IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Heavier weapon = lesser recoil?
mattness pl
post Jun 16 2005, 09:36 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 216
Joined: 6-August 03
From: Polish Ghetto
Member No.: 5,342



Sorry for my poor English, chummers.

If somebody made weapon heavier than normal (Kalashniokov 4 kilograms heavier than standard one) is that will make weapon more stable?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SirBedevere
post Jun 16 2005, 09:41 AM
Post #2


Knight Templar
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 212
Joined: 20-June 04
From: Ipswich, UK Just South of the Stinkfens
Member No.: 6,424



Yes. IIRC (I'm at work, don't have my books with me) in CC a gun can be given recoil compensation by using a weight. I think it's -1 for 0.5kg.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tziluthi
post Jun 16 2005, 09:39 AM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 596
Joined: 18-February 03
Member No.: 4,112



Maybe. Although, you would also have less control over the weapon, largely because of the extra weight. It's hard to say really.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Jun 16 2005, 09:45 AM
Post #4


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



well you can get up to 2 points 'built in', although it doesn't really state precisely how. I always took this to mean it has a good design. You can also get a point for an underbarrel counterweight (and a fore grip, and shockpads, a stock, gas vents ,etc , drek-etc).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Critias
post Jun 16 2005, 09:47 AM
Post #5


Freelance Elf
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 7,324
Joined: 30-September 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 6,714



"Heavy barrel" (during creation) can give you a point, as can an "underbarrel weight" (external mod), and you can get a few points by unspecified/undescribed just plain "recoil compensation" during firearm creation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mmu1
post Jun 16 2005, 12:17 PM
Post #6


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,070
Joined: 7-February 04
From: NYC
Member No.: 6,058



Yes - the heavier the weapon (assuming the same cartridge), the less recoil there is. It's just conservation of momentum (mass * velocity) - the gun doesn't fly backward at the same speed as the bullet goes forward for the same reason. Given the same momentum, greater mass means less velocity.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jrayjoker
post Jun 16 2005, 01:50 PM
Post #7


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,453
Joined: 17-September 04
From: St. Paul
Member No.: 6,675



Once you start adding 2 kilograms to a weapon, it may as well be a sniper rifle or a one shot weapon. Handling and carrying it becomes a liability that offsets the efficacy of the recoil comp.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Jun 16 2005, 01:53 PM
Post #8


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



mmu1 has the the RL-aspect covered (and since it's momentum that's conserved, higher mass also means less recoil energy), and Critias has the rules right.

It would be a very bad idea to simply give Recoil Compensation for adding dead weight to a weapon in SR3, though, since weights and load limits are so screwed, so stick with the Heavy Barrel, Underbarrel Weight, and Internal Recoil Compensation Design/Customization options from CC.

QUOTE (mattnes_pl)
(Kalashniokov 4 kilograms heavier than standard one)

Bad idea unless you're a really beefy guy (ie. a troll). There's a very good reason why assault rifles heavier than the original AK-47 (4.5kg) are extremely rare. Like people have been saying, less recoil isn't very useful if your general handling of the weapon is compromised. If you don't mind carrying a 7-10kg weapon and your main concern is recoil, just get a LMG. (Except in SR3, where LMGs have a stiffer recoil than ARs for some inexplicable reason.)

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Jun 16 2005, 02:22 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mattness pl
post Jun 16 2005, 03:15 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 216
Joined: 6-August 03
From: Polish Ghetto
Member No.: 5,342



Austere - Kalashnikov was just an example.
You can put SMG with 3 kgs extra weight, or whatever you wish.

Few years ago my player want to hit somebody at point blanc ("I put whole magazine in that sucker"). In game terms he missed (guess why? Recoil!). I think irl that would not happened :(
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Jun 16 2005, 03:32 PM
Post #10


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



QUOTE (mattness_pl)
Kalashnikov was just an example.

I figured as much, but adding 4kg to any assault rifle will make insanely heavy -- 1.5kg+ over the original AK-47 with the milled receiver. ~6kg is simply too heavy for a shoulder-fired weapon meant to be easily maneuverable in CQB by humans.

