-
If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
-
Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
[Lor] M12B Selectable Assault Rifle, Lightweight (SARL)
- Thread starter Vesper
- Start date
I'll be reviewing this later, purely for my own nefarious purposes and sick pleasure. If that helps.
FIRST IMPRESSION: The idea of using a straight magazine at that kind of angle ... it's just really steep.
FIRST IMPRESSION: The idea of using a straight magazine at that kind of angle ... it's just really steep.
Vesper
Inactive Member
Keep in mind that the round is only ~19mm long, versus the 45mm of a 5.56mm round, so it would be much easier to move it back parallel with the breach. In any event, I think the rounds would be kept angled parallel in the magazine (which would still be angled forward) just to simplify the loading process.
Ohhhh. 19 mm long ... Okay. That's nothing then; no big deal. Sorry for not getting to it last night; other duties called. I'll try again tonight.
Okay ... I've got about half an hour, and I want to get into nitpicky shit because, well, I like guns.
So, without further ado.
1. Price -- is that in KS, or Resource Points?
2. 6.67 x 18.96 mm round is about .26-caliber. Any particular reason you're using that?
3. Having seen the look of the weapon, I think I get the purpose of the design. However, I wonder if you are forgetting the balance of the weapon -- everything is in back, and with the carbine model, and the ranges you have dialed in, I'd worry this baby would be a bitch to handle. Obviously a big Lorath wouldn't have a problem ... but you might want to sell this to civilians someday. *wink wink* Basically, the concern is about the material used -- ceramics in a weapon that isn't balanced in the center seems like a bad plan.
4. The separate propellant magazine is ingenious. I hate the idea of carrying around one more fucking thing, yet if you want the ultimate in modular, versitile weaponry (complete with varying range and hitting power), it makes perfect sense.
5. Is there anything ejected from this weapon? Case or what have you? I know it's caseless ammo ... just want to be sure.
6. 50 cm is tiny. The extendable stock, however, is what I assume to be 16.6 cm, by your math? Nice length on it. Is it a wire or a solid stock?
7. Pretty small difference in weight between the rifle and the compact. And a big jump to the heavy weights. Interesting.
8. Can you explain the sections of maximum effective ranges? I have a feeling I get Area, Point and Suppression, but I'm not sure.
9. I would remove the ranges between bipod and without. Focus on the range of round itself, as humans can sometimes outdo a bi-pod, and theoretically it doesn't add any more effective range anyway -- it just makes it easier to shoot.
10. Why is it not safe to fire fully automatic with the sharpshooter variant? Are the barrels between all four variants different besides their length? As in, is one thicker than the other, or carries a different length-of-twist, or maybe made with a different material or production technique?
11. Remove the semi-automatic firing rate UNLESS the disconnector and recoil system of this weapon somehow truly limit it to that. I highly doubt it does -- I bet I could bumpfire this thing faster than 75 rpm.
12. Can you explain the difference between Automatic, Sustained and Cyclic? Again, I think I know, but to be sure.
13. Under muzzle velocity, do you mean the M12 or the M7?
14. The maximums are fucking hot on this gun. Seriously hot. I wouldn't touch a gun that fired a round -- on full auto -- at more than 2,000 m/s. That's fucking sick.
15. Thank you for the note about the recoil. I was going to say, this fucker would break your goddamn shoulder like that.
16. Is an explosive and frangible round really necessary for something that's only .26-caliber? I mean, I guess the round's pretty long at nearly 19 mm ... but still. Fuck.
17. Again, love the propellant system. About 150 rounds is pretty good, actually. Firing in a vacuum, too! Yukari NEEEEEEDS one of these.
18. Under firing mechanism -- you mean magazine, not clip.
19. So if this gun has no propellant charge, does the electrical parts of it not work either?
20. Where is the Type-D sight rail located? I'm a little confused because you say a flashlight could go up there.
21. ... Okay, I have nothing else. Other than some typos. But they can wait. SERIOUSLY, Yukari would drool for this.
So, without further ado.
1. Price -- is that in KS, or Resource Points?
2. 6.67 x 18.96 mm round is about .26-caliber. Any particular reason you're using that?
3. Having seen the look of the weapon, I think I get the purpose of the design. However, I wonder if you are forgetting the balance of the weapon -- everything is in back, and with the carbine model, and the ranges you have dialed in, I'd worry this baby would be a bitch to handle. Obviously a big Lorath wouldn't have a problem ... but you might want to sell this to civilians someday. *wink wink* Basically, the concern is about the material used -- ceramics in a weapon that isn't balanced in the center seems like a bad plan.
4. The separate propellant magazine is ingenious. I hate the idea of carrying around one more fucking thing, yet if you want the ultimate in modular, versitile weaponry (complete with varying range and hitting power), it makes perfect sense.
5. Is there anything ejected from this weapon? Case or what have you? I know it's caseless ammo ... just want to be sure.
6. 50 cm is tiny. The extendable stock, however, is what I assume to be 16.6 cm, by your math? Nice length on it. Is it a wire or a solid stock?
7. Pretty small difference in weight between the rifle and the compact. And a big jump to the heavy weights. Interesting.
