Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Integral sound suppressor
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
yoippari
I checked back three of four pages in two different searches and couldn't find anything.

Are integral suppressors like on the Smartgun X subject to the 300 round life expectancy that the suppressor accessory is? If so are they replaceable or is the gun essentially insuppressible at that point. Also is your answer RAW that I couldn't find or a common houserule?
kzt
Real world, really well built suppressors will outlive the barrel of an automatic weapon. Surefire has a piece where they shoot out 5 or so M4 barrels using the same (glowing red hot) suppressor firing as fast as they can. Many silencers have wipes and other parts that need to be replaced. But I don't think the body actually wears out and needs to be thrown away.
Crusher Bob
Wipe style suppressors are obsolete and are not really used by anyone anymore. Modern suppressors are good for several thousand rounds
FriendoftheDork
Oh, and don't think suppressors are that good. A -2 to hear the gunfire should be sufficent penalty.

Hollywood still tends to overrate the effectiveness of silencers and suppressors, even in Prison Break someone fires a silenced pistol in a room and one of the people in the next room barely hears the sound of the spent casing hitting the floor.... yeah right! Silenced weapons are loud still.
toturi
You might be surprised at how quiet a silenced subsonic round can be.
Jack Kain
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork)
Oh, and don't think suppressors are that good. A -2 to hear the gunfire should be sufficent penalty.

Hollywood still tends to overrate the effectiveness of silencers and suppressors, even in Prison Break someone fires a silenced pistol in a room and one of the people in the next room barely hears the sound of the spent casing hitting the floor.... yeah right! Silenced weapons are loud still.

Real world doesn't matter,
SR SHOULD follow hollywood rules on silencers
MJBurrage
A silencer and a suppressor are not quite the same thing. The former combined with subsonic ammunition, and firing from a closed bolt is silent. The latter is much more common, and simply reduces the volume of the firing weapon.

The "silencer" in SR4 seems to be more of a suppressor. I think it would be more confusing than helpful to now try and differentiate different types of silencers/suppressors, so...

For those desiring uber-stealth I would would make available:

Sub-Sonic Ammunition
This ammunition does not create a small sonic boom when fired. As a result, it applies a –4 dice pool modifier on all Perception Tests to notice the weapon’s use or locate the weapon’s firer. This modifier stacks with the modifier for using a silencer. (–1 damage, +1 AP, 8R, 50¥)

I went with R, because while it might be suspicious on the street, it has a valuable use at target ranges in keeping the neighbors happy.
Ravor
QUOTE (Jack Kain)
Real world doesn't matter,
SR SHOULD follow hollywood rules on silencers


To each their own. Although I might not be a huge fan of making Shadowrun line up with Real World Physics, I've even more revoted by twisting it to Hollywood Physics.

*Edit*

Alsom to answer the OP's question, personally at the moment I assume that internal silencer's are good for the life of the weapon although I'm toying with the idea of charging a monthly 'Maintance' Fee ala Lifestyle to cover for the costs the Runners surely have in keeping their gear in full working order and SOTA.

However, it's low priority for me right now because I figure that 'I'll be able to pull it out of my ARSE' when it is finally released... cyber.gif
kzt
QUOTE (Ravor)
I'm toying with the idea of charging a monthly 'Maintance' Fee ala Lifestyle to cover for the costs the Runners surely have in keeping their gear in full working order and SOTA.

Consider that they should each be monthly firing a few hundred rounds using pistols or rifles, and a thousand+ using MGs or SMGs to maintain (much less improve) their skills.
Eleazar
QUOTE (MJBurrage @ Jun 1 2007, 01:08 PM)
A silencer and a suppressor are not quite the same thing.  The former combined with subsonic ammunition, and firing from a closed bolt is silent.  The latter is much more common, and simply reduces the volume of the firing weapon.

The "silencer" in SR4 seems to be more of a suppressor.  I think it would be more confusing than helpful to now try and differentiate different types of silencers/suppressors, so...

For those desiring uber-stealth I would would make available:

Sub-Sonic Ammunition
This ammunition does not create a small sonic boom when fired.  As a result, it applies a –4 dice pool modifier on all Perception Tests to notice the weapon’s use or locate the weapon’s firer.  This modifier stacks with the modifier for using a silencer.  (–1 damage, +1 AP, 8R, 50¥)

I went with R, because while it might be suspicious on the street, it has a valuable use at target ranges in keeping the neighbors happy.