QUOTE (mattness_pl)
You can put SMG with 3 kgs extra weight, or whatever you wish.

Adding weight to SMGs is an ever worse idea. At least with ARs you can justify the weight by making it more of support weapon with a heavier and longer barrel, bipod and all that. With SMGs you're only interested in CQB, so quick handling is a must. It's not by accident that SMGs have dropped from around 4-5kg to 2-3kg in weight (empty) since WW2. I can safely say you won't be seeing those 6kg+ monster SMGs you get with the SR Firearm Design rules IRL.

This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Jun 16 2005, 03:33 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cynic project
post Jun 16 2005, 03:41 PM
Post #11


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,032
Joined: 6-August 04
Member No.: 6,543



This bring up another point. Why does your strength matter so little with recoil? I mean a half of KG on your gun is worth 5 points of strength. I mean one has to have enough strength to rip tanks open to have any hope of using that to fire a micro uzi on full auto.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shadow
post Jun 16 2005, 04:00 PM
Post #12


Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill.
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,545
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Gloomy Boise Idaho
Member No.: 2,006



QUOTE (Cynic project)
This bring up another point. Why does your strength matter so little with recoil? I mean a half of KG on your gun is worth 5 points of strength. I mean one has to have enough strength to rip tanks open to have any hope of using that to fire a micro uzi on full auto.

Well I can only speak in human terms. But it doesn't really matter how strong you are... beyond a certain point. A very strong human can manage recoil about the same as a above average strength human.

Someone with normal strength or a weakling would have trouble with it. But beyond just keeping the gun steady strength just doesn't come into play. No matter how strong you are (as a human) the barrel is going to jump when you shoot, period. Just like you will always blink when the gun fires. It's ok, everyone does it.

What does matter is how quickly you can bring the barrel back into alignment of your target. Which is more agility and acuity then anything else.

Perhaps a troll with 14 strength could hold a barrel perfectly steady, as it is 'super human' strength. But it would have to be beyond the realm of human capability for that to work.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mmu1
post Jun 16 2005, 04:21 PM
Post #13


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,070
Joined: 7-February 04
From: NYC
Member No.: 6,058



QUOTE (Cynic project)
This bring up another point. Why does your strength matter so little with recoil? I mean a half of KG on your gun is worth 5 points of strength. I mean one has to have enough strength to rip tanks open to have any hope of using that to fire a micro uzi on full auto.

No matter how strong you are, your hand is not a metal vise - the skin, connective tissue and muscle are soft, at least relatively speaking. That alone makes it nearly impossible to hold a gun so firmly that you'll be able to ignore recoil.

Second, I'm not sure it's just physiologically possible to make the muscles which stabilize your arm and hand strong enough to matter, and to lock them in place at the appropriate moment - holding something steady and tensing up the muscles in question might be mutually exclusive.

Third, because of the way our hands are designed, and because of how guns are made, you're always at a huge mechanical disadvantage when trying to overcome recoil - it's roughly the same principle as trying as hard as possible to hold a stick steady while someone pushes on the far end with one finger - you won't be able to.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Method
post Jun 16 2005, 05:51 PM
Post #14


Street Doc
*******

Group: Admin
Posts: 3,508
Joined: 2-March 04
From: Neverwhere
Member No.: 6,114



Actually for a skilled shooter dealing with recoil involves less strength and more relaxation. If your body possition is correct and you are relaxed the momentum of the recoil is transfered effectively into and through your body to your center of mass. Its an extension of the explaination mmu1 gave for conservation of momentum. In stead of the bullets momentum being imparted to just the mass of the gun and your arms (a small mass) its imparted to the mass of the gun and your body (a very large mass).

YOUR GUN WILL STILL MOVE. Thats where skill comes into play. Professonal shooters shoot by "sight-picture acquisition" meaning you learn very quickly how to realighn your gun/body/sights on a target after each shot.