8. Can you explain the sections of maximum effective ranges? I have a feeling I get Area, Point and Suppression, but I'm not sure.
9. I would remove the ranges between bipod and without. Focus on the range of round itself, as humans can sometimes outdo a bi-pod, and theoretically it doesn't add any more effective range anyway -- it just makes it easier to shoot.
10. Why is it not safe to fire fully automatic with the sharpshooter variant? Are the barrels between all four variants different besides their length? As in, is one thicker than the other, or carries a different length-of-twist, or maybe made with a different material or production technique?
11. Remove the semi-automatic firing rate UNLESS the disconnector and recoil system of this weapon somehow truly limit it to that. I highly doubt it does -- I bet I could bumpfire this thing faster than 75 rpm.
12. Can you explain the difference between Automatic, Sustained and Cyclic? Again, I think I know, but to be sure.
13. Under muzzle velocity, do you mean the M12 or the M7?
14. The maximums are fucking hot on this gun. Seriously hot. I wouldn't touch a gun that fired a round -- on full auto -- at more than 2,000 m/s. That's fucking sick.
15. Thank you for the note about the recoil. I was going to say, this fucker would break your goddamn shoulder like that.
16. Is an explosive and frangible round really necessary for something that's only .26-caliber? I mean, I guess the round's pretty long at nearly 19 mm ... but still. Fuck.
17. Again, love the propellant system. About 150 rounds is pretty good, actually. Firing in a vacuum, too! Yukari NEEEEEEDS one of these.
18. Under firing mechanism -- you mean magazine, not clip.
19. So if this gun has no propellant charge, does the electrical parts of it not work either?
20. Where is the Type-D sight rail located? I'm a little confused because you say a flashlight could go up there.
21. ... Okay, I have nothing else. Other than some typos. But they can wait. SERIOUSLY, Yukari would drool for this.
Vesper
Inactive Member
Allot of the issues you present come from two items:
1)
About half of this item was written about 9 months ago and has since loitered on my hard drive. This led to some of confusing paragraphs, since I myself was trying to remember what I had been thinking. This is also the cause of the two weapon names (M7 and M12) appearing in the document. The M7 was the original name, which I changed to the M12. The other mentions are just entries I failed to notice in my update prior to posting. This ties into the different ranges and fire rate categories (which were derived from the MS1 ROTC book entry for the M16A2).
From what I can remember Area would be a small region (say a meter or two across) over which a round fired could be reliably expected to land at the listed range. Point is just what it says, a point target (a bulls-eye target, a fuel tank, a head, etc.). Suppression is a larger region (say several meters across) over which the weapon could reliably saturate with fire at the listed range. For the RoF, Automatic is what the weapon can physically fire when set to automatic fire. Sustained is the recommended fire rate it can maintain for extended periods. Cyclic is the maximum RoF the breach and feed mechanisms can actually produce, such as during a burst fire.
2)
The other main cause is the system I used to make generate the technical details of the weapon (3G3: Guns! Guns! Guns!; produced by Blacksburg Tactical Research Center; no I did not pull the numbers out of my ass). Due to the small size of the round fired (due to the lack of cartridge) the receiver was fairly small (the actual generated one was like 2.3cm long, but I boosted it to 8.3 cm since it seemed more manageable), so the majority of the length was in the barrel. The barrel was also the majority of the weapons weight which resulted in the substantial weight differences between the rifle and sharpshooter configurations (on which I based the other two, compact and automatic rifle respectively). I set the barrel length of the two alternate configurations as 85% of the generated ones. The weight followed this proportion between the Rifle and Compact, but the automatic rifle barrel actually weighs more despite being shorter due to extra mass in the area of cooling fins and heavier barrel to keep a safe temperature for sustained autofire. Unfortunately, it used a ‘Range Class' rating for the range of the weapon, which I was not able to find a adequate description of, so the ranges are my extrapolations for the weapon based on its muzzle velocity and round size based on IRL weaponry.
For the other items.
2) This was arrived at back when I was originally making the gun. Around that time I had done some calcs for rail guns to see what kinds of recoil they produced. I believe the 6.67mm was a size I settled on that had good punch but not excessive recoil.
3) While that picture makes it look like all the mass is in the back (keeping in mind that is just a picture I found on deviantart that I thought looked similar to my vision for the M12), most of the weight is in the barrel. Much of the bulk around the receiver and handgaurds is lightweight composite honeycomb and empty space. Since most of the weight is in the barrel, each version would be designed to keep it balanced with a standard magazine/propellant loadout (52 rounds, 156 shots of propellant). When something like the 208 round box or 416 charges of propellant could unbalance it, but I do not believe it would be excessive.
5) No, it has no breach and doesn't eject anything except the bullet and propellant gas.
6) The stock is a lightweight composite honeycomb, though the outside would be fairly solid.
10) It is not unsafe per-se. As stated, all of the configurations use the same receiver and can therefore fire at the same rates physically as the automatic rifle. However, the automatic rifle barrel is heavier and has cooling fins so it can maintain a safer temperature during sustained autofire. For the sharpshooter configuration, autofire and pin-point accurate fire for a man-carried weapon just don't mesh, especially considering the recoil the rounds could produce.
