Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:47:09 +0000 (GMT)
So, I might be talking out my ass (more than usual ;)
), but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the
rotation of a minigun's barrels acts to counter the
recoil of actually firing the weapon. Yes? No? If yes
- why don't miniguns have some kind of integral recoil
compensation?

And while we're at it, why is it so hard to fire LMGs
(and even MMGs) unassisted? Didn't soldiers fire M60s
(which I think would be classed as an MMG) unaided in
Vietnam?

Feel free to expose my ignorance. ;)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!





___________________________________________________________
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80
http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk
Message no. 2
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:14:32 +0100
According to Rand Ratinac, on Tuesday 03 February 2004 09:47 the word on
the street was...

> So, I might be talking out my ass (more than usual ;)
> ), but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the
> rotation of a minigun's barrels acts to counter the
> recoil of actually firing the weapon. Yes? No?

The forces resulting from the weapon's spinning barrels would be at roughly
a 90-degree angle to the forces from recoil, and so they would have little
or no effect on each other. What the spinning barrels would help with,
though, is keeping the minigun on target due to the gyroscopic effects of
those spinning barrels. The same way as with a bicycle or motorcycle: if
you're standing still with one, you'll fall over, but as soon as its
wheels are spinning at a reasonable rate, you can stay upright without any
effort. So if recoil for some reason were to try and force the minigun
from its line of aim, this would compensate.

> If yes - why don't miniguns have some kind of integral recoil
> compensation?

In the real world, miniguns are usually carried on vehicles, rigidly enough
that the recoil forces get absorbed by the mounting and vehicle. As we've
discussed before, it would really be highly impractical to try and fire a
minigun as a hand-held weapons -- the torque will rip it out of your hands
in no time.

> And while we're at it, why is it so hard to fire LMGs
> (and even MMGs) unassisted? Didn't soldiers fire M60s
> (which I think would be classed as an MMG) unaided in
> Vietnam?

LMGs have always been fired without support, even from WWI onward -- Lewis
guns, Chauchats and BARs were all fired from the hip or the shoulder at
the time, when the need arose. Even the MG 08/15, that had a water-cooled
barrel and so despite its official designation was anything but a light
machine gun at 20+ kg, could be fired from the hip. The rules in Cannon
Companion seem overly harsh compared to reality, so my guess is they were
written more for game balance (to prevent players from carrying HMGs like
they were SMGs) than to reflect reality per se.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 3
From: lunchbox311@*******.com (Austin Morgan)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 14:20:55 -0700
According to Rand Ratinac, on Tuesday 03 February 2004 09:47 the word on
the street was...


And while we're at it, why is it so hard to fire LMGs
>(and even MMGs) unassisted? Didn't soldiers fire M60s
>(which I think would be classed as an MMG) unaided in
>Vietnam?


LMG's and MMg's have been fired like that in many wars... however they were
ment for supressive fire.. and hitting larger objects IE: troop
concentrations
the rules for supressive fire in cannon companion more reasonably reflet
this... an MMG or LMG for that matter is inaccurate.... espicially if not
mounted on a vehicle
so it is more accurate to think you would be aiming in a general area rather
than a specific target... for an example of this look at the movie Full
Metal Jacket... i think Animal had a .30 cal LMG
but when he fired it.. it peppered an area.. not necessicarly cutting down
people accuratly... just all over

i hope this helps
and plese excuse the lack of a good form I: punctuation and whatnot... i
just got out of classes for today

~LunchBox

_________________________________________________________________
High-speed users—be more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet
Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1
Message no. 4
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:21:29 +0000
In article <20040203084709.23833.qmail@********.mail.yahoo.com>, Rand
Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> writes
>So, I might be talking out my ass (more than usual ;)
>), but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the
>rotation of a minigun's barrels acts to counter the
>recoil of actually firing the weapon. Yes? No? If yes
>- why don't miniguns have some kind of integral recoil
>compensation?

No, because the barrels rotate in the wrong axis for gyroscopic effect
to keep the gun on target. (If recoil makes the gun climb, gyro effect
will make them tend to skid sideways instead - still not on target)

Miniguns don't have recoil compensation in real life for the same reason
that virtually no real weapons do: it's a SR rules device that doesn't
reflect reality.

>And while we're at it, why is it so hard to fire LMGs
>(and even MMGs) unassisted? Didn't soldiers fire M60s
>(which I think would be classed as an MMG) unaided in
>Vietnam?

