Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Aethelwulf)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Thu Apr 18 19:55:02 2002
hello

now here is a question that I believe I have asked at least once.... does
anyone know or have a list that details what rw calibres of ammunition are
used by the various classes of guns and the corresponding damage codes?

I ask because I find that if all heavy pistols do 9M then you have a 9mm
glock 17 doing the same damage as a .50 Action Express IMI Desert Eagle, and
that doesn't make sense....

can anyone help me with this?

Aethelwulf
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Thu Apr 18 22:20:01 2002
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 17:52:04 -0600
"Aethelwulf" <uptoic@***********.net> wrote:

> I ask because I find that if all heavy pistols do 9M then you have a 9mm
> glock 17 doing the same damage as a .50 Action Express IMI Desert Eagle, and
> that doesn't make sense....

The people who designed the Shadowrun firearms rules tried to keep it
all as abstract as possible (and the result came out too abstract for a
lot of people :)). There's no official damage-caliber listing, but you
can find a nice one on http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun

--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowlandbr.hpg.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Fri Apr 19 05:30:26 2002
According to Aethelwulf, on Fri, 19 Apr 2002 the word on the street was...

> now here is a question that I believe I have asked at least once.... does
> anyone know or have a list that details what rw calibres of ammunition
> are used by the various classes of guns and the corresponding damage
> codes?

Various attempts have been made over the years by a number of people, but
the best thing to do is to say, "Don't worry about it." Heavy pistols fire
heavy pistol ammo, sport rifles fire sport rifle ammo, and so on.

> I ask because I find that if all heavy pistols do 9M then you have a 9mm
> glock 17 doing the same damage as a .50 Action Express IMI Desert Eagle,
> and that doesn't make sense....

So say the .50 AE is a 10M round, similar to whatever is fired by the Ruger
Super Warhawk... With a little bit of work, you should be able to match
calibers to firearm types in a way that looks right to you. However, it
won't do that to everyone else: IMHO heavy pistols fire 9x19 mm, but a lot
of other people see heavy pistols as starting at .357 Magnum and going up
from there.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> 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. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Fri Apr 19 08:45:01 2002
>From: "Aethelwulf" <uptoic@***********.net>
>now here is a question that I believe I have asked at least once.... does
>anyone know or have a list that details what rw calibres of ammunition are
>used by the various classes of guns and the corresponding damage codes?
<snip>
>can anyone help me with this?

It's only a vague rule of thumb but this is what I tend to use:

Hold out pistol = .22
Light pistol = .38/9mm
Heavy pistol = .357 mag - .50
Sport rifle = .22 - .308
Assault rifle = .277/5.56mm
Sniper rifle = .50
LMG = 5.56mm
MMG = 7.62mm
HMG = .50
Barrett 121 = .68 (hence unique ammo)

so your Glock 17 will have the same sort of profile as a Beretta 92F, both
are 9mm and will convert to something like the 101-t.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Valeu John EMFA)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Fri Apr 19 09:30:01 2002
>It's only a vague rule of thumb but this is what I tend to use:

>Hold out pistol = .22
>Light pistol = .38/9mm
>Heavy pistol = .357 mag - .50
>Sport rifle = .22 - .308
>Assault rifle = .277/5.56mm
>Sniper rifle = .50
>LMG = 5.56mm
>MMG = 7.62mm
>HMG = .50
>Barrett 121 = .68 (hence unique ammo)

So then where exactly does a .45 ACP fit into on a table like?
I've come up with a similar table from time to time, but that caliber always
seems to stump me.
And don't forget that some assault rifles are also chambered for the 7.62mm
casing.

And what exactly is the basis for the sniper rifle and HMG being S/D damage
while a Heavy Pistol would only do M? Would muzzle velocity have something
to do with the damage code, or just the amount of power packed into the
shell (which I guess would effect muzzle velocity...)

EMFN John Valeu
-AKA- TimeKeeper
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Christian Casavant)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Fri Apr 19 09:40:01 2002
> So then where exactly does a .45 ACP fit into on a table like?
> I've come up with a similar table from time to time, but that caliber always
> seems to stump me.
> And don't forget that some assault rifles are also chambered for the 7.62mm
> casing.

.45 (as in .452 inches) falls in between .357 and .50. I've never heard of
.277 as a calibre, but is close to 7.62. Maybe that's what he meant.