So in terms of SR, STR really shouldn't play as great a role in RC as BOD (mass) and Skill. Maybe in SR4 with the "skill+attribute=dice pool" they will come a little closer to getting it right. Then again, that depends on how recoil is going to work (it must reduce your pool, so having a greater skill automatically counters its effects... the mechanism is basically built in...).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Foreigner
post Jun 16 2005, 06:03 PM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 586
Joined: 22-November 02
From: Gordonsville, Virginia, U.S.A. (or C.A.S.)
Member No.: 3,630



When I was still in my early teens (I turned 41 last month; that'll give you some idea how long ago it was :) ), I had an opportunity to fire a legally registered Auto-Ordnance-manufactured Thompson Model 1921 submachine gun in .45 ACP caliber.

It was quite heavy-- at least to me (about 12 pounds)-- because I didn't have much upper-body strength at the time. (Actually, I still don't, although I'm probably stronger now than I was then. :P )

However, even during full-automatic fire (about 600 rounds per minute), it was controllable--as long as I kept firing short bursts (three to five shots).

My point is that almost any full-automatic weapon can be controlled, under the right circumstances.

mattness pl: Another way of getting what you want would be to increase the weapon's cyclic rate--that is, the number of shots fired per minute.

As an example, the now-defunct Heckler & Koch G-11 assault rifle (firing 4.7mm caseless ammunition) had a 3-round burst feature, but was amazingly accurate. This was accomplished by using a very light operating mechanism (bolt, etc.)--so light that the effective cyclic rate was in excess of 2000 rounds per minute. The end result was that, during burst fire, the last round of a given burst had already left the barrel by the time the recoil impulse began.

--Foreigner

This post has been edited by Foreigner: Jun 17 2005, 01:20 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Jun 16 2005, 06:26 PM
Post #16


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



QUOTE (Foreigner)
As an example, the now-defunct Heckler & Koch G-11 assault rifle (firing 4.7mm caseless ammunition) had a 3-round burst feature, but was amazingly accurate. This was accomplished by using a very light operating mechanism (bolt, etc.)--so light that the effective cyclic rate was in excess of 2000 rounds per minute. The end result was that, during burst fire, the last round of a given burst had already left the barrel by the time the recoil impulse began.

The internal bits of the weapon were not particularly light -- at least I wouldn't think so, since the weapon weighed 3.6kg empty (about the same as an M16/AR-15), and it doesn't seem to be of particularly heavy construction. You can see the gun eviscerated here.

Also, there will be a recoil force the moment the propellant gases begin pushing the payload down the barrel, and it will have done all its work once the projectile and the gases have exited the muzzle. Simply increasing the rate of fire will not reduce the loss of accuracy from recoil -- unless you increase the RoF massively, as you can with Metal Storm weapons (with their own downsides), so that the recoil doesn't have time to move the weapon before the next bullet or several have left the barrel; but this approach is not viable with a conventional firing mechanism.

The revolutionary thing (well, one revolutionary thing anyway) about the G11 design was that it allowed felt recoil to be delayed by pushing back the action inside the actual weapon while the 3 rounds are being fired. This way the momentum is preserved at first by moving the action and not the whole weapon. Only once the 3 rounds have all exited the muzzle, the action will return to the full forward position, exposing the whole weapon and the shooter to the full momentum -- and by now a much lower recoil energy.

Loweing the weight of the operating mechanism would not help in achieving something like this other than perhaps allowing the bits to move around quicker -- I doubt that's the limiting factor in increasing the cyclic RoF even higher, however. Or do you have some sources with more in-depth analysis of the design?

More about the G11 here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Foreigner
post Jun 16 2005, 08:44 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 586
Joined: 22-November 02
From: Gordonsville, Virginia, U.S.A. (or C.A.S.)
Member No.: 3,630



A.E.:

My mistake. :(

I should've done more research.

Most of the stuff I mentioned about the H&K G-11 was from memory and, as I've often said in the past, my memory hasn't been very good for most of my life.

