Are the stats for MIU linked , shoulder mounted psycannon similar to regular psycannon, or are more like a pistol stats?
Thanks, SMS
Strictly, the same as MIU rules + Psycannon rules.
However, a considerable chunk of members agree that basic weapons are too large to really be perched on a shoulder, particularly something as violent as bolt weapons, and would use pistol rules instead.
Of course, this is sidestepping the question of "Why a psycannon, rather than a conventional bolter?". The things and their ammo are rarer than rocking horse poo, even for the Ordo Malleus - yet every second daemonhunter appears to have one.
Quote from: MarcoSkoll on October 04, 2009, 02:30:04 AM
.... The things and their ammo are rarer than rocking horse poo, even for the Ordo Malleus - yet every second daemonhunter appears to have one.
I think the trouble might come from 40k, where, in a large scale battle in which a great many daemons will be prancing about, it makes a wee bit of sense to pull out the psycannons. In inquisitor though, where oft the most deamonic thing around is a daemonhost (and there's very few of them) it'd really be, I think the most daemonhunting of deamonhunters that would have one. Nevermind that many members of the Ordo Mallus aren't all that preoccupied with hunting down deamons.
Quote from: MarcoSkoll on October 04, 2009, 02:30:04 AMHowever, a considerable chunk of members agree that basic weapons are too large to really be perched on a shoulder
I think restrictions for shoulder mounts ought to be based on a weapons weight, rather than it's class.
That being said, why are MIUs only on shoulders? Surely one could imagine some Techpriest with a harness, and having a machinegun held over his head?
Quote from: GhouraAgur on October 04, 2009, 04:54:32 AMI think restrictions for shoulder mounts ought to be based on a weapons weight, rather than its class.
Size is an important issue too. Either way, pistols are usually of a reasonable size and weight - basic weapons generally are somewhat impractical. Not to say it's impossible, but it is improbable.
QuoteThat being said, why are MIUs only on shoulders? Surely one could imagine some Techpriest with a harness, and having a machinegun held over his head?
Amen, brother. I think we can blame Alien vs Predator for this trend
Tullio
Thanks, guys!
Quote from: MarcoSkoll on October 04, 2009, 10:28:43 AM
Quote from: GhouraAgur on October 04, 2009, 04:54:32 AMI think restrictions for shoulder mounts ought to be based on a weapons weight, rather than its class.
Size is an important issue too. Either way, pistols are usually of a reasonable size and weight - basic weapons generally are somewhat impractical. Not to say it's impossible, but it is improbable.
Size is a funny sort of issue, what with digi-weapons thrown in the mix. Sure, they're probably insanely expensive and rare, but when you can fit a pistol into a ring, you could probably get some Tech-priest of the Micro-Omnisiah to cram a bigger gun into a pistol sized rig.
But I agree with you, really. A weight 60 plasma blaster? That
basic weapon is heavier than a
heavy stubber! But things like bola launchers, and neural shredders? Much too flavorful, methinks, to simply lug around with your hands.
But hey! The skitarri are mind linked to their weapons, even those that they carry with their hands!
(And aren't, y'know, there instead of hands...) Surely there's some benefit to knowing exactly how many bullets are left in the clip, or just how close the barrel is to melting
(or the plasma gun is to overheating!)
Quotehow many bullets are left in the clip
If I don't do it for him, MarcoSkoll will be along shortly to point out that a clip and a magazine are not the same thing and that you mean magazine in this case.
R.
Off topic, but - is there any universal word for the ammunition loaded into a weapon? I mean, for some guns its a clip (M1 Garand, right?), for most its a magazine, I remember Marco mentioned a "slide gun" at one point, Heavy Stubbers and Bolters and various other weapons take belts, Lasweapons of all kinds take Powerpacks, Plasma and Flamer (and I think I've come across it in Melta as well) use flasks or tanks... And how would one refer to an entirely internal system, like a revolver or most pump action shotguns?
Quote from: precinctomega on October 04, 2009, 06:13:01 PMIf I don't do it for him, MarcoSkoll will be along shortly to point out that a clip and a magazine are not the same thing and that you mean magazine in this case.
I was going to resist the urge to do that this time, actually.
Quote from: DapperAnarchist on October 04, 2009, 07:26:34 PMOff topic, but - is there any universal word for the ammunition loaded into a weapon?