> And what exactly is the basis for the sniper rifle and HMG being S/D damage
> while a Heavy Pistol would only do M? Would muzzle velocity have something
> to do with the damage code, or just the amount of power packed into the
> shell (which I guess would effect muzzle velocity...)

The calibres are measured in width, not generally in length. The .50cal HP
bullet is a much short version than the .50cal HMG round. For a comparison of
several different bullets, go to
http://www.calweb.com/~haas/ammoguide/runammo.html and check out the ammo guide
server. You'll see the difference between the .50 Action Express, a HP round,
and the .50cal Browning HMG round...

...Gotta run, doorbell!!!

Me.
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (shadowrn@*********.com)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Fri Apr 19 10:10:14 2002
-----Original Message-----
From: Valeu John EMFA [mailto:ValeuJ@*************.navy.mil]
Sent: Friday, 19, April, 2002 09:28 AM
To: 'shadowrn@*********.com'
Subject: RE: Speaking of ballistics


>It's only a vague rule of thumb but this is what I tend to use:

>Hold out pistol = .22
>Light pistol = .38/9mm
>Heavy pistol = .357 mag - .50
>Sport rifle = .22 - .308
>Assault rifle = .277/5.56mm
>Sniper rifle = .50
>LMG = 5.56mm
>MMG = 7.62mm
>HMG = .50
>Barrett 121 = .68 (hence unique ammo)

So then where exactly does a .45 ACP fit into on a table like?
I've come up with a similar table from time to time, but that caliber always
seems to stump me.

.45 ACP fits in the heavy pistol range between .357 and .5

Coyote
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Sat Apr 20 05:45:10 2002
According to Valeu John EMFA, on Fri, 19 Apr 2002 the word on the street was...

> So then where exactly does a .45 ACP fit into on a table like?
> I've come up with a similar table from time to time, but that caliber
> always seems to stump me.

It does just about everyone else as well, both IRL and in games...

> And what exactly is the basis for the sniper rifle and HMG being S/D
> damage while a Heavy Pistol would only do M? Would muzzle velocity have
> something to do with the damage code, or just the amount of power packed
> into the shell (which I guess would effect muzzle velocity...)

This is exactly why you shouldn't try to correlate SR damage codes with RL
calibers :) You'll run into these sorts of problems, requiring you to fix to
the damage codes to make everything work (sort of).

IMHO, the main problems with SR's damage codes are that heavy pistols and
sniper rifles are over-powered, while HMGs are under-powered. A few other
adjustments could be made, too, such as changing LMGs to 8M damage, but those
are not as big a problem as the heavy pistols and sniper rifles are.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> 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. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Mon Apr 29 00:45:01 2002
> >It's only a vague rule of thumb but this is what I tend to use:
>
> >Hold out pistol = .22
> >Light pistol = .38/9mm
> >Heavy pistol = .357 mag - .50
> >Sport rifle = .22 - .308
> >Assault rifle = .277/5.56mm
> >Sniper rifle = .50
> >LMG = 5.56mm
> >MMG = 7.62mm
> >HMG = .50
> >Barrett 121 = .68 (hence unique ammo)

Ummm....no.....the Barrett is a .50 most other sniper rifles use NATO
7.62 (aka Winchester .308) same as high quality sport rifles (hence they
do 12-14S instead of 14D)

The other thing you're forgetting is that they do make "elephant guns"
which aren't detailed in the SR rules but are larger in caliber than the
barrett but still wouldn't have the damage code it does....I think we'd
decided at one point in my group that we'd make the .700 Nitro Express
round a 20S because it's made for penetrating thick armors and such
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Mon Apr 29 04:35:01 2002
>From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
>Ummm....no.....the Barrett is a .50 most other sniper rifles use NATO
>7.62 (aka Winchester .308) same as high quality sport rifles (hence they
>do 12-14S instead of 14D)

As I've said before that doesn't explain the unique ammo point, why pay a
vast and silly sum for Barrett's own brand ammunition when you can buy
identical ammunition at a fraction of the price belted for a heavy
machinegun.
Also where does the difference between sport rifles and sniper rifles come
from? a .308 cal sport rifle (to my mind) (eg the Remington 950) does 9S so
how does a .308 cal sniper rifle do 14S, more than half as much damage
again.
I still say that the Barrett is somewhat equivalent to a .68 cal Tank rifle
or your .700 Nitro express.
Remember that the ammunition for the barrett counts as AV IIRC.