I don't think I would decrease the damage, I do agree with the +AP. Maybe you could get rid of the -1 damage reduce and change the AP to +2 or +3. The AP and damage modifiers would also be variable depending on the muzzle velocity of the bullets. For instance, a SMG with a muzzle velocity of 1476 fps would not be as severely hampered as a Rifle with a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps. I do not know enough about the muzzle velocity of the guns in SR4, and how they differ in each gun. Subsonic rounds would be anything below 1100 fps (feet-per-second), in normal weather conditions. We would also have to reduce the effective range of the gun as well, in some cases it would actually half the effective range.

I have a question that is pertinent to this discussion, what is the muzzle velocity of most pistols, most smg's, most rifles, most hmg's, most sniper rifles, etc? In regards to SR4, would the muzzle velocity of the real-life guns match the muzzle velocities of the guns in SR4?

EDIT: One last thing, if I am correct, most pistols would not even need subsonic ammo, as their muzzle velocity is already subsonic. Is this correct? Does that mean if we introduce the idea of subsonic ammo into SR4 that all pistols should get this same -4 perception bonus?
yoippari
Well, this is for a "Down in the Gutter" ganger character. The gun is more for emergencies than a once a week run. I actually see it being used for the occasional driveby more than anything.

Having a suppressor is just ok in that I don't really care if everyone hears a gun go off in the barrens but if I have it do I need to replace it with a 12F aftermarket suppressor which might take a long time to get or is it good "forever".
djinni
this made me wonder where is a suppressor for a fubuki?
the bbarrel/integral is the clip...but then can you attach an after market supressor?
Demon_Bob
QUOTE (Jack Kain)
Real world doesn't matter,
SR SHOULD follow hollywood rules on silencers

Having it take only a combat pass to attach or remove a silencer, just does not sit right with me.
Demon_Bob
QUOTE (MJBurrage)
Sub-Sonic Ammunition
This ammunition does not create a small sonic boom when fired. As a result, it applies a –4 dice pool modifier on all Perception Tests to notice the weapon’s use or locate the weapon’s firer. This modifier stacks with the modifier for using a silencer. (–1 damage, +1 AP, 8R, 50¥)

Might suggest reducing the range catagory to the next type as well.
kzt
QUOTE (Demon_Bob)
Having it take only a combat pass to attach or remove a silencer, just does not sit right with me.

It's fairly accurate with some suppressors. If you have to unscrew retaining nuts,etc it's totally bogus.

A decent article (though remember it is marketing) on suppressors is Surefire's "SUPPRESSOR SCIENCE "

They have a lot more on their site. Despite what they say, other people do make pretty good suppressors and silencers. I've been told that their "no point of aim change" was something original, most manufactures apparently just suggested just not removing the suppressor after you zeroed.
FriendoftheDork
QUOTE (Jack Kain)
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Jun 1 2007, 10:26 AM)
Oh, and don't think suppressors are that good. A -2 to hear the gunfire should be sufficent penalty.

Hollywood still tends to overrate the effectiveness of silencers and suppressors, even in Prison Break someone fires a silenced pistol in a room and one of the people in the next room barely hears the sound of the spent casing hitting the floor.... yeah right! Silenced weapons are loud still.

Real world doesn't matter,
SR SHOULD follow hollywood rules on silencers

Sorry, I don't do Shadowrun D20.


SR doesen't have to be realistic, but believable. Silencers and suppressors as undetectable weapons with no drawbacks at all doesen't sit well with me. A true silenced pistol (like the MK-22 navy) with locked slide and subsonic ammo is good for stealthy shooting, but even so the clack of hammer and the sound of the bullet will still be there. The main advantage is that most people won't realize a gun has been fired even if they heard the shot.

Supressors is mostly made to make it difficult for the enemy to pinpoint your position, not to avoid hearing you shoot at all.
Crusher Bob
QUOTE (Eleazar)
I have a question that is pertinent to this discussion, what is the muzzle velocity of most pistols, most smg's, most rifles, most hmg's, most sniper rifles, etc? In regards to SR4, would the muzzle velocity of the real-life guns match the muzzle velocities of the guns in SR4?

Speed of sound is roughly 1100 fps / 340 m/s

The muzzle velocity of most 'normal' pistols is somewhere around the speed of sound. As a sample, .45 and come .40, .38 spl, and 9mm loads are subsonic. .357, .44. 10mm. most 9mm loads, etc are supersonic.