--Foreigner
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raygun
post Jun 16 2005, 08:57 PM
Post #18


Mostly Harmless
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 937
Joined: 26-February 02
From: 44.662,-63.469
Member No.: 176



Yeah. Lightweight recoiling parts didn't have much to do with the speed of the G11's burst cycle. The operating mechanism did not depend on a reciprocating bolt like conventional automatic firearms do. Rather it had a rotating chamber block that was rigidly attached to the barrel. The chamber block rotated 90 degrees in order to feed from the top-mounted magazine, then align each cartridge with the barrel. When fired, the chamber block, barrel and magazine recoiled as a unit inside of the rifle's body. The extremely fast ROF had mostly to do with the lack of an extraction/ejection cycle. As the G11 used caseless ammunition, the action could forgo that time-consuming step.

Increasing the rate of fire while effectively neutralizing the effects of recoil increases the probability of a hit, and that's why caseless ammunition (for small arms) and the G11 were developed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zen Shooter01
post Jun 17 2005, 06:00 PM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 932
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Orlando, Florida
Member No.: 1,042



In real life, there are a lot of weapon handling issues that vary from weapon to weapon and shooter to shooter. SR ignores these because A.) the game designers probably didn't know that much about guns and B.) addressing them would make fire combat insanely complicated.

Take the Desert Eagle .50 AE pistol for example. I hate it. Because it's like trying to point a brick. It's got a big fat grip and it weighs (guessing from personal experience) about twelve pounds. It's awkward as hell. If I can't get my weapon pointed, what good is it?

But in SR, this awkwardness factor doesn't apply.

My Springfield Armory 1911-A1 .45, on the other hand, is much easier to handle -- and the handling is much improved since I put Hogue palm-swell grips on it, to fill my big hands. On the other hand, a smaller shooter might find the original grips to be perfect.

Similarly, the standard stock on an Ak-47 is awkward for me, because it's too short -- I'm 6'5" and have long arms. If I was 5'6", the rifle would feel better. SR ignores these differences between shooters.

I've got a hallway in my house that's about a meter wide. In real life, that creates some real issues trying to handle rifles or shotguns in combat in that hallway. SR says it makes no difference at all.

So in short, yeah, adding weight to a weapon reduces felt recoil. But in real life, it creates significant handling problems.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aardvark892
post Jun 17 2005, 07:02 PM
Post #20


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 29-March 05
From: White Sands Missile Range, NM
Member No.: 7,255



Has anyone considered the effect of a cyber-arm on recoil? Would it be possible to lock a (full) cyber arm in such a way that it acts like a modern day cupola or other-wise fixed weapon mount? I believe that a cyberarm would negate the effects brought up earlier (sorry I don't remember who wrote that, I can't figure out how to use the quote function) about the pliability of the muscles and skin of a normal hand/arm. I realize that the main pivot point of a cyberarm is the shoulder, and that some flex is unavoidable, but even so would a -1 or -2 recoil bonus be realistically applicable with a cyberarm? Cheers!

Tim
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aku
post Jun 17 2005, 07:31 PM
Post #21


Running, running, running
*****

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,220
Joined: 18-October 04
From: North Carolina
Member No.: 6,769



QUOTE (Aardvark892)
I realize that the main pivot point of a cyberarm is the shoulder, and that some flex is unavoidable, but even so would a -1 or -2 recoil bonus be realistically applicable with a cyberarm? Cheers!

Tim

i think this is best done by increasing the strength of the arm; as far as i know, i don't THINK that they are limited by the normal metahuman that they're designed for, but i could be wrong, and it would get expensive, but i think, doable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aardvark892
post Jun 17 2005, 07:42 PM
Post #22


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 29-March 05
From: White Sands Missile Range, NM
Member No.: 7,255



QUOTE (Aku)
[/QUOTE]
i think this is best done by increasing the strength of the arm

Aku, the strength of the arm (as long as it's at least average human strength) wasn't my point. Think about a fixed weapon mount, like on top of a HMMWV for example. It only need be strong enough to support the weapon, especially when firing. The main advantage it gives to the weapon is the stability, i.e. the mount won't move very much, which increases the accuracy of the weapon (or in some cases just makes the damn things accurate at all). If it were possible to lock a cyberarm at a certain degree, along with the hand/wrist, it should provide near the same benefits as that godawful gyromount thingy. I think. You're right, as far as the game rules go, but maybe this makes sense enough to use? Just my opinion. Cheers!