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Message no. 11
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Mon Apr 29 15:50:01 2002
In article <000401c1ef35$e128d7e0$0700a8c0@*****>, Derek Hyde
<dhyde@*********.net> writes
>Ummm....no.....the Barrett is a .50 most other sniper rifles use NATO
>7.62 (aka Winchester .308) same as high quality sport rifles (hence they
>do 12-14S instead of 14D)

Shadowrun story stuff (Elven Fire, for instance) cites the Ranger Arms
SM-3 as a .655, which sort of fits the high damage from a subsonic
round.

>The other thing you're forgetting is that they do make "elephant guns"
>which aren't detailed in the SR rules but are larger in caliber than the
>barrett but still wouldn't have the damage code it does....I think we'd
>decided at one point in my group that we'd make the .700 Nitro Express
>round a 20S because it's made for penetrating thick armors and such

No, it most explicitly is _not_ designed for penetrating armour: it's
designed to kill elephants.

The .50BMG and the Soviet 14.5mm were both designed as anti-tank weapons
from the outset and anti-materiel rifles chambered for them are not
uncommon.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 12
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Mon Apr 29 16:35:01 2002
> <dhyde@*********.net> writes
> >Ummm....no.....the Barrett is a .50 most other sniper rifles use NATO
> >7.62 (aka Winchester .308) same as high quality sport rifles (hence
they
> >do 12-14S instead of 14D)
>
> Shadowrun story stuff (Elven Fire, for instance) cites the Ranger Arms
> SM-3 as a .655, which sort of fits the high damage from a subsonic
> round.

Ok perhaps I'll stand corrected in that instance because I've never once
seen that book.


>
> >The other thing you're forgetting is that they do make "elephant
guns"
> >which aren't detailed in the SR rules but are larger in caliber than
the
> >barrett but still wouldn't have the damage code it does....I think
we'd
> >decided at one point in my group that we'd make the .700 Nitro
Express
> >round a 20S because it's made for penetrating thick armors and such
>
> No, it most explicitly is _not_ designed for penetrating armour: it's
> designed to kill elephants.

Not quite, the point of an elephant gun is that It's gotta have the
penetration to get THROUGH the elephant's tougher skin without starting
to expand until it's through it therefore it would work on the same
concept with armored people, granted it's not going to be as effective
in a non APDS form against hardened armor but how many characters are
really running around in hardened milspec armor? I know I got a LOT of
criticism when I mentioned that I'd made my players do a run against
people in it so in the same effect why are you worried about it trying
to do damage to a HEAVILY armored person.


> The .50BMG and the Soviet 14.5mm were both designed as anti-tank
weapons
> from the outset and anti-materiel rifles chambered for them are not
> uncommon.

You're right, the .50BMG IS an anti tank weapon just as Most Barret
Rifles are listed as light anti tank rifles, if they're used as a sniper
rifle good for them but they're still an anti tank weapon, the point is
that the largest one I've found in Jane's Gun book was a .55, now if
it's supposed to be a milspec weapon they're NOT going to use something
HUGE because (little known fact to follow for those of you that AREN'T
military and never have been) the Geneva convention specifies that a .50
weapon cannot be fired at a person, it may be fired at his equipment
however cannot be fired specifically at the person itself. For this
reason in itself nearly ALL sniper rifles of modern day are 7.62mm, look
through the net, look in books, I've found a very small percentage that
are actually anything other than 7.62mm or 5.56mm and that's going
through the official sniper rifles of almost every military in the
world.
Message no. 13
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Mon Apr 29 22:35:00 2002
> As I've said before that doesn't explain the unique ammo point, why
pay a
> vast and silly sum for Barrett's own brand ammunition when you can buy
> identical ammunition at a fraction of the price belted for a heavy
> machinegun.

The difference in cost is because it's probably a more powerful round,
and is specially designed for that gun instead of being "heavy
machinegun" ammo
(just like there's a ton of different varieties of modern day ammo,
there are about 5 different types of .22 ammo (.22 Long Rifle, .22
Magnum, .22 Short, .22 Standard, .22 Long Rifle Shot)

> Also where does the difference between sport rifles and sniper rifles
come
> from? a .308 cal sport rifle (to my mind) (eg the Remington 950) does
9S
> so
> how does a .308 cal sniper rifle do 14S, more than half as much damage
> again.