Typical pistol round speeds 800-1300 fps / 250-370 m/s

Pistol rounds fired from sub-machine guns are almost invariably supersonic, due to the longer barrel of the SMG giving them another 100 fps/30 m/s in velocity. Expect velocities in the range of 1000-1400 fps / 310-430 m/s

For rifle rounds fired from very compact carbines/smgs the rounds will be going much faster, around 1300-1800 fps / 400-550 m/s

For military rifles, bullet velocity goes from around 2600-3100 fps / 800-950 m/s with the lower velocity range comming out of rifles with shorter barrels / carbines.

For sniper and anti-material rifles, they will typically have velocities around 850-1000 m/s. The anti material rifles just throw a much larger projectile.

Maximum projectile velocity is determined by the gas expansion rate of the explosive used to fire the projectile, the maximum speed for an explosive driven projectiles is somewhere around 2000-2500 m/s. Of course, the 'practical' maximum velocity is considerably smaller.
MYST1C
QUOTE (Crusher Bob)
Maximum projectile velocity is determined by the gas expansion rate of the explosive used to fire the projectile, the maximum speed for an explosive driven projectiles is somewhere around 2000-2500 m/s.  Of course, the 'practical' maximum velocity is considerably smaller.

Just to give an example of bullet speeds aside from smallarms:

A 105mm APFSDS-T round fired from the L7 cannon of a Leopard 1A5 battle tank has a muzzle velocity of ~1450 m/s or ~4760 fps - 4.2 times the speed of sound.
yoippari
So by RAW the integral suppressor does or does not have the 300 round life span of the accessory suppressor?
Ed_209a
Suppressors actually do a great job at reducing firearm sound. Many people just don't realize how loud firearms really are. Even phrases like "The only sound you hear is that of the action cycling" is a little misleading. When you read "action cycling" think "one big piece of metal hitting another big piece of metal really hard."

A quality suppressor can reduce the peak sound volume by 30dB. This is enough to turn "painfully, stunningly, your ears making disturbing whistling noises afterwards, loud" into just "loud". It also makes the gunshot sound less like a gunshot, and more like someone dropping something onto a bare floor.

Suppressor manufacturers today (2007) are developing technology where sound from one part of the silencer partially cancels out sound from another part of the silencer. I think in 2070, this will give rise to smart silencers that can adjust themselves on the fly to optimise for ambient weather conditions. This might give you a 40 or even 50 dB suppressor.

I'll second KZT's link to the Surefire site. It's a good intro to suppressors.
kzt
QUOTE (yoippari)
So by RAW the integral suppressor does or does not have the 300 round life span of the accessory suppressor?

The book doesn't say. I'd say the 300 round lifetime is BS and I'd ignore it.
yoippari
Ok, stupid, no make sense, fluff mechanic is considered ignored. With the original question out of the way then I'll leave you guys to your suppressor effectiveness debate.
Eleazar
QUOTE (kzt @ Jun 3 2007, 01:31 PM)
QUOTE (yoippari @ Jun 2 2007, 11:46 PM)
So by RAW the integral suppressor does or does not have the 300 round life span of the accessory suppressor?

The book doesn't say. I'd say the 300 round lifetime is BS and I'd ignore it.

I personally would ignore the unintegral 300 round life span as well.


EDIT: One more thing, I about fell out of my chair when I read the words "cool science". Who the heck does marketing for these people?
Fix-it
QUOTE (Ed_209a)
Suppressor manufacturers today (2007) are developing technology where sound from one part of the silencer partially cancels out sound from another part of the silencer. I think in 2070, this will give rise to smart silencers that can adjust themselves on the fly to optimise for ambient weather conditions. This might give you a 40 or even 50 dB suppressor.

QFT

You guys have to remember, you need to add 40 years to SOTA in order to get where SR is at.
Eleazar
QUOTE (Fix-it)
QUOTE (Ed_209a @ Jun 3 2007, 12:13 PM)
Suppressor manufacturers today (2007) are developing technology where sound from one part of the silencer partially cancels out sound from another part of the silencer. I think in 2070, this will give rise to smart silencers that can adjust themselves on the fly to optimise for ambient weather conditions. This might give you a 40 or even 50 dB suppressor.

QFT

You guys have to remember, you need to add 40 years to SOTA in order to get where SR is at.