Yes, but that's reality: SR firearms rules bear little resemblance.

I will hold forth at length about the difference between SR rules and
reality if demanded, but one thing Shadowrun does (particularly from SR2
onwards) is level out firefights: it might suck that your emplaced heavy
machinegun is less lethal when it's your ambush, but when your character
is caught in a similar killing zone with just a pistol then you
appreciate that the system artificially favours light weapons :)

Fundamentally, "You made a mistake. Your characters are dead. End of
campaign." is not fun to play very often, if at all - yet that's what
using realistic weapon lethality gets you.

Personally, I ended up playing Shadowrun in a John Woo style and found
it worked really well.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 5
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:32:52 +0000
In article <200402031114.32106.gurth@******.nl>, Gurth <gurth@******.nl>
writes
>LMGs have always been fired without support, even from WWI onward -- Lewis
>guns, Chauchats and BARs were all fired from the hip or the shoulder at
>the time, when the need arose.

All of those would be MMGs by Shadowrun terms. (So would the Bren, also
called a 'LMG' - if the 'light machine gun' weighs 24lb the 'heavy' MG
must be a beast!)

LMGs would be weapons like the M249 / FN Minimi, for reference.

>The rules in Cannon
>Companion seem overly harsh compared to reality, so my guess is they were
>written more for game balance (to prevent players from carrying HMGs like
>they were SMGs) than to reflect reality per se.

Having carried L4 Brens and L7 GPMGs, both of which qualify as MMGs, I'd
suggest that while you could fire them from shoulder or hip in a crisis
you'd really, really prefer to get prone, support the barrel (bipod
would be nice, handy tree limb would do) and then deliver _proper_ fire.
(You can also run cross-country with them, though it's hard work)

I've seen and handled HMGs on several occasions. For normal (fit,
healthy, military-qualified) humans they're a two-person lift unloaded
with extra personnel needed for ammunition: nobody, but nobody, fires
them manpack. Tripod or vehicle mount only.


SR skews lots of values and figures for game balance. In reality you can
fire a MMG from the hip or shoulder if you have to, though you'd
generally rather not: but HMGs are not manpack assets. Flipside? HMGs
like Ma Deuces, NSVs and DShKs are _far_ more lethal than rifle-calibre
MMGs in reality.

It's a game... have fun or quit.



(I've been willing to help SR's publishers get their military house in
order for ten years or more and _still_ nobody's bothered to ask :) Do I
still have to write that novel about Rusanov's Rebel and _then_ justify
a sourcebook?)

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 6
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 00:42:34 +0000
In article <Law11-F25MhG4YdlbEw000024d6@*******.com>, Austin Morgan
<lunchbox311@*******.com> writes
>According to Rand Ratinac, on Tuesday 03 February 2004 09:47 the word on
>the street was...
>And while we're at it, why is it so hard to fire LMGs
>>(and even MMGs) unassisted? Didn't soldiers fire M60s
>>(which I think would be classed as an MMG) unaided in
>>Vietnam?
>
>
>LMG's and MMg's have been fired like that in many wars... however they
>were ment for supressive fire.. and hitting larger objects IE: troop
>concentrations

Try using a L4 Bren. You can drive nails with it at 300 metres, when
firing from a braced position (like, off the bipod).

One problem oft-cited is that it doesn't spread and scatter fire: some
users prefer that because it concentrates rounds at the point of aim.

However, a common target is "the firing slit of a bunker" where misses
are wasted. Hence, a fondness for accuracy in British Army weapons.

>the rules for supressive fire in cannon companion more reasonably
>reflet this... an MMG or LMG for that matter is inaccurate....
>espicially if not mounted on a vehicle

Disagree, based on reported experience. If all you need is "rounds
downrange for general suppression" give everyone SMGs and bucketfuls of
ammunition.

If you're trying to hit a sniper's loophole at 300 yards then you need a
weapon that can group well around point of aim: or you need to smoke off
the threat and manoeuvre around it.

>so it is more accurate to think you would be aiming in a general area
>rather than a specific target... for an example of this look at the
>movie Full Metal Jacket... i think Animal had a .30 cal LMG
>but when he fired it.. it peppered an area.. not necessicarly cutting
>down people accuratly... just all over

Animal Mother had a M60 machinegun, which was a MMG not a LMG.

