or not combustible case rounds actually have more stopping power than the alternative, it's just whether or not the public perceives that they do. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 17 2005, 09:17 AM
Post
#49
|
|||||||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
I've heard something similar, though it didn't have anything to do with combustible cased ammunition or DARPA. Rather it involved the progression of conventional propellant technologies, specifically those of comparatively lower volume that burn at faster rates, resulting in a relative increase in velocity from a shorter barrel, used in conjunction with both heavier bullet loads (similar to that of the Mk262 load that's been seeing quite a bit of use lately), and lightweight, non-combustible polymer cases.
The only small arms program I've seen combustible cased ammunition referenced to is the OICW program, which at the moment is close to completely shut down. Dynamit Nobel (the same company responsible for the development of the G11's 4.73x33mm DM11 caseless cartridge) were supposed to be developing it. All of the patents I could find regarding a "combustible cartridge" or "combustible ammunition" related to tank/artillery munitions, though the patent for the polymer-cased ammunition developed by Natec did include the following:
Honestly, I'm not sure how much of a benefit that would provide. There may be a significant savings in weight, but that's immediately traded off by an increase in heat transferred to the firearm as the combustible case is not going to provide a heat sink as well as cased ammunition would, as well as the possibility of the combustible cartridge itself being less resistant to heat (increased probability of cook-offs). Anyway, if you have links with more information about combustible cased ammunition in relation to small arms and the programs you mentioned, I would most defintely like to see it. I can't seem to find much more than blog blurbs via Google. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Apr 17 2005, 09:31 AM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
The increased velocity only really matters when you've got a caliber standard to worry about, though, such as in the armed forces. Otherwise you could simply increase the size of the cartridge slightly (a few millimeters in all directions, maybe) to allow for that little bit more propellant to be packed in to get the exact same benefit -- or, for a saner approach, simply pick a more powerful existing caliber to pick a gun in. [Edit]Or, like Raygun pointed out, finding ways of getting more efficient propellant in the same cartridge.[/Edit]
The efficiency of it, getting those 50 extra feet per second from a cartridge of the same size, hardly matters outside of the armed forces either. Further, if the velocity gain is less than, for example, the difference between standard and +P loadings for .45 ACP, I just can't see it being a huge factor. That's not to say that such technology wouldn't have some demand, but based on what (little) I know it'd take one hell of a marketing campaign for it to gain a large share of the market. The +/- 1 Power is definitely uncalled for, unless the combustible case actually provides a lot more extra velocity than the difference between a 14.5" and a 12.5" barrel. Even then, I don't think it'd make sense unless some kind of Ammo By Caliber rules were worked into SR4. [Edit]Google is pissed off at me right now for some reason. Can someone find links related to these projects?[/Edit] This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Apr 17 2005, 09:34 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st December 2025 - 12:08 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.