Increased accuracy and as I said with the barrett ammo and someone else
pointed out about 9mm ammo, the NATO rounds kick out at a hell of a lot
higher velocity than what the standard over the shelf rounds do. Also
the difference is in the composition of the actual bullet, some are made
for more penetration and some are made for stopping power and energy
transfer, to give you an example of this I'll pull info right off the
back of my box of Winchester 9mm Luger 147gr SXT (Special eXpansion Tip)
ammo laying here on my desk.....
Usage: Properties
Application
________________________________________________________________________
__
Personal Protection Sure Functioning Personal
Protection Optimum Energy Deposit
Accurate
Controlled Recoil

Hunting Massive Energy Deposit Thin Skinned
Game such
Accurate
as Whitetail Deer and
Optimum Penetration Boar
Consistent Expansion

Target Range Accurate Indoor
and Outdoor
Sure Functioning
Range, Plinking,
Controlled Recoil
Target, and Match


Ok now that's just the table that's on here, I'll guarantee you that
there's at least 2 to 3 more varieties above what they list that are
military grade and each one has more power to it and will be more
impossible to get ahold of.

> I still say that the Barrett is somewhat equivalent to a .68 cal Tank
> rifle
> or your .700 Nitro express.
> Remember that the ammunition for the barrett counts as AV IIRC.
I think I'll look up your point there about it being AV, nope it
doesn't, they count as APDS (page 21 Cannon Companion)now you're right
the rounds are expensive however since they're no longer in the back of
the book with the equipment list.........(Custom Barret Ammo is 200¥ for
a box of 10 with availability and street index being equal to that of
the gun) umm....that's not that outrageous. Go to a store now and try to
buy a box of Match Grade .50 Caliber Rounds....I don’t really think
you're going to find them for less than about $50 for 10, now tell them
you want Teflon coated rounds because essentially it's the easiest way
to transfer APDS to modern rounds and they're going to laugh their asses
off at you, they're ILLEGAL. And the reason that they cost more is
because for once they actually decided that not any gun of that same
caliber could take the extra punch that these rounds give and gave them
their own custom designation for ammo, personally it's something that
they SHOULD do for each type of ammo, split it up into each category of
gun, MP's won't shoot SMG rounds even if they are the same caliber, it's
just dumb, if they do shoot the same why do they have different damage
codes? Anyway here's the point, if you can go through Jane's Gun
Recognition and find me a single sniper rifle that IS a .68 Cal (other
than a paintball gun) I'll swallow the argument and shut up about it
because it's an arbitrary argument anyway because as someone else has
said, it was made plain vanilla so that it didn't get too complicated.
On the other hand if you can't find it I'd like to know where you've
gotten the idea that there's a .68 cal sniper rifle anywhere, having
just gotten out of the army and only seen one .65 cal anti tank rifle
and having seen it shot and what it did to targets AS WELL as what it
did to the HUMMER that it was mounted to! This rifle had enough kick it
BROKE the ring mount on the turret of the hummer, NO ONE would use this
as a sniper rifle, especially considering the amount of noise it makes,
period.
Message no. 14
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 02:00:01 2002
> Usage: Properties
> Application
>
________________________________________________________________________
> __
> Personal Protection Sure Functioning Personal
> Protection Optimum Energy Deposit
> Accurate
> Controlled Recoil
>
> Hunting Massive Energy Deposit Thin
Skinned
> Game such
> Accurate
> as Whitetail Deer and
> Optimum Penetration Boar
> Consistent Expansion
>
> Target Range Accurate Indoor
> and Outdoor
> Sure Functioning
> Range, Plinking,
> Controlled Recoil
> Target, and Match



AAACK, the ignorant machine ruined my table!
Message no. 15
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 06:15:00 2002
According to Derek Hyde, on Mon, 29 Apr 2002 the word on the street was...

> > Shadowrun story stuff (Elven Fire, for instance) cites the Ranger Arms
> > SM-3 as a .655, which sort of fits the high damage from a subsonic
> > round.
>
> Ok perhaps I'll stand corrected in that instance because I've never once
> seen that book.

It's one of two caliber references I can remember in SR stories, the link
being that both are by Michael Stackpole. Since he doesn't really stick to
SR canon anyway, you can make of it what you will.