Beyond that, movies do not reflect reality: they reflect what directors
want to portray. The Isle of Dogs made a credible simulacrum for Hue
City, but I'd hesitate to call the actions portrayed representative of
real experience. (Gustav Hasford's "The Short-Timers", from which the
film was derived, is worth reading precisely because he blends
hallucination and reality)


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 7
From: lunchbox311@*******.com (Austin Morgan)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 18:07:18 -0700
i suppose you would have more experience abotu that
i know some are accurate... i guess i got a little off topic and was
referring more to miniguns in that sense (not an LMG or MMG at all...
hehehe)
i can see a LMG being accurate... but would mmg's and such be less so when
doing autofire?
i know short bursts are the preferred method for ammo consupmtion and
accuarcy
but how accurate are those things when they are going full bore??? j/c
i would like to know now having the oppertunity to have fired one as so...
being the restriction on full auto weapons for citizens :P hehe (at least
here in america)

ur insight is greatly appreciated
~LunchBox

_________________________________________________________________
High-speed users—be more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet
Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1
Message no. 8
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:45:16 +0000 (GMT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> (I've been willing to help SR's publishers get their
military house in order for ten years or more and
_still_ nobody's bothered to ask :) Do I still have to
write that novel about Rusanov's Rebel and _then_
justify a sourcebook?)
> Paul J. Adam

Apparently...yes.

:)

Okay, Paul, so what would you do to bring weapons more
into line with reality? That's probably a huge
subject, so why don't you start with the topics at
hand - miniguns and firing machine guns without assistance.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!





___________________________________________________________
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80
http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk
Message no. 9
From: flakjacket@***********.com (flakjacket@***********.com)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 00:23:37 +0000 (GMT)
Paul J. Adam wrote:

> (I've been willing to help SR's publishers get their military house in
> order for ten years or more and _still_ nobody's bothered to ask :) Do I
> still have to write that novel about Rusanov's Rebel and _then_ justify
> a sourcebook?)

Someone already kind of beat you to it. If you're looking for gun related stuff then you
could do worse that Raygun's Shadowrun and Firearms site,
http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/

Keep in mind though that Ben tends to keep things a bit more realistic, and letahal, than
normal for Shadowrun so they're a bit different from the standard gear.
Message no. 10
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:43:00 +0200
Paul J. Adam wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Miniguns don't have recoil compensation in real life for the
> same reason
> that virtually no real weapons do: it's a SR rules device
> that doesn't
> reflect reality.
>
> [snip]

Have to disagree with you there. Many contemporary SMGs and assault rifles
include some form of gas vent system or muzzle compensator to reduce either
recoil effect or muzzle climb, or both.


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon



**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
Message no. 11
From: DroneWar@*******.com (Stephen Allee)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:32:48 -0600
Steve Garrard wrote:
> Have to disagree with you there. Many contemporary SMGs and assault rifles
> include some form of gas vent system or muzzle compensator to reduce
either
> recoil effect or muzzle climb, or both.

Assault Rifles such as the M16-A2 and M4-A1 incorporate "flash hiders' as
screw-on attachments on the front of the barrels. From personal experience
with the M16-A2 with and without the flash suppressor, they do very little
if anything to reduce felt recoil for the shooter. The main method of recoil
compensation is the buffer spring assembly shcih consists of a large spring
and piston in line with the bolt. When the weapon is fired, the bolt absorbs
a large quantity of rearward force and dissapates it by compressing the
buffer / spring assembly. That energy is released to move the bolt forward
and feed the next round. An internal gas tube also bleeds off some of the
waste gas produced by firing the weapon and redirects that energy to assist
with moving the bolt to the rear, but that gas is directed rearward along
the rifle, so it would add to the felt recoil rather than reducing it.

Some of the Glock handguns, however, are available in "C" models with ported
barrels and slides. These do help push the muzze back down on target. Their
impact is much greater with a handgun than with an assault rifle because of
the large difference in (energy release / weapon weight) between an 8.6
pound rifle and a 2.2 pound handgun.