Except this isn't an absolute rule in SR, some of this alleged future tech in SR is more like slightly improved, if at all, modern tech. This is most especially the case with guns. Think of how much has improved with guns from WW2 and now. Technological progress seems to be moving even faster(could just be me, or my limited POV), so unless it hits a wall, I think we would see more change by 2070.

So yeah I guess I agree with you in terms of where I think SR should be in 2070, but then again I disagree in terms of where SR actually is in 2070.
kzt
QUOTE (Eleazar)
This is most especially the case with guns. Think of how much has improved with guns from WW2 and now. Technological progress seems to be moving even faster(could just be me, or my limited POV), so unless it hits a wall, I think we would see more change by 2070.

I don't see this, what are you seeing?

I see the most common military small arms are essentially unchanged from 1963 and 1947, based on a 1943 concept. And sniper rifles are mostly minor refinements of the rifles used to fight the first world war. The most popular pistol among the hard-core pistol nuts are all directly based on the 1911.

The only significant major changes I can think of are in optical sights, training, and effective handgun bullets. The deployment of very large caliber long-range rifles is a new development, but not one that really has that much impact. The Glock pistol has some new features and others that are put together cleverly, but I wouldn't call it a major change.

All the attempts at revolutionary change I've seen have failed. SPIW, G-11, CAWS, etc.
Eleazar
You don't see a big difference between the MP44 and the HK416? This is just WWII I am talking, not the WWI you suggested. The fundamental tech might be relatively unchanged, but the effectiveness of these guns are notably different. The fundamentals of a gun hasn't even really changed since medieval times, but I am not about to claim there is not really a significant difference.

I wouldn't call an M24 a minor refinement to the M1 Garand. Actually we should really compare the XM110 SASS to the M1 Garand.

You do have a good point on the 1911. Still if I had to make my choice, I would rather have a USP Tactical than a 1930s 1911.
kzt
They are minor refinements. It's not nearly the difference between the most deadly man portable AT weapon in WW2 (a panzerfaust) and a Javelin. Or a BM-13 Katysha and a GMLRS. Or a ME-262 compared to an F-22. These are huge, revolutionary improvements that make someone armed with the old weapons effectively unable to do any damage.

A panzergrenadier company armed with MG-42s and MP-44s would be able to effectively fight a US infantry company armed with M4s, SAWs and M-240s. The weapons are similar enough that they wouldn't determine the battle.

An ME-262 squadron wouldn't even know they were in combat with F-22s before they were dead. That's technological progress.
Eleazar
QUOTE (kzt)
A panzergrenadier company armed with MG-42s and MP-44s would be able to effectively fight a US infantry company armed with M4s, SAWs and M-240s. The weapons are similar enough that they wouldn't determine the battle.

There is AT THE VERY LEAST a significant difference between the effective combat range and accuracy of these rifles, especially if an M16A2 were used instead of the M4. I think the US infantry given everything else being the same(training from 1940 and not 2007, with the exception of modern training on the effective use of modern guns) would wipe the floor. If what you said was true, the US army would not be spending large portions of it's money on guns that are effectively no better than what they had back in 1945.

The MP44's effective range is 150-250m(probably closer to the lower figure) while the M16A2 effective range is 400-460m(I have heard the 550m figure is inflated). Not to mention the M16A2 is more accurate across the board.
Ravor
Although I'm not going to get involved in the base agruement over whether or not guns have advanced since WWII I do have to point out the the United States Government is the same one that buys $1000 Toliet Seats to go along with their $5000 Hammers so claiming that we wouldn't spend money on something if it weren't 'better' just doesn't hold water.
Eleazar
QUOTE (Ravor)
Although I'm not going to get involved in the base agruement over whether or not guns have advanced since WWII I do have to point out the the United States Government is the same one that buys $1000 Toliet Seats to go along with their $5000 Hammers so claiming that we wouldn't spend money on something if it weren't 'better' just doesn't hold water.

That isn't pertinent to the discussion. This just shows they are not honest when it comes to reporting what they actually are spending their money on.

Lastly, I don't know how we got focused on the M16s when I said the the HK416. Which is actually more accurate and reliable than the M16A2 previously mentioned. It also actually has all of today's technology, the M16A2 does not.
djinni
QUOTE (Fix-it)
You guys have to remember, you need to add 40 years to SOTA in order to get where SR is at.