> You're right, the .50BMG IS an anti tank weapon just as Most Barret
> Rifles are listed as light anti tank rifles, if they're used as a sniper
> rifle good for them but they're still an anti tank weapon, the point is
> that the largest one I've found in Jane's Gun book was a .55, now if
> it's supposed to be a milspec weapon they're NOT going to use something
> HUGE because (little known fact to follow for those of you that AREN'T
> military and never have been) the Geneva convention specifies that a .50
> weapon cannot be fired at a person, it may be fired at his equipment
> however cannot be fired specifically at the person itself.

*sigh* For some reason, the entire US military seems to believe that
myth... Though I can't quote sections to prove it, the Geneva Conventions
do not forbid firing .50 caliber rounds at people, and so you don't need to
claim you fired it at the target's flak jacket instead.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Begint eer ge bezint.
-> 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. 16
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 09:25:00 2002
> *sigh* For some reason, the entire US military seems to believe that
> myth... Though I can't quote sections to prove it, the Geneva
Conventions
> do not forbid firing .50 caliber rounds at people, and so you don't
need
> to
> claim you fired it at the target's flak jacket instead.
That's cause that's what we're taught in training, keep in mind that the
average person doesn't see a .50 rifle only the .50 HMG, that by all
standards is an anti-vehicle weapon and not intended for use as
anti-personnel. Regardless, even if I'm free to spray "bob" with the .50
I'm sure as hell not allowed to use anything bigger on him directly, if
he were in a vehicle yes but him out there with his LBE, rifle, helmet,
and flak jacket....NO
Message no. 17
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 13:15:01 2002
In article <000801c1efb8$e97c6870$0700a8c0@*****>, Derek Hyde
<dhyde@*********.net> writes
>> No, it most explicitly is _not_ designed for penetrating armour: it's
>> designed to kill elephants.
>
>Not quite, the point of an elephant gun is that It's gotta have the
>penetration to get THROUGH the elephant's tougher skin without starting
>to expand until it's through it therefore it would work on the same
>concept with armored people,

Nope. Severely different terminal ballistics. The mechanics needed to
pierce elephant hide and generate controlled expansion beyond it, are
extremely unlike those needed to those required to penetrate armour
plate and generate adequate behind-armour effects.

Elephant hide is just thick skin: the STANAG 4512 target (the reference
for "what you have to hit and hurt") is 1.6mm of Titanium plus 20 layers
of Kevlar, and a totally different proposition.

>granted it's not going to be as effective
>in a non APDS form against hardened armor but how many characters are
>really running around in hardened milspec armor? I know I got a LOT of
>criticism when I mentioned that I'd made my players do a run against
>people in it so in the same effect why are you worried about it trying
>to do damage to a HEAVILY armored person.
>
>
>> The .50BMG and the Soviet 14.5mm were both designed as anti-tank
>weapons
>> from the outset and anti-materiel rifles chambered for them are not
>> uncommon.
>
>You're right, the .50BMG IS an anti tank weapon just as Most Barret
>Rifles are listed as light anti tank rifles, if they're used as a sniper
>rifle good for them but they're still an anti tank weapon, the point is
>that the largest one I've found in Jane's Gun book was a .55,

Finland, Germany, Switzerland and Japan all produced and issued 20mm
rifles (Lahti model 39, PzB41, Solothurn S-18, and the Model 97) while
the Soviets standardised on the (ballistically excellent) 14.5mm.

More recently, Steyr-Mannlicher developed and offered the AMR in 15mm
calibre during the late 1980s.

>now if
>it's supposed to be a milspec weapon they're NOT going to use something
>HUGE because (little known fact to follow for those of you that AREN'T
>military and never have been) the Geneva convention specifies that a .50
>weapon cannot be fired at a person, it may be fired at his equipment
>however cannot be fired specifically at the person itself.

Popular urban myth, but untrue. There is *no* legal prohibition on
firing .50BMG or larger ball rounds at combatants. (Also, the Geneva
Conventions deal with the treatment of wounded, PoWs and noncombatants,
not with ammunition)

Part of the reason the myth began was with the .50 spotting rifles
mounted on 106mm recoilless rifles, which fired an explosive bullet
ballistically matched to the 106mm shell: aim and fire, and if the .50
bullet exploded with a bright flash on the target, you followed with a
106mm HEAT shell :)


However, the use of explosive projectiles of under 400 grams against
personnel *is* proscribed (first by the 1868 Declaration of St.
Petersburg, then by the Hague Conventions)

"The Contracting Parties engage mutually to renounce, in case of war
among themselves, the employment by their military or naval troops of
any projectile of a weight below 400 grammes, which is either explosive
or charged with fulminating or inflammable substances."