A case could be made that if a silencer such as those used on the MP5SD
series was re-engineered, you could vent the bled off gasses to assist with
compensating for recoil. I did have one quick aside, though:

If you are bleeding off gasses in the barrel and redirecting the gas away to
compensate for recoil, wouldn't that reduce the speed that the round is
traveling at? That is basically the premise behind the real-world HK MP5 SD
series. They redirect gas out from small ports in the barrel to blee off
enough pressure from standard rounds to slow them to subsonic speeds
(eliminating the "CRACK" sound of the bullet breaking the sound barrier) and
reduce the amount of waste gas that is vented out the barrel behind the
round (which traps and dissapates sound waves produced by firing the
weapon). Consequently, The SD series doesn't hit targets nearly as hard as
it's unsuppressed cousins.

Wouldn't putting a high-level recoil compensator on a weapon possibly reduce
it's damage rating if it is bleeding propellant gasses out of the barrel?
Message no. 12
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 19:59:02 +0100
Stephen Allee wrote :

>
> Wouldn't putting a high-level recoil compensator on a weapon possibly
> reduce
> it's damage rating if it is bleeding propellant gasses out of the
> barrel?

Not really, because most recoil compensators work by redirecting gases
near the end of the barrel to prevent barrel climbing. Basically they
redirect some of the gases upwards, so that the momentum produced
counteracts the rotational momentum created by the recoil.
They're near the end of the barrel because that's where they're the
most effective. M = D * F , where M is the momentum produced, D the
distance between the point where the force is exerted and the axis of
rotation (in our case, the top of the firer's hand) and F the force
exerted. (Yes, that means they're more effective in longarms)
Thus, at most they make you lose a centimeter or two of effective
barrel length, which is IMHO not enough to reduce the power/damage
level of the weapon.

The MP5SD is a wholly different beast. It is /designed/ for silence,
it is specifically engineered to reduce the speed of a bullet to
subsonic speeds. That's why they're far more effective than regular
silencers, which take the gases more or less at the same point as
recoil compensators (but don't redirect them the same way) and don't
make the bullet subsonic: most of the noise comes from the supersonic
crack of the bullet, which is still a lot of noise.
Actually from what I've heard, silencers don't silence shots that
much. However, they make them sound different: you hear the same amount
of noise, but it sounds like a big book being dropped on a table, not
like a gunshot.

-- Wild_Cat
maxnoel_fr@*****.fr -- ICQ #85274019
"Look at you hacker... A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting
and sweating as you run through my corridors... How can you challenge a
perfect, immortal machine?"
Message no. 13
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 19:26:00 +0000
In article <3C8C3C9EF6A3D411A2170090274E89D001630C5A@*******>, Steve
Garrard <SteveG@***********.co.za> writes
>Paul J. Adam wrote:
>> [snip]
>> Miniguns don't have recoil compensation in real life for the
>> same reason
>> that virtually no real weapons do: it's a SR rules device
>> that doesn't
>> reflect reality.
>>
>> [snip]
>
>Have to disagree with you there. Many contemporary SMGs and assault rifles
>include some form of gas vent system or muzzle compensator to reduce either
>recoil effect or muzzle climb, or both.

And most don't. M16 doesn't, MP5 doesn't, L85 doesn't, Uzi doesn't,
Ingram doesn't. (Which do? I can think of the AK74, but that's about it)

L7 GPMG / M240 doesn't, M249 doesn't, M2HB Browning doesn't... and so it
goes.

Muzzle compensators have their users (Glock offer them on some handguns,
for instance) but they're not common: yet if they were as effective as
Shadowrun rules suggest, they'd be nearly universal.


>
>
>Slayer
>
>"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
> - Unknown Dragon
>
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
>intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
>are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
>the system manager.
>
>This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
>MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
>
>www.mimesweeper.com
>**********************************************************************
>

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 14
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 19:38:54 +0000
In article <Law11-F60gcJnixhXyE00030551@*******.com>, Austin Morgan
<lunchbox311@*******.com> writes
>i suppose you would have more experience abotu that
>i know some are accurate... i guess i got a little off topic and was
>referring more to miniguns in that sense (not an LMG or MMG at all...
>hehehe)
>i can see a LMG being accurate... but would mmg's and such be less so
>when doing autofire?

Depends how it's mounted. If you're firing from the hip or shoulder,
then short bursts (2-3 rounds) would be preferred and accuracy would be
pretty poor. From the bipod, 4-5 round bursts would be a starting point,
with longer (sweeping the killing zone of an ambush) or shorter (to
conserve ammo during suppressive fire) possible, and accuracy would be
respectable.