For Inquisitor, the word
reload works well: "Stubber and two reloads". Wouldn't be too hasty to use it in real life though, you might get some odd looks.
QuoteAnd how would one refer to an entirely internal system, like a revolver or most pump action shotguns?
Revolvers have a cylinder, which is often loaded by virtue of "moon clips", which hold together typically 2, 3 or 6 rounds at a time.
Shotguns have "tubular magazines", where shells are stacked end to end. A magazine is still a magazine, even if it isn't removable. Strictly, the M1 Garand has an internal magazine - it's just unusual in that the clip it's loaded with is inserted into the magazine as well...
... and somewhat annoying in that is ejected after the last round is fired, making a distinct metallic ting on hitting the floor, something that cost a few lives in WWII.
Firstly, the Nazis used it as an indicator that the US soldier was out of ammo. Then the Americans got smart, and kept a few empty clips around - they'd drop one, then shoot the head of whichever poor bugger popped up because they thought they were out of ammo.
While we are on the 'ask Marco Skoll about guns' detour I have a question of my own. I'm a bit confused about the terminology relating to rounds. Is a bullet the same as a round or do either imply the cartridge or just the missile part. Is cartridge the right word for the brass or do these terms only apply once they are spent?
Quote from: Inquisitor Cade on October 05, 2009, 01:29:25 PMWhile we are on the 'ask Marco Skoll about guns' detour I have a question of my own.
In strict terms...
- Bullet is just the projectile. More strictly, only certain projectiles, as shotgun shot, musket balls, etc. wouldn't be referred to as bullets.
- Round and cartridge are strictly the terms for the whole thing, bullet, case, powder/propellant, primer and all. So taking "send some rounds downrange" literally, you'd probably have lobbed them.
- "Brass" is slang for the case. "Spent brass" would obviously refer to the case of a fired round.
These are of course, sometimes mixed up a bit, even by people in the profession. Bullet and round are often used in place of one another, and cartridge can sometimes be simply the case - but usually qualified by "empty cartridge".
Hmm, here is my take on this...
Revolvers- can have a quickload clip (?)- essentially a gizmo that holds all your rounds. After emptying all the rounds in a rev drum- flip it out and empty all used brass. Then produce the quickload holder, shove the new rounds in the drum, release the ammo from holder, push back drum- all set. These are used often by cops, but nowadays most of PDs are switching to standard 9mm- Glocks.
Clip is usually an internal, partially external ammo holder that you load in a pistol or some rifles- M1, SKS. M1 has a 8(?) round clip that you push down with thumb, while holding breach with other fingers- "Garand thumb" is a bit painful.
When clip is done it pops with clinking sound- breach stays open. SKS has a strip clip- that you push in the internal magazine, and then while holding down rounds yank out the strip.
Magazine is usually completely external ammo holder that you click in place- internal spring will push all the ammo in the breach while firing. When done, just swap the mag...
Something like that...
Marco is right. Serge is wrong. A clip is just that: a clip that holds a number of rounds together in order to make loading the magazine - internal or external - faster.
Professionals often refer to rounds rather than bullets, even though they understand the distinction, because the use of the word "bullet" is usually heard by the ignorant referring to rounds. As a result, the term is tarnished by association. A better word would be "projectile", if one wanted to sound like an expert without using the word "bullet".
Most multipl-shot weapons have a magazine where they hold their ammunition immediately prior to percussion. Revolvers are the exception, as they have a cylinder that contains a number of individual chambers. The distinction is important because the chamber exists in non-revolver kinetic weapons as well, but there is only one. So a cylinder contains many chambers, whilst a weapon with a magazine has only one.
I don't know, but I assume that those multi-shot grenade launchers also have a cylinder and chambers, rather than a magazine.
Going back to the OP, shoulder-mounted weapons were, of course, popularized by Inquisitor Covenant, possibly inspired by the original Predator movies. The influence of AvP is unlikely, as that was released some time after Inquisitor.
R.
Quote from: precinctomega on October 08, 2009, 02:40:06 PMI don't know, but I assume that those multi-shot grenade launchers also have a cylinder and chambers, rather than a magazine.