Eleazar has it close, you also have to look at it this way in terms of business what makes more money? a one time item that lasts forever or an item you have to keep buying over and over...
TheOneRonin
QUOTE (Eleazar)

There is AT THE VERY LEAST a significant difference between the effective combat range and accuracy of these rifles, especially if an M16A2 were used instead of the M4. I think the US infantry given everything else being the same(training from 1940 and not 2007, with the exception of modern training on the effective use of modern guns) would wipe the floor. If what you said was true, the US army would not be spending large portions of it's money on guns that are effectively no better than what they had back in 1945.

The MP44's effective range is 150-250m(probably closer to the lower figure) while the M16A2 effective range is 400-460m(I have heard the 550m figure is inflated). Not to mention the M16A2 is more accurate across the board.



Just to clarify a few things here.

#1 If you are talking about long range, open terrain engagements, the Germans wouldn't be using MP-44s. They would be using the Gewehr 43 chambered in 7.92x57mm Mauser. That cartridge significantly outperforms the 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge in terms of range, penetration, and lethality at just about any range. The Americans could expend ammunition more quickly, but when you are shooting at anything beyond CQC ranges, single, well-aimed shots are the order of the day.

#2 If you are talking CQC, then the Germans WOULD be using the MP-44. And in that regard, I would still favor the penetration and lethality of the 7.92mm Kurz over the Remington .223.

All other things being equal...I would put my money on the Germans.

As a side note, hitting a stationary, human-sized target at 400+ meters with an A2 and iron sights is REALLY fucking challenging for your average Infantry Rifleman.
kzt
QUOTE (Eleazar)

There is AT THE VERY LEAST a significant difference between the effective combat range and accuracy of these rifles, especially if an M16A2 were used instead of the M4. I think the US infantry given everything else being the same(training from 1940 and not 2007, with the exception of modern training on the effective use of modern guns) would wipe the floor. If what you said was true, the US army would not be spending large portions of it's money on guns that are effectively no better than what they had back in 1945.

The MP44's effective range is 150-250m(probably closer to the lower figure) while the M16A2 effective range is 400-460m(I have heard the 550m figure is inflated). Not to mention the M16A2 is more accurate across the board.

M16s are more effective than MP44s, just not that much more so that they will utterly outclass the opposition. And it doesn't really matter, because the ranges of infantry rifles are pretty much immaterial to most combat. Machineguns are the real long range killers, and not many people would classify the MG-42 as anything other then one of the finest machineguns ever used. To a large extent, the Germans had infantrymen with rifles to keep people from sneaking up on and bothering the MG-42 gunners. The MG-42 can kill you at 1000 meters. This is why Germany (home of HK, etc) still uses the MG-42, rechambered to 7.62, as the MG-3.

There really hasn't been that much in the way of dramatic changes in small arms in the last 50 years. Really.
Heimdalol
There is at least one technological refinement in SR weapons as it pertains to this discussion. That is by 2070 many firearms are fired by a pulse of electrical current and not by a metal hammer striking a pin.

This makes a big difference especially in the field of suppressors. If today already we can get the noise of the powder explosion to be less than that of the action, then if we decrease the noise of the action, I could easily see specially designed firearms being as quiet as a paintball gun or even a bb gun.

The more I think about it I can't see why ( just about ) every gun in SR wouldn't have built in suppressor. If you think about it from the point of view of a corporate team. Gunshots are only going to scare your wageslaves, give your security team suppressed guns and if you can contain a breach people working in the next room could keep going without missing a beat. I'm sure they'd rather have the sec team's guns wirelessly notify the on site security supervisor rather than have the weapon's report make nearby sec guards jumpy when they should be at their posts.

In civilian life. While I don't think wageslaves would be allowed to be armed when at work. I think out on the streets putting a suppressor on your gun would just be the neighborly thing to do. No one wants to be awoken by your gunfight at 3 am. The Star isn't coming the least you could do is keep it down.
yoippari
Even now the big reasons why people support the use of suppressors are personal comfort and not disturbing the neighbors. Gun ranges need to be away from people and they need to have concrete and dirt walls built to help contain the sound. Ranges often require the use of earmuffs. Earmuffs aren't practical in actual hunting so you either need one of those GameEars or incur hearing damage.

With that in mind security personnel (especially ones with extraterritoriality) should always be using suppressors in SR. All shadow runners should probably use them and military will probably use them. No one wants to need a new set of ears.

Right now you just need (assuming its legal in your state) $200 tax and the signature of your county sheriff. In dystopia, you'd need a fixer.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012