For a MMG on a tripod, UK doctrine is 20-round bursts and then adjust as
required: for a HMG, it's situation-dependent (in part because HMG
ammunition is heavy, but also very lethal: use it when you need it, but
need it when you use it: don't waste rounds if you can help it, but fire
like hell if you need to)

>i know short bursts are the preferred method for ammo consupmtion and
>accuarcy
>but how accurate are those things when they are going full bore??? j/c

You don't generally get pinpoint accuracy, like "hit him in the head at
300 yards". (The M2 heavy machinegun is a exception, as is the old
Bren: most MMGs/HMGs fire from open bolts)

On the other hand, a short burst will take a target at that range almost
every time if the aimer's on target. At that or longer range you get a
"beaten zone" where you're hitting a (small) area rather than a point
target: for example, you'd be putting bursts into a fireteam's trench to
keep the four men inside pinned down (and killing/wounding anyone who
comes up to shoot back) rather than firing at individual soldiers.

With a MMG, at long (500m+) range you're generally using tracer to
correct; beyond 1100m the tracers burn out but on some terrain (dusty
ground, water) you can still walk the strikes through the target zone.
Fire, observe, adjust, long burst; rinse, spin, repeat. Area rather than
point fire. HMGs are 'point target' for quite a bit further: one tactic
involves siting a HMG/GPMG combo as an anti-armour ambush, with the HMG
disabling enemy APCs and the GPMG dealing with the dismounting crews and
infantry.


>i would like to know now having the oppertunity to have fired one as
>so... being the restriction on full auto weapons for citizens :P hehe
>(at least here in america)

Hey, it's even more draconian in the UK, you have to enlist before they
let you play with them :)

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 15
From: docwagon101@*****.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 23:37:57 +0000 (GMT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> Muzzle compensators have their users (Glock offer
> them on some handguns,
> for instance) but they're not common: yet if they
> were as effective as
> Shadowrun rules suggest, they'd be nearly universal.
> Paul J. Adam

On the other hand, Paul, is recoil in real life really
as bad as in SR? Each round fired makes it about 16%
harder to hit? Maybe recoil compensation isn't as
necessary in real life, so the effects of what
compensation exists isn't as marked, and thus fewer
people use compensators.

I don't know - never fired a gun in real life. I'm
asking. :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!





___________________________________________________________
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80
http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk
Message no. 16
From: valeuj@*****.navy.mil (Valeu, John W. EM3 (AS40 R-3))
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 09:41:37 +1000
> <snipt!(TM)>
> > Muzzle compensators have their users (Glock offer
> > them on some handguns,
> > for instance) but they're not common: yet if they
> > were as effective as
> > Shadowrun rules suggest, they'd be nearly universal.
> > Paul J. Adam
>
> On the other hand, Paul, is recoil in real life really
> as bad as in SR? Each round fired makes it about 16%
> harder to hit? Maybe recoil compensation isn't as
> necessary in real life, so the effects of what
> compensation exists isn't as marked, and thus fewer
> people use compensators.
>
> I don't know - never fired a gun in real life. I'm
> asking. :)

Actually, I recently had a chance to prove this fact (and will be able to
prove it again.)

Given the space of time a combat turn takes, it makes sense. Firing a .357
DE, with both the recoil and the fact that I was trying to fire off about
half the clip in 7 seconds, my grouping wasn't that great (kinda hard to
tell because I used the same target for the DE, a .45 USP, an Uzi, an M4,
and a shotgun)

With the remaining shots, I took my time and settled in before squeezing the
trigger. Better results.

Most people don't use compensators unless a.) They need them, and 2.) They
have the money. I don't know too many civies that have recoil comp except
for target shooters. The only execption I can think of is if they're built
into the weapon.
Even we (the US Military) only have stocks and the ocasional barrel weights.
Most of our assualt rifles and machine guns incorperate an gas vent sytle
system, but it's not really that effective (So I'm told).
Message no. 17
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:35:36 +0200
Paul J. Adam wrote:
> In article <3C8C3C9EF6A3D411A2170090274E89D001630C5A@*******>, Steve
> Garrard <SteveG@***********.co.za> writes
> >Paul J. Adam wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> Miniguns don't have recoil compensation in real life for the same
> >> reason that virtually no real weapons do: it's a SR rules device
> >> that doesn't
> >> reflect reality.
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >
> >Have to disagree with you there. Many contemporary SMGs and assault
> >rifles include some form of gas vent system or muzzle compensator to
> >reduce either recoil effect or muzzle climb, or both.
>
> And most don't. M16 doesn't, MP5 doesn't, L85 doesn't, Uzi doesn't,
> Ingram doesn't. (Which do? I can think of the AK74, but
> that's about it)