Depends on the grenade launcher. The Mk19 is belt fed; the QLZ-87 and QLZ-87B are fed from drum magazines, the pump action China Lake Grenade Launcher is fed from a tubular magazine...
But things like the Milkor M32 and the MM-1 are essentially large revolvers. Only real difference is that the chambers are driven by a spring, rather than the pull of the trigger. You do need to remember to wind them up during the loading though.
When I fire it, it's a round, when it hits something, it's a bullet, when it's been fired, it's spent brass (or casings).
When I'm bombing up (or charging) a Magazine, I use a Clip, when I'm loading Vera (we all name our rifles) I use a Magazine.
Marco shows, once again, why he's our resident firearms boffin.
Quotewe all name our rifles
You sad, sad muppets.
R.
Quote from: precinctomega on October 14, 2009, 08:24:43 AM
Quotewe all name our rifles
You sad, sad muppets.
R.
(http://i35.tinypic.com/2akd7jq.jpg)
Quote from: Jayne
when I'm loading Vera
"she's got a name!"
"'s got a name. I call her Vera"
yeah, points for the reference but none for originality.
Ah, I know of a much more impressive gun named "Vera"... A 19" bore cannon designed to launch 100 lb. projectiles or small children at 1,000 feet per second.
Construction isn't quite finished, but the muzzle energy of 1.6 million ft-lbf will speak for itself. (But if strain testing goes well, it'll be possible to up it to around 2.4 million ft-lbf.)
Unfortunately, this is NOT a project I am involved in.
Quote from: precinctomega on October 14, 2009, 08:24:43 AM
Quotewe all name our rifles
You sad, sad muppets.
R.
To be fair, we didn't get a choice. CSM told us to name our rifles. Happyfeet didn't want to. Happy feet did 10 Bastard Gecko's.
We named our rifles.
QuoteUnfortunately, this is NOT a project I am involved in.
Not one of your backyard aircannon experiments then?
QuoteCSM told us to name our rifles.
Did anyone go for a satyrical/amusing name, or would the CSM have not accepted anything other than a girls name?
Incidentally how is your OTC operating now? We are paid until Sunday and then C1 training apparently.
Same, all training C1, no budget for anything much at all.
The Bitch, was quite a common name after the first weekend of lugging them around everywhere, And someone memorised the seriel number and said that was their name, and most of the girls went with blokes names, but other than that, no, most everyone went with a girls name. Most of them Ex girlfriends names.
Marco, you seen any of the current coil guns being made recently? Seen some impressive ones, with a little better magazine and smaller lighter projectiles, some could do as 'legal' firearm substitutes, though obviously, carrying one as a weapon would make it illegal. Think this will be the next step in firearms? Only problem I've seen is the recharging time of capacitors.
Quote from: Inquisitor Cade on October 15, 2009, 12:48:00 PMNot one of your backyard aircannon experiments then?
Neither part of my backyard tinkering, nor part of my work. I'm on decent enough terms with the guy who IS running the project, but other than the fact the two of us occasionally shoot ideas (not
literally) back and forth, there is no involvement on my part.
Quote from: Adlan on October 15, 2009, 03:05:39 PMMarco, you seen any of the current coil guns being made recently?
I have. I've been working on one of my own for a while, in fact.
QuoteThink this will be the next step in firearms?
I think it's unlikely that we'll see man-portable coilguns that can challenge powder-burners in many a year. As it stands, powder-burning firearms do their job, and are a whole lot simpler.
QuoteOnly problem I've seen is the recharging time of capacitors.
For my own project, I'm doing my best to bring up efficiency in an attempt to be able to improve recharge time. (Obviously, if you can get the same muzzle energy with a smaller capacitor bank, then that smaller bank will charge in less time.)
I figure I may be able to get a 30 Joule (kinetic) coilgun - around twice the energy of an air rifle - capable of charging in around three seconds. Enough to deal with small pests, but little more. (Still, the silent nature of coilguns would prove a boon to pest control.)
Quote from: MarcoSkoll on October 14, 2009, 04:54:53 PM
Unfortunately, this is NOT a project I am involved in.
Must break your heart, Marco.
Quote from: Koval on October 15, 2009, 10:11:51 PMMust break your heart, Marco.
I'll live. I prefer things I can actually pick up.
And suffice to say, where the barrel
alone weighs more than 2 tonnes, it's a bit hard to do that.