- so, firing that spotting rifle against troops *is* illegal by those
rules. Note, firstly, that the US is not a signatory to the Hague rules,
though it accepts them; secondly, few would bother firing a .50 spotting
rifle when they could fire the 106mm instead :) Thus, you "can't fire a
.50 at people" became a popularly-believed myth.


This proscription is sort-of-ignored now anyway, although in the 1930s
the US Navy chose the calibre of its 1.1" anti-aircraft gun specifically
to remain within the Declaration's limit for an explosive shell; there's
a general consensus that below 20mm calibre there's little advantage to
be gained in putting explosive content into a bullet, though incendiary
bullets are widespread.


If it *is* illegal to fire a .50 or larger weapon at personnel, where
has anyone been convicted as a result of doing so?

>For this
>reason in itself nearly ALL sniper rifles of modern day are 7.62mm, look
>through the net, look in books, I've found a very small percentage that
>are actually anything other than 7.62mm or 5.56mm and that's going
>through the official sniper rifles of almost every military in the
>world.

British Army issues an Accuracy International in .338 Lapua and
evaluated some .50s, the US and Canadians use .50BMG (a couple of
Canadian snipers are being proposed for US medals for their long-range
shooting in Afghanistan), and I've had my hands on an interesting South
African rifle from Denel that's chambered for 14.5mm and 20mm.

Most sniper rifles are 7.62mm or thereabouts because it's a good match
to visibility and expected engagement ranges, but there's an occasional
place for heavier weapons.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 18
From: shadowrn@*********.com (CJ Tipton)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 17:30:01 2002
Paul said:
> Nope. Severely different terminal ballistics. The mechanics needed
> to
> pierce elephant hide and generate controlled expansion beyond it,
> are
> extremely unlike those needed to those required to penetrate armour
> plate and generate adequate behind-armour effects.

Actually, one of the most overlooked problems in this whole Blah-Blah
Elephant Gun Blah-Blah is that even if a .600 H&H was good at punching
through armor, it has a crappy effective combat range, and you would have
to handload all of your Super sniper rounds (APDS,AV, Frag Flechettes, EX
Explosive). And if you did need to take out a target in an armored car,
you should have brought a .50 BMG.

> >> The .50BMG and the Soviet 14.5mm were both designed as anti-tank
> >weapons
> >> from the outset and anti-materiel rifles chambered for them are
> not
> >> uncommon.

Good word. Anti-materiel. Based around the concept that, as Sgt. Jordan
once put it, "Our job is to kill people and break their toys."

>
> >now if
> >it's supposed to be a milspec weapon they're NOT going to use
> something
> >HUGE because (little known fact to follow for those of you that
> AREN'T
> >military and never have been) the Geneva convention specifies that
> a .50
> >weapon cannot be fired at a person....<Snikt...Hack,Chop>

RIGHT! And all us spiffy Street Sam Snipers are real bound up in what the
Geneva Convention says. We kill people with automatic shotguns. }:>)

> Part of the reason the myth began was with the .50 spotting rifles
> mounted on 106mm recoilless rifles, which fired an explosive bullet
> ballistically matched to the 106mm shell: aim and fire, and if the
> .50
> bullet exploded with a bright flash on the target, you followed with
> a
> 106mm HEAT shell :)
<LE SNIP>
> though it accepts them; secondly, few would bother firing a .50
> spotting
> rifle when they could fire the 106mm instead :) Thus, you "can't
> fire a
> .50 at people" became a popularly-believed myth.

I knew there was some basis to the mumbo-jumbo, but I hadn't heard this.
Cool, thanks.