I don't have the time to search for all of them right now, but as an example
almost all Colt rifles incorporate a muzzle compensator (M4, AR-15, M16A4,
etc.), as well as some variants of the Glock handgun (as pointed out by
someone else). I wasn't stating that most modern firearms incorporate them,
simply arguing against the statement that "virtually no real weapons do",
which isn't really correct.


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon



**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
Message no. 18
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:03:39 +0100
At 11:35 09.02.2004 +0200, Steve Garrard wrote:

<snip>

>I don't have the time to search for all of them right now, but as an example
>almost all Colt rifles incorporate a muzzle compensator (M4, AR-15, M16A4,
>etc.), as well as some variants of the Glock handgun (as pointed out by
>someone else). I wasn't stating that most modern firearms incorporate them,
>simply arguing against the statement that "virtually no real weapons do",
>which isn't really correct.

Those are flash hiders, not compensators.


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 19
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:09:50 +0100
At 19:59 06.02.2004 +0100, Max Noel wrote:

<snip>

> The MP5SD is a wholly different beast. It is /designed/ for
> silence, it is specifically engineered to reduce the speed of a bullet to
> subsonic speeds. That's why they're far more effective than regular
> silencers, which take the gases more or less at the same point as recoil
> compensators (but don't redirect them the same way) and don't make the
> bullet subsonic: most of the noise comes from the supersonic crack of the
> bullet, which is still a lot of noise.

You can watch sample movies (Quicktime AFAIK) featuring various HK guns on
HKpro.com - There's not that much of a difference between a standard MP5
with subsonic ammo and a detachable suppressor and a MP5SD with standard ammo.

> Actually from what I've heard, silencers don't silence shots that
> much. However, they make them sound different: you hear the same amount
> of noise, but it sounds like a big book being dropped on a table, not
> like a gunshot.

A good suppressor has an effectiveness of about 20 db - which is quite
good. And it's true that they also alter the sound.


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 20
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 20:32:10 +0000
In article <20040206233757.5099.qmail@********.mail.yahoo.com>, Rand
Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> writes
>> Muzzle compensators have their users (Glock offer
>> them on some handguns,
>> for instance) but they're not common: yet if they
>> were as effective as
>> Shadowrun rules suggest, they'd be nearly universal.
>> Paul J. Adam
>
>On the other hand, Paul, is recoil in real life really
>as bad as in SR? Each round fired makes it about 16%
>harder to hit?

In general, no. 7.62mm rifles (G3, FN-FAL) have quite a kick and don't
do autofire well: but 5.56mm weapons are much more controllable on
full-auto. (And 7.62mm machineguns weigh twice what the rifles do, and
so jump about rather less)

There's a 5.56mm LMG from Singapore, the Ultimax, whose recoil is so
light that there's a macho dare to brace the butt against one's chin
while firing... AFJI's "Small Arms Shoot Out" has reported doing just
that with no ill effects (though no particular accuracy)

>Maybe recoil compensation isn't as
>necessary in real life, so the effects of what
>compensation exists isn't as marked, and thus fewer
>people use compensators.

Where you _do_ tend to see compensators is on Big Beastly Weapons like
.50cal sniper rifles - not to reduce autofire penalties, but to ease the
pain in the firer's shoulder - and on raceguns used for Practical
Pistol, where rapid aimed fire is the rule and muzzle compensators help
prevent muzzle rise and allow faster double-taps.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 21
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 20:36:03 +0000
In article <3C8C3C9EF6A3D411A2170090274E89D001630C6F@*******>, Steve
Garrard <SteveG@***********.co.za> writes
>Paul J. Adam wrote:
>> And most don't. M16 doesn't, MP5 doesn't, L85 doesn't, Uzi doesn't,
>> Ingram doesn't. (Which do? I can think of the AK74, but
>> that's about it)
>
>I don't have the time to search for all of them right now, but as an example
>almost all Colt rifles incorporate a muzzle compensator (M4, AR-15, M16A4,
>etc.),

That's a flash hider, not a muzzle compensator. The AK-74 has a muzzle
compensator: note the difference.

