General > Discussion
Latest real-world weaponry
Sophisanmus:
I heard that the gay bomb project was abandoned on... nyeeeh ...grounds. That said, I'm sure you could raise some eyebrows with hot Shevaar-on-Shevaar action...
"Long term side effects" do not a good weapon make, at least not in this setting. *VOOON* "Ha-ha! Now you die in six to ten days!" *FRAPP* "Oh dear, I am dead!"
Kaerius:
Meh, metalstorm I say... now there's an interesting system. From super-fast machineguns and grenade launchers(emplacements in both cases), to machinepistols that get several shots out of the barrel before the recoil gets a chance to kick in, to multi-shot underslung grenade launchers and shotguns.
Winter:
--- Quote from: Kaerius on July 10, 2008, 01:18:29 am ---Meh, metalstorm I say... now there's an interesting system. From super-fast machineguns and grenade launchers(emplacements in both cases), to machinepistols that get several shots out of the barrel before the recoil gets a chance to kick in, to multi-shot underslung grenade launchers and shotguns.
--- End quote ---
You don't need Metalstorm to get several shots out of the barrel before recoil, the HK G11 did it in the bloody 1980s. In fact, while Metalstorm is indeed pretty cool, its military applications are actually very limited because it runs through its ammo too quickly, the ammo is too bulky (i.e. having to cart around lots of pre-loaded barrels), and it takes too much time to switch out barrels to reload.
The MS underslung launchers seem like a good idea but even they get a lot of flak from soldiers, for example the aussies equipped with the new AuSteyr, because they can't actually be reloaded in the field. If that is eventually resolved I can see it gaining some popularity, though the ammo for it would still be a pain to carry around.
Regards,
Winter
P.S. We do use Metalstorm techniques where appropriate, such as in the Bolter.
DanielOR:
Winter,
G11 never saw mass production though, did it? Shame, that. The Russians now have the Abakan rifle - similar ergonomics to AK-74 with the main difference being that the second round is fired before ANY recoil is felt. Resulting in two bullets in one hole at 100m (with a competent shooter, of course). After two shots, though, it becomes a regular assault rifle. I tried to ask around and what I heard is: yes, the two-punch has greater lithality, but the system is much more complicated than the famous AK series. As a result, field-servicing Abakan is tricky, making it a weapon for a professional in a police environment, i.e. with frequent quality servicing, rather than a grunt's weapon.
Winter:
--- Quote from: DanielOR on July 15, 2008, 09:59:46 am ---Winter,
G11 never saw mass production though, did it? Shame, that. The Russians now have the Abakan rifle - similar ergonomics to AK-74 with the main difference being that the second round is fired before ANY recoil is felt. Resulting in two bullets in one hole at 100m (with a competent shooter, of course). After two shots, though, it becomes a regular assault rifle. I tried to ask around and what I heard is: yes, the two-punch has greater lithality, but the system is much more complicated than the famous AK series. As a result, field-servicing Abakan is tricky, making it a weapon for a professional in a police environment, i.e. with frequent quality servicing, rather than a grunt's weapon.
--- End quote ---
No, the G11 got scuppered by the reunification of Germany, although it was apparently quite reliable to fire despite its complexity.
As far as complexity goes, though, you're always going to have these problems when trying to update your infantry weapons, which is why rifle technology hasn't advanced very far in twenty years. Any new mechanism you add is going to make the weapon more difficult to service and more prone to breakage. It's the old wisdom of more moving parts. Also, any next-generation weapon needs to be significantly better than past ones in order to justify the expense of adopting it, and incurring extra costs such as adding fiddly bits and changing calibres away from the NATO standards is a no-no for most militarised nations (which are your only real market as a rifle manufacturer).
You simply cannot modernise a weapon like the AK because when you add anything you automatically make it more vulnerable to the harsh climes where it's likely to be used. That's the sort of design theory we've used for the game. Weaponry follows life, and things like ease of service and reliability weigh just as much as (if not more than) firepower and penetration.
Regards,
Winter
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version