> >For this
> >reason in itself nearly ALL sniper rifles of modern day are 7.62mm,

Once again, your looking for the wrong word. Most modern sniper rifles
are 7.62mm(by 54mm, by 51mm, .300 Win mag, etc.). If the round gets any
bigger than that, the weapon gets labeled an anti-materiel rifle, an
anti-tank rifle, or some other technical crap to confuse civilians as to
its purpose. But let me assure you, when the US sends out the boys to go
a warrin', you had best believe that the Barrett is going along for the
ride. Hiding behind a tree is not good enough, and "bullet-proof" glass
won't stop a .50 BMG SLAP. It will also be perfect for those Shadowrun
occasions when stopping the armored limo and then killing everybody
inside, because having to switch guns is just a drag.

> Most sniper rifles are 7.62mm or thereabouts because it's a good
> match
> to visibility and expected engagement ranges, but there's an
> occasional
> place for heavier weapons.

Actually, it was my impression that .308 (7.62mm, e pluribus unum), was
pretty much representative of the standard due to its use by police and
federal agencys as a sniper weapon. The cops don't usually (I did say
USUALLY!) need a .50 cal to take down objectives in SWAT scenarios.
Although a bank robbery or two might have gone a little differently for
them if they used Anti-materiel rifles, the hard fact is that .50 BMG and
the like will turn your armed and armored assailant into Alpo chunky
style and not lose enough of its velocity. And cops hate it when innocent
bystanders get killed (especially FBI/ATF cops).

COWBOY('s other impression is of a lemur on speed...)
CJ
Arkades@****.com


________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
Message no. 19
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 18:20:01 2002
In article <20020430.162458.-319621.0.Arkades@****.com>, CJ Tipton
<arkades@****.com> writes
>Actually, it was my impression that .308 (7.62mm, e pluribus unum), was
>pretty much representative of the standard due to its use by police and
>federal agencys as a sniper weapon.

Nope - it does the job and even now, the sniper can still scrounge ammo
from line units (even if the infantry mostly use 5.56mm, the MG platoon
still have 7.62mm x 51 in abundance) One reason why in the UK military,
the .338 rifle is an "as-and-when-required" item while the similar L96A1
in 7.62mm is standard issue for snipers. Nothing to do with civilian or
other units - mostly to do with being able to find ammo.

Nobody in the military much cares what civilian police do :) As an
example, civilian police loved the MP-5 family for its accuracy;
military units find it cranky if it doesn't get lots of TLC and
preferred weapons like the Sterling for 9mm, or _real_ rifles if they
needed accuracy. Military use means "has to live in mud for days and
still fire" and the MP-5 doesn't like that, though with proper care it's
a superb weapon. It is _not_ a battlefield weapon.

Civilian police, especially in the US, got gung-ho about .40 S&W and
wanted a MP-5 chambered for it... and when it broke too often from
firing that cartridge, they got offered the UMP but many switched to the
M4 carbine instead.

>Although a bank robbery or two might have gone a little differently for
>them if they used Anti-materiel rifles, the hard fact is that .50 BMG and
>the like will turn your armed and armored assailant into Alpo chunky
>style and not lose enough of its velocity. And cops hate it when innocent
>bystanders get killed (especially FBI/ATF cops).

Though they're beginning to lose their paranoia about "overpenetration"
and actually equip with effective weapons. Or so it looks from here.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 20
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 18:40:01 2002
In article <000001c1ef98$d26b2830$0700a8c0@*****>, Derek Hyde
<dhyde@*********.net> writes
>Increased accuracy and as I said with the barrett ammo and someone else
>pointed out about 9mm ammo, the NATO rounds kick out at a hell of a lot
>higher velocity than what the standard over the shelf rounds do.

But that doesn't explain why a military weapon should automatically be
less effective. For instance, check what the US military currently use
as one of their sniper weapons... it's a type-certified Remington 700,
which is a very nice rifle but one that's readily available to the
civilian shooter.

>Also
>the difference is in the composition of the actual bullet, some are made
>for more penetration and some are made for stopping power and energy
>transfer,

Bear in mind the assorted rules that forbid the use of incomplete
jackets or hollow points.

Bear also in mind that the military are using the same rifle as
civilians, and can't get much higher chamber pressures.

>to give you an example of this I'll pull info right off the
>back of my box of Winchester 9mm Luger 147gr SXT (Special eXpansion Tip)
>ammo laying here on my desk.....

That ammunition is not only illegal for Official Government Use (not
like shadowrunners would care, but still...) but also is pretty marginal
for most weapons. I think you'd find that if you used it in a H&K MP-5
you'd invalidate the manufacturer's warranty. 1200fps from a 147-grain
bullet is a _very_ hot load.