Tim
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LynGrey
post Jun 17 2005, 07:55 PM
Post #23


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 19-February 05
From: Charlotte, NC
Member No.: 7,100



where is Raygun when you need him?

Adding weight doesn't just fix recoil problems. Alot of Really light guns have gret recoil comp. Its really how the gases are vented. You can throw on a Marksmen Weighted Barrel and that helps a bit. But... you have to reach and equilibrim to get it right to much may over compensate. Also weight on the barrel can make the wrist tired and make the gun alot harder to fire with. You can be as strong as you want, but that doesn't matter, the gun is going to be heaver than the basic model without it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheOneRonin
post Jun 17 2005, 08:50 PM
Post #24


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,109
Joined: 16-October 03
From: Raleigh, NC
Member No.: 5,729



QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)
In real life, there are a lot of weapon handling issues that vary from weapon to weapon and shooter to shooter. SR ignores these because A.) the game designers probably didn't know that much about guns and B.) addressing them would make fire combat insanely complicated.

Take the Desert Eagle .50 AE pistol for example. I hate it. Because it's like trying to point a brick. It's got a big fat grip and it weighs (guessing from personal experience) about twelve pounds. It's awkward as hell. If I can't get my weapon pointed, what good is it?


More like 4.5 lbs...a bit more fully loaded. I didn't find it much more diffuct to aim than my old HK USP45 full size, though. However, I've got smaller hands than the average guy, so yeah, the grip was really uncomfortable for me too.

QUOTE
But in SR, this awkwardness factor doesn't apply.

My Springfield Armory 1911-A1 .45, on the other hand, is much easier to handle -- and the handling is much improved since I put Hogue palm-swell grips on it, to fill my big hands. On the other hand, a smaller shooter might find the original grips to be perfect.

Similarly, the standard stock on an Ak-47 is awkward for me, because it's too short -- I'm 6'5" and have long arms. If I was 5'6", the rifle would feel better. SR ignores these differences between shooters.


I'm a helluva lot closer to 5'6" and 6'5", and though I've never handled an actual AK (just SKS knockoffs), M-16s and M4s fit just right on my shoulder. Again, I think adding stuff like that is just a little too detailed for SR.


QUOTE

I've got a hallway in my house that's about a meter wide. In real life, that creates some real issues trying to handle rifles or shotguns in combat in that hallway. SR says it makes no difference at all.


Now I would LOVE to have some good rules for CQB. I think SR REALLY needs 'em. Anyone have some good, static house rules for weapon size and how they are effected by CQB?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raygun
post Jun 17 2005, 09:15 PM
Post #25


Mostly Harmless
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 937
Joined: 26-February 02
From: 44.662,-63.469
Member No.: 176



QUOTE (Aardvark892)
Has anyone considered the effect of a cyber-arm on recoil? Would it be possible to lock a (full) cyber arm in such a way that it acts like a modern day cupola or other-wise fixed weapon mount?

No, because your body will never be as rigid or weigh anywhere near as much as the vehicle that the mount is attached to.

Like Method suggested above, in dealing with recoil, rigidity generally works against you by causing a greater part of your body to move. If your arm won't flex, it simply acts as a lever for the rest of your body to deal with. Instead of dealing with the energy flowing through you, you're fighting against it, which tends to cause more problems that it solves. Of course, that does depend on how much recoil energy is generated; depending on the weapon, there might be so much as to make handling it in a fluid, graceful motion impossible.

The Cyberarm Gyromount (MM.36) makes more sense. Of course, as it is explained, it should only work with handguns or similar weapons that are not fired from the shoulder.

This is also why I'm not a big fan of the Strength attribute having anything to do with recoil compensation. I agree with Method that a Body + Skill "recoil pool" is a better way to handle it.

And as pretty much everyone has said, adding mass to a firearm will reduce the amount of recoil energy that is transferred to your body, but there are no free lunches (except maybe in SR). More mass does make for greater handling problems. Which is why machine guns aren't general issue weapons in any military.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th May 2024 - 06:22 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.