16) The explosive is probably better termed fragmentary as there is not really enough compound in the round to cause significant damage through the actual explosion (it is not like .50 cal explosive rounds, which can take chunks out of things). Against porous, hard targets (like concrete) the speed of the round could probably get it far enough in that the explosive could dislodge small chunks however. This high-speed fragmentation is able to cause very heavy internal damage. The fragmentary round is for urban environments where the high-speed standard round could very well punch through several houses before stopping.
19) As written previously, yes. I clarified that there is a back-up battery in the weapon that could run the scope and other power items. However, it does not have any storage in the weapon for the propellant due to safety reasons.
20) The rail is located on the top of the weapon. I am not sure why I put the flashlight there (that entry is from the original write-up long, long ago), but I removed that comment.
Edit: The price is in KS. Forgot to mention that.
1)
About half of this item was written about 9 months ago and has since loitered on my hard drive. This led to some of confusing paragraphs, since I myself was trying to remember what I had been thinking. This is also the cause of the two weapon names (M7 and M12) appearing in the document. The M7 was the original name, which I changed to the M12. The other mentions are just entries I failed to notice in my update prior to posting. This ties into the different ranges and fire rate categories (which were derived from the MS1 ROTC book entry for the M16A2).
From what I can remember Area would be a small region (say a meter or two across) over which a round fired could be reliably expected to land at the listed range. Point is just what it says, a point target (a bulls-eye target, a fuel tank, a head, etc.). Suppression is a larger region (say several meters across) over which the weapon could reliably saturate with fire at the listed range. For the RoF, Automatic is what the weapon can physically fire when set to automatic fire. Sustained is the recommended fire rate it can maintain for extended periods. Cyclic is the maximum RoF the breach and feed mechanisms can actually produce, such as during a burst fire.
2)
The other main cause is the system I used to make generate the technical details of the weapon (3G3: Guns! Guns! Guns!; produced by Blacksburg Tactical Research Center; no I did not pull the numbers out of my ass). Due to the small size of the round fired (due to the lack of cartridge) the receiver was fairly small (the actual generated one was like 2.3cm long, but I boosted it to 8.3 cm since it seemed more manageable), so the majority of the length was in the barrel. The barrel was also the majority of the weapons weight which resulted in the substantial weight differences between the rifle and sharpshooter configurations (on which I based the other two, compact and automatic rifle respectively). I set the barrel length of the two alternate configurations as 85% of the generated ones. The weight followed this proportion between the Rifle and Compact, but the automatic rifle barrel actually weighs more despite being shorter due to extra mass in the area of cooling fins and heavier barrel to keep a safe temperature for sustained autofire. Unfortunately, it used a ‘Range Class' rating for the range of the weapon, which I was not able to find a adequate description of, so the ranges are my extrapolations for the weapon based on its muzzle velocity and round size based on IRL weaponry.
For the other items.
2) This was arrived at back when I was originally making the gun. Around that time I had done some calcs for rail guns to see what kinds of recoil they produced. I believe the 6.67mm was a size I settled on that had good punch but not excessive recoil.
3) While that picture makes it look like all the mass is in the back (keeping in mind that is just a picture I found on deviantart that I thought looked similar to my vision for the M12), most of the weight is in the barrel. Much of the bulk around the receiver and handgaurds is lightweight composite honeycomb and empty space. Since most of the weight is in the barrel, each version would be designed to keep it balanced with a standard magazine/propellant loadout (52 rounds, 156 shots of propellant). When something like the 208 round box or 416 charges of propellant could unbalance it, but I do not believe it would be excessive.
5) No, it has no breach and doesn't eject anything except the bullet and propellant gas.
6) The stock is a lightweight composite honeycomb, though the outside would be fairly solid.
10) It is not unsafe per-se. As stated, all of the configurations use the same receiver and can therefore fire at the same rates physically as the automatic rifle. However, the automatic rifle barrel is heavier and has cooling fins so it can maintain a safer temperature during sustained autofire. For the sharpshooter configuration, autofire and pin-point accurate fire for a man-carried weapon just don't mesh, especially considering the recoil the rounds could produce.
16) The explosive is probably better termed fragmentary as there is not really enough compound in the round to cause significant damage through the actual explosion (it is not like .50 cal explosive rounds, which can take chunks out of things). Against porous, hard targets (like concrete) the speed of the round could probably get it far enough in that the explosive could dislodge small chunks however. This high-speed fragmentation is able to cause very heavy internal damage. The fragmentary round is for urban environments where the high-speed standard round could very well punch through several houses before stopping.
19) As written previously, yes. I clarified that there is a back-up battery in the weapon that could run the scope and other power items. However, it does not have any storage in the weapon for the propellant due to safety reasons.
20) The rail is located on the top of the weapon. I am not sure why I put the flashlight there (that entry is from the original write-up long, long ago), but I removed that comment.
Edit: The price is in KS. Forgot to mention that.
*nods* Your explanations work well enough for me, if that's consolation for anyone. Damn fine weapons.
I still don't like .26-caliber.
I still don't like .26-caliber.
