Wounded Ronin
Dec 11 2007, 01:27 AM
I haven't been doing much work on my 80sRun project lately because I've been quite occupied getting re-adjusted to life in the US. However, it's always been on the back of my mind.
SR3 (and SR2, and SR1) all demonstrate the role of caseless weapons in the 80s. In the 80s many people thought that caseless weapons were going do dominate military armament of the future. Like in Alien 2 where the ammunition the giant assault rifles use is referred to as "10mm caseless" but then in a later scene the rifle is clearly shown spitting out casings. See also Twilight 2000 where they go on about how caseless weapons are the shiznit but now cannot be used so often because the end of civilization meant the end of manufacture of caseless ammo.
However, coming off of a recent Soldier of Fortune II binge, I decided to look up the OICW on world.guns.ru to get warm fuzzy feelings of nostalgia, and realized that the OICW is very 80s in many ways. (The OICW looks like a big happy tropical fish so it gives you the warm fuzzies. It's also fragile and expensive like a tropical fish.)
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as40-e.htm| QUOTE |
The history of the one of the most ambitious projects in the history of small arms, known as the OICW, or the Objective Individual Combat Weapon, began late in the 1986, when the US Army Infantry School at Ft. Benning published a military paper, named "Small Arms System 2000" (SAS-2000). Despite the current trends towards the caseless and fleschette ammunition and appropriate weapons, researched and developed under the ACR program (see HK G11 and Steyr ACR entries for some details), this paper stated that the conventional small arms already reached its technological peak, and the only way to increase the hit probability in the small arms is to introduce a weapon that will fire explosive and fragmentation warheads, combined with the smart fusing and sighting / aiming technologies. While the most small arms research during the late 1980s in the USA was conducted under the ACR program, the idea first developed in the SAS-2000 was supported by another US military paper, published in 1989 by the US Army TRADOC (Training & Doctrine) center. This paper, called "The Small Arms Master Plan" (SAMP), requested for a family of infantry "Objective" weapons, namely the Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), Objective Personal Defense Weapon (OPDW), and the Objective Crew Served Weapon (OCSW). The SAMP stated that such weapons must utilize the latest developments in computers and visual technologies, as well as in the small arms, and combine both high explosive warheads and traditional bullets fire capabilities in a single weapon, that should be fielded circa 2000. Of cause, the timelines and most of the weight and cost requirements set in this paper looked unrealistic from the start, but the development of the Objective weapons began in the early 1990s.
During the early stages of research and development in the mid-1990 one out of the two teams was selected as a winner for further development contract. This team is lead by the US based Alliant Techsystems corporation (ATK), with the Heckler-Koch (Germany), Brashear and the Omega companies (both of USA) as the other team members. The ATK is responsible for system integration, and also develops the 20mm Air Burst munitions; HK is responsible for both the 5.56mm rifle and the 20mm grenade launcher; Brashear works on the sighting equipment and Omega provides the training means. The resulting weapon was type-classified by the US Army as the XM-29 circa 2002, and is scheduled to enter the service during the year 2008 in limited numbers. It will be then consequently upgraded with the new technologies then available. Present plans for fielding the M-29 are to issue four units per one infantry squad of 9 men. Early in the 2002 the XM-29 test weapons were successfully tested with the newest 20mm HEAB (High Explosive Air Bursting) munitions, which will be a major "kill factor" for the M-29 weapon. At the same time the "kinetic energy" part of the XM-29 was type-classified as the XM-8 light rifle, and, in the near future, could possibly replace the current Colt M4 carbines as a standalone compact conventional small arms.
|
Based on that description, it seems like there's a whole lot of 80s thinking gone into the OICW project. Emphasis on electronics as being the most important components? Check, see also the music of the era. Computers make everything better? Check, even in a rifle that is potentially going to be immersed in mud. Bullets AND little grenades from the same weapon? OMG the developers were watching Alien 2!
The question is, are the 80s big enough for two uber weapon systems, both caseless AND OICW?
Heh, and from a game design standpoint, how would someone implement t3h OICW in a game? It seems like in reality it's just a carbine with a ginormous grenade launcher attached that shoots little 20mm grenades which can be set to detonate manually at certain ranges with the help of a laser rangefinder. Perhaps the laser viewfinder you're supposed to be looking through has Predator-style or Terminator-style special effects graphics.
[Predator vision mode change]
VWOMP!
[/Predator vision mode change]
MITJA3000+
Dec 11 2007, 06:54 AM
I'm kinda off-topic here, but it seems that you know a fair deal about guns and ammunition, so maybe you can tell me the benefits of caseless ammunition and why they aren't used more commonly?
Wounded Ronin
Dec 11 2007, 07:32 AM
| QUOTE (MITJA3000+) |
| I'm kinda off-topic here, but it seems that you know a fair deal about guns and ammunition, so maybe you can tell me the benefits of caseless ammunition and why they aren't used more commonly? |
I'm really, honestly, and truly hardly an expert, but here's the situation as I understand it.