(Cutting the barrel off at an angle might be claimed to "offset recoil",
as the AKM family did, but it makes no difference in reality)

>as well as some variants of the Glock handgun (as pointed out by
>someone else).

Civilian shooters, not military - the -C versions are for sports
shooters.

>I wasn't stating that most modern firearms incorporate them,
>simply arguing against the statement that "virtually no real weapons do",
>which isn't really correct.

AK-74s, some civilian Glocks, heavy-calibre sniper rifles, and IPSC
raceguns.

Meanwhile police and military issue weapons go without: curious, if the
effect were dramatic enough to make a difference in combat (rather than
improve score in competitions)


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 22
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 23:01:27 +0000
In article
<60D5E0B98DDE60408535F5F7D7A4412903A8C2F5@********.cable.navy.mil>,
"Valeu, John W. EM3 (AS40 R-3)" <valeuj@*****.navy.mil> writes
>Actually, I recently had a chance to prove this fact (and will be able to
>prove it again.)
>
>Given the space of time a combat turn takes, it makes sense. Firing a .357
>DE, with both the recoil and the fact that I was trying to fire off about
>half the clip in 7 seconds, my grouping wasn't that great (kinda hard to
>tell because I used the same target for the DE, a .45 USP, an Uzi, an M4,
>and a shotgun)
>
>With the remaining shots, I took my time and settled in before squeezing the
>trigger. Better results.

By SR rules you should have got two rounds off in ~3 seconds and been
unable to fire any faster.

But then I was firing at Wired-II rates with a SA-only weapon that
should have double recoil (a L1A1 SLR, aka FN-FAL - double uncompensated
recoil, no compensator) and grouping nicely in a man's chest at 100m at
6 shots/round)

>Most people don't use compensators unless a.) They need them, and 2.) They
>have the money. I don't know too many civies that have recoil comp except
>for target shooters. The only execption I can think of is if they're built
>into the weapon.

Indicating that they're useful luxuries rather than vital necessities.

>Even we (the US Military) only have stocks and the ocasional barrel weights.
>Most of our assualt rifles and machine guns incorperate an gas vent sytle
>system, but it's not really that effective (So I'm told).

Don't know about the M249, but unless you've modified the M240 that has
no recoil compensation: and "a flash hider with one slot not cut out" is
not a gas vent comparable in cost with the weapon it's mounted on.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 23
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:43:09 +0200
Arclight wrote:
> At 11:35 09.02.2004 +0200, Steve Garrard wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >I don't have the time to search for all of them right now,
> but as an example
> >almost all Colt rifles incorporate a muzzle compensator (M4,
> AR-15, M16A4,
> >etc.), as well as some variants of the Glock handgun (as
> pointed out by
> >someone else). I wasn't stating that most modern firearms
> incorporate them,
> >simply arguing against the statement that "virtually no real
> weapons do",
> >which isn't really correct.
>
> Those are flash hiders, not compensators.

Straight from http://www.colt.com/mil/M4Com_3.asp:

- Muzzle compensator further reduces muzzle climb, and helps eliminate flash
and dust signatures.



Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon



**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
Message no. 24
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Miniguns and recoil
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:18:14 +0100
According to Steve Garrard, on Tuesday 10 February 2004 09:43 the word on
the street was...

> > Those are flash hiders, not compensators.
>
> Straight from http://www.colt.com/mil/M4Com_3.asp:
>
> - Muzzle compensator further reduces muzzle climb, and helps eliminate
> flash and dust signatures.

Do note where you're getting your information from: the weapon's
manufacturer. This kind of data tends to hold rose-colored glasses in
front of your eyes, since its point is to make you buy whatever it is
they're selling, after all :)

Yes, the later models of M16 (and the M4 carbine is just that) has what is
often called a muzzle compensator. But as Paul pointed out, it's just the
old flash hider that's been fitted to every M16 aside from early
production "A0" models (that is, the plain M16 from the mid-'60s) but
without a hole in the side facing down. The idea is that this will counter
muzzle climb a bit, but I doubt it's anywhere near as effective as a
purpose-built muzzle brake like on the AK-74 or Barrett 82.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Miniguns and recoil, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!