>Ok now that's just the table that's on here, I'll guarantee you that
>there's at least 2 to 3 more varieties above what they list that are
>military grade and each one has more power to it and will be more
>impossible to get ahold of.

On the other hand, do what I did and handload. I never fired a
commercial .45ACP, but I made and fired thousands of rounds, tweaking
them to make Major for IPSC.

>now tell them
>you want Teflon coated rounds because essentially it's the easiest way
>to transfer APDS to modern rounds

No, it just protects the barrel from a hardened steel bullet (at the
cost of accuracy). Doesn't do a thing for penetration.

>MP's won't shoot SMG rounds even if they are the same caliber, it's
>just dumb,

MPs _do_ shoot SMG rounds. It's pretty much all 9mm x 19 or .45ACP.

>if they do shoot the same why do they have different damage
>codes?

Game balance, and writers who don't know _that_ much about guns.

>Anyway here's the point, if you can go through Jane's Gun
>Recognition and find me a single sniper rifle that IS a .68 Cal (other
>than a paintball gun) I'll swallow the argument and shut up about it

I can find you three or four that are .79" or thereabouts...

>because it's an arbitrary argument anyway because as someone else has
>said, it was made plain vanilla so that it didn't get too complicated.

Big-time. Shadowrun, especially from 2nd Ed., tried hard to make pistols
useful in skilled hands, SMGs and assault rifles effective. and to
prevent the tiresome reality of "the emplaced SFMG wins most battles"
from letting corporate security win every firefight by having a solid
depth position.

That resulted in an unrealistic model of firearm damage. I choose to
live with it, even though I point out its flaws. Others prefer to fix
it. Life's like that.

>On the other hand if you can't find it I'd like to know where you've
>gotten the idea that there's a .68 cal sniper rifle anywhere, having
>just gotten out of the army and only seen one .65 cal anti tank rifle

I can find you six 20mm rifles without breaking step, sad to say.

>and having seen it shot and what it did to targets AS WELL as what it
>did to the HUMMER that it was mounted to!

I can find you a 30mm automatic cannon that was designed to be mounted
on a Hummer in place of a .50".


>This rifle had enough kick it
>BROKE the ring mount on the turret of the hummer, NO ONE would use this
>as a sniper rifle, especially considering the amount of noise it makes,
>period.

Snipers don't generally use silencers, and muzzle blast is relative. If
you're a kilometre away, your target doesn't even _hear_ your muzzle
blast for three seconds.


>
>

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 21
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Jane VR)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 20:15:01 2002
Sorry for the stupid question, but what is a BMG ?

Jane


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Message no. 22
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Arclight)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Tue Apr 30 20:20:01 2002
At 00:15 01.05.2002 +0000, Jane VR wrote:

>Sorry for the stupid question, but what is a BMG ?

Take a look:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m2-50cal.htm


Arclight
Message no. 23
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Wed May 1 04:20:01 2002
>From: "Jane VR" <kadjari@*******.com>

>Sorry for the stupid question, but what is a BMG ?

Assuming noone else has answered already, B.M.G. stands (or stood as far as
I was aware, I'm conscious I'm surrounded by people who can find six
examples of 20mm rifles at the drop of a hat) for Browning Machine Gun, as a
suffix for a calibre it gives those who know information about the bullet's
length. .50BMG is (I think) about the most commonly chambered .50 cal round.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Message no. 24
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Speaking of ballistics
Date: Wed May 1 05:30:04 2002
According to Jane VR, on Wed, 01 May 2002 the word on the street was...

> Sorry for the stupid question, but what is a BMG ?

It stands for "Browning Machine Gun," and refers (mainly) to the ammunition
used by certain models of machine gun -- those designed by John Moses
Browning early in the 20th century. The guns themselves are frequently
called simply "Brownings" or also "Browning machine guns," and were
mostly
made in .30 caliber (7.62 mm) and .50 caliber (12.7 mm) variants; they're
just as often called simply by their calibers.

Lots of confusion all around, which is why I prefer to use terms like M2 HB
or M1919, which then confuses other people who don't realize those are the
proper indicators for what they call ".50 Browning" or ".30 Browning"
machine guns :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Begint eer ge bezint.
-> 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 Speaking of ballistics, 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!