Quote from: MarcoSkoll on October 15, 2009, 09:19:47 PM
QuoteOnly problem I've seen is the recharging time of capacitors.
For my own project, I'm doing my best to bring up efficiency in an attempt to be able to improve recharge time. (Obviously, if you can get the same muzzle energy with a smaller capacitor bank, then that smaller bank will charge in less time.)
I figure I may be able to get a 30 Joule (kinetic) coilgun - around twice the energy of an air rifle - capable of charging in around three seconds. Enough to deal with small pests, but little more. (Still, the silent nature of coilguns would prove a boon to pest control.)
How does that fit into UK gun law? I know that beyond a certain air pressure of air rifle you need a Firearms License own/use it, but this isn't an air rifle, and probaby isn't even a conventionally acknowledged type of gun, so there might not even be a law concerning it. I'm really quite interested in this one.
I think the firearms law simply applies to projectile weapons of all forms - my sister has had MACE cans taken from her on occasion under firearms legislation in London (she's been mugged about 6 times in 5 years... They never give her a warning, they just take it, tell her she shouldn't have it, then send her on her way)
Quote from: Simeon Blackstar on October 15, 2009, 10:28:59 PMHow does that fit into UK gun law?
Strictly, UK gun law covers any "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged". There is some leeway around lethality and whether something is a "weapon", but while airguns receive a certain amount of automatic dispensation, coilguns do not.
Of course, it is entirely possible to build a coilgun which hasn't got what would conventionally be perceived as a barrel, and under those circumstances, you'd then be limited under crossbow/slingshot legislation... which is basically non-existent. Aside from the restrictions on having them out in public and not using them as a weapon, there's very little limitation compared to firearms.
I could go out right now, and build a Van Helsing-esque auto crossbow (for which I do have a set of blueprints I did a year and a half back) of any power, and it would be entirely legal.
Compare that to the whole fuss about airguns... you can't even buy them over the internet these days, it has to be done in person at a dealer.
There is currently no specific coilgun law - mostly because no-one has done anything to make them write it yet.
Anyway, as it stands, there are some loopholes that define something as not being a weapon. A coilgun can either fit in one of these, or it can be built in such a way so that it's not a firearm.
So, they can be legal.
I suspect that DapperAnarchist's anecdote is the police simply using firearms law as an excuse to confiscate what is (to be honest) a weapon. Evidence has shown enough times that the police often just guess at the legality of something, and make up a likely sounding excuse if they think it's illegal.
Quote from: Simeon Blackstar on October 15, 2009, 10:28:59 PM
How does that fit into UK gun law? I know that beyond a certain air pressure of air rifle you need a Firearms License own/use it, but this isn't an air rifle, and probaby isn't even a conventionally acknowledged type of gun, so there might not even be a law concerning it. I'm really quite interested in this one.
Convential acknowledgement is of course not required for a weapon to be illegal :-)
If your projectile were to be a dart-like form then you would run the risk of being classed as a blowpipe - a class 5 firearm in the same category as machineguns and fully automatic rifles.
Which a ball bearing as the projectile then you're in a better position, it is generally accepted that a weapon firing a spherical, non-frangible projectile at muzzle energies of 1 joule or lower are incapable of causing significant injury provided that appropriate precautions are taken (eye protection primarily).
Furthermore, 1 ft/lb is deemed the low limit for air weapons - projectile launchers below that limit are effectively toys.
Keeping the muzzle energy at or below 1 joule therefore would keep you pretty safe - particularly for a physics experiment.
(For reference:
1off, 6mm dia steel ball bearing = 0.88g
Muzzle velocity would have to be kept below about 47m/s to keep the energy in the 1 Joule range.)
And 12ft/lbs is the limit for a non FAC air rifle.
@InquisitorHeidfeld: Regrettably, a sphere is actually just about the worst shape for coilgun efficiency. An ideal is a solid cylinder, but that then has aerodynamic problems.
Usually, there's some kind of compromise with a cylinder with a more aerodynamic nose.
... Like a bullet shape? You know, a bullet...
Though that may cause its own problems, legally...
A spitzer bullet (like most rifle bullets) isn't quite the shape in question, and non-spitzer pistol bullets are too short for their diameter... but like a long pistol bullet I suppose.