When you go and shoot someone with a typical firearm today, what happens? You pull the trigger, the hammer strikes the cartridge, the powder ignites, the bullet flies down the barrel and hopefully into the other person, and the slide on your firearm flies back and the casing is ejected before a new round enters the chamber so you can double tap.
The rate of fire on an automatic weapon could be a lot higher if there were no casing to eject and the firearm could just go spitting bullets out without the mechanism needing to take the time to send the slide back in order to eject a casing, right? There would be less steps in the mechanism and thus less steps between one bullet flying out and the next one.
So caseless ammo was bullets embedded in blocks of propellant with no casings to be ejected. Heckler und Koch, the gigantic testicles of the firearms world, worked on a design for an assault rifle with a really high rate of fire using such new technology. IIRC it was called the G11. After lots of development and testing they were able to get a version that was reasonably resistant to bad weather and conditions.
However, caseless technology never caught on. Why? The textbook explanation is that "regular" ammunition with casings was so prevalant, especially in light of NATO standardization, that no military wanted to spend the money to convert their armory from adequate cased ammunition to higher-rate-of-fire caseless ammunition.
No doubt, the DSF gun experts will now pounce on me and tear my explanation to shreds. But this is my humble understanding derived from personal research into the subject.
Kagetenshi
Dec 11 2007, 09:58 AM
First off, the OICW is not the ultimate '80s weapon. The ultimate '80s weapon is an OICW with an underbarrel keytar.
As for caseless ammo, I'm also no expert, but some advantages:
No ejection of brass. Aside from possible evidence-trail considerations for Shadowrunners, this means no constantly-operating ejection port, and no having hot brass fly into your face if you happen to be in the wrong place relative to the weapon.
IIRC, caseless ammo is also usually lighter. I think there was even talk of it getting cheaper, since once economies of scale kick in you've got this bullet, but minus some materials which cost money.
One of the perhaps not immediately intuitive disadvantages caseless ammo has is that the case is typically at or above the ambient temperature of the chamber, meaning it carries away heat when it gets ejected. With caseless ammo, your other methods of heat transfer need to make up for that loss.
~J
Blade
Dec 11 2007, 11:20 AM
One OICW is in the Infiltration mod for UT99 (maybe in the Community Expansion Pack) and, as for all guns in Infiltration, should be as close as it gets to what the real thing could be.
The grenade launcher is really sweet.
Video :
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...filtration+OICW
Fix-it
Dec 11 2007, 02:58 PM
# Allows a firearm to have a simpler, more reliable, and inexpensive design, by eliminating the components needed to eject casings.
# Allows the firearm to be better sealed against dirt and moisture, by getting rid of the ejection port (a port is still needed to extract chambered rounds, but not needed to be as big as a standard ejection port).
# Allows a firearm to be used by right- and left-handed users without modification
# Eliminates the hazard of ejecting hot, fast-moving casings
# Means that ammunition weighs less, allowing a soldier more mobility, or the option to carry more ammunition for a higher rate of fire and/or longer mission
# Reduces the cost of manufacturing the ammunition and avoids consuming raw supplies of metal
PBTHHHHT
Dec 12 2007, 04:01 PM
| QUOTE (Fix-it) |
# Allows the firearm to be better sealed against dirt and moisture, by getting rid of the ejection port (a port is still needed to extract chambered rounds, but not needed to be as big as a standard ejection port).
# Allows a firearm to be used by right- and left-handed users without modification
# Eliminates the hazard of ejecting hot, fast-moving casings
|
Hmmm... you should check out the P90 and the FN2000 (or the civilian models of which I'm familiar with the FS2000), they have the ejector system that has the brass pushed forward and dropped out front. They're also friendly for different handed users compared to other rifles.
Fix-it
Dec 12 2007, 04:13 PM
I copied that from Wikipedia btw. I'm quite aware there are other methods for dealing with the hot Brass problem.
/wants a P90.
//and a FAMAS.
///and a B&T MP9.
CircuitBoyBlue
Dec 12 2007, 05:21 PM
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin) |
The question is, are the 80s big enough for two uber weapon systems, both caseless AND OICW?
|
No, the question is, are the 80's Bad Enuff Dudes to save the President? Because you know what else is caseless? Your fists.
Kagetenshi
Dec 12 2007, 06:01 PM
My fists eject spent cases every time I punch someone. It is hard core.
~J
Moon-Hawk
Dec 12 2007, 06:39 PM
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
My fists eject spent cases every time I punch someone. It is hard core.
~J |
Chuck Norris? Is that you?
Wounded Ronin
Dec 13 2007, 06:47 AM
| QUOTE (CircuitBoyBlue) |
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Dec 10 2007, 08:27 PM) | The question is, are the 80s big enough for two uber weapon systems, both caseless AND OICW?
|
No, the question is, are the 80's Bad Enuff Dudes to save the President? Because you know what else is caseless? Your fists.
|
Wow. I can never watch Bloodsport in the same light again.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.