Additionally, it's hard to rifle a coilgun (hard steel bullets don't take up rifling easily*), so it's really best to do them with a hollow tail so that they're drag stabilised - not that drilling down steel rod is all that easy.
*That said, with the right magnetic fields, it's possible to induce spin. Still tricky.
well, the classic shape is what I meant, not a specific design...
Cylinders, particularly pointed and drag stabilised cylinders, though are too close to darts to be safe with regard to the blowpipe classification.
A sphere may not be an efficient projectile but it offers the least risk, legally speaking.
Yes, I've seen people using nails with the heads removed as their projectile - the trick there is that there's a heck of a lot of mass behind a very small surface area in that case (or any other involving a dart-like projectile) - it's not going to need to hit the eye to cause potentially fatal injury... It's unlikely to do so but likelyhood has no impact on that part of legisliation.
In legal terms you're on very questionable ground with anything over 1 joule, you're in incredibly tricky legal ground on anything where the projectile's contact area with the target is very small given its mass...
Ball bearings may not be ideal but at least there are defendable precidents.
Keep in particular mind that fact that any charges levelled would not be "possession" but manufacture, if the device was deemed to be a weapon then you'd have to swim quite a way to break surface, you'd be that deep in the brown stuff.
It is therefore that much more important to steer a wide course around the legal shoals. If the object is to understand or illustrate the principles then efficiency is unimportant - so efficiency is not a suitable defence.
Quote from: InquisitorHeidfeld on October 23, 2009, 01:11:21 PMCylinders, particularly pointed and drag stabilised cylinders, though are too close to darts to be safe with regard to the blowpipe classification.
You're mistaken here. Blowpipe classification only goes so far. It doesn't cover every and any dart like projectile, for arrows and crossbow bolts would fall under that definition, yet both are entirely legal. As I describe them, coilgun projectiles would even fall further outside being blowgun projectiles.
Blowguns are illegal because it's deemed that they are "a weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing" - that is, they're designed for the purpose of delivering poisons or sedatives (even if they may not use them.)
A coilgun would be unlikely to be assessed as such.
QuoteKeep in particular mind that fact that any charges levelled would not be "possession" but manufacture, if the device was deemed to be a weapon then you'd have to swim quite a way to break surface.
The important wording in law is "designed or adapted as a weapon". There are many air cannons that greatly exceed energy limits, but are legal because they are not designed or adapted as weapons - they're special effects cannons mostly.
If a coilgun wasn't designed as a weapon, and you have evidence to that effect (mostly by demonstrating what it was designed for), you immediately have a defence. While my projects are legal (or indeed, licensed), there's reasons why I keep very complete notes, so if at any time, the fuzz should decide to change their mind, I have no end of things to throw at them.
The blowpipe effect is one of many in law which is trying to cover a "multitude of sins", if the CPS decide that your pointed, drag stabilised cylinder could be used to deliver a chemical charge then you're defending yourself against manufacturing class five firearms.
You have copious notes and you're fairly well covered - all well and good, but that doesn't apply to everyone. And while special effects companies can launch 5 gallon water bottles with ease, most people who build themselves gas cannon, spud guns...etc are running a serious risk.
If you give the legal hassles a wide berth then you have the option of using "because it was cool and I wanted to see if I could" as a defence - fall afoul of any legislation though and it's a different story.
Look at the VCRA of a couple of years back for an indication of what the law can classify as an illegal weapon, extreme examples included a child's transparent plastic waterpistol which classed as a RIF by the wording of the act.
I'm not saying that you can't build a 10 Megajoule railgun firing a fin stabilised, tungsten tipped dart as a personal project... I'm saying that to be safe you'd be best avoid doing so.
Avoiding all of the significant legal shoals means a spherical, non frangible projectile with a muzzle energy of 1 joule or less. More power, shaped darts...etc all increase the risk.
Quote from: InquisitorHeidfeld on October 26, 2009, 01:01:51 PMIf the CPS decide that your pointed, drag stabilised cylinder could be used to deliver a chemical charge...
Well, I wouldn't advise a pointed coilgun projectile (although some people will use them). It's better to have a rounded nose in most cases.
As I make them, I can't see that my projectiles would be considered an issue under law.
Anyway, we're now horribly, horribly off-topic.