Approved Submission [Chelti] 6mm AR APT Ammunition

This review is for: Chelti 6 mm Armor-Piercing Tracer ammunition

The submitted article is/has…
[x] A very high level of overall quality
[/] A general topic sentence under the title header
[-] Artwork (Required for new species; Strongly recommended for vehicles and hand weapons)\\
[x] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[-] In the proper format/template
[x] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[x] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[x] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[X] No red and/or broken links
[x] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[x] Reasonably neutral point of view

The submitted article is/does not…
[X] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[X] Obtusely redundant
[X] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[X] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[X] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[X] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[X] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[X] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[X] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[/] Lacking Detail
[X] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)

The article has…
[-] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[x] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[-] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[-] The Standard Product Nomenclature System, if applicable.


Status: This submission is in progress.

1. Get a one-sentence line under the main header, then dump the rest of that stuff in an “about” section.

2. Is this ammunition cased?

3. 2,200 m/s is LIGHTNING fast. Did you mean 2,200 feet per second? Or maybe 600 m/s?

4. The caliber is 6 mm; though caliber technically refers only to Imperial units, in firearms it applies to everything. You can specify that instead of going with the Imperial measurement.

5. When describing size, is the second number the case measurement?

It's always nice to see another good, old fashioned, nitrocellulose (or whatever futuristic flavour you'd have) weapons platform popping up.

As Doshii noted, 2200m/s is certainly fast, given the assumption that we're looking at a relatively normally proportioned cartridge. For reference, the .338 Lapua Magnum (less intermediate cartridge and more magnum rifle cartridge) can send rounds out at a little over 1km/s, the .30-06 (at 7.62×63mm is relatively close case-wise) punts rounds at almost 900m/s for lighter projectiles.

The closest round I can find dimension wise (case length and calibre anyway) is the .240 Weatherby Magnum (at 6.2x63.4mm metric) which is said to have the potential to send bullets away at a little over 1200m/s on a good day. Of course, if we're looking at a caseless cartridge with untold amounts of propellant, things certainly do change in that case.

Considering we're in the future, metallurgy and chemistry developments coupled with a stout bullet (but it'll have to be light to achieve higher velocities), you could probably try squeezing for 1400m/s. But there will be consequences for this: overpenetration galore for unarmoured targets, potential for round to simply shatter against armoured objects, and all the other niggles that don't come to my mind right now.

Assuming we are looking at a cased cartridge, I've whipped up an image to show what a brass cased 6x65mm Chelti would look like, measured against other extant cased cartridges of the SARPverse below. They may be to your liking, or not (if my assumption of cased cartridge proves false).



Well, that was rather verbose. Here's to hoping the picture doesn't break the page.

Just so we're all on the same page here, I know hardly anything about guns and bullets. Regular bullets like this are rather boring compared to plasma guns and stuff we have in the setting. These bullets were made to be a starting point towards more fun articles to come, including (but not limited to): self-correcting bullets, exploding bullets, particle accelerator cannons, giant spiderbots, and jetpacks!

Now to go about the points that are raised:

1. The Ammunition Template should be changed if this is going to become a requirement for all these ammunition articles. These are meant to be really boring ones!

2. Yes.

3. 2.2km/s is from another project of mine basically made to give PA a rough day. It was a nice round number that fit, so it can be dropped to 1000-900m/s no problem.

4. So you want me to put 6mm in the Caliber section instead of .236 which is the exact same size? I took the caliber request literally, at least .236 has a nice ring to it. Most other measurements in SARP have always required both systems, I'm honestly surprised they don't start asking for bullets in 1/8th of inches.

5. Case measurement? 65mm is the length from the tip of the bullet to the bottom of the brass case.


@Zunther

Honestly, I only picked 6mm because it was a nice round number between 5.56 and 7.62 (and easy to remember) which I assume gives it a mixture of the properties of both so I only have to keep one ammo size in inventory. Mostly it's intended to be controllable burst-fire bullet with enough weight to keep it stable firing through dense foliage but with enough legs to be useful over long windswept plains.

Cool diagram also. You've clearly put more thought into this than I have. XD

Well, you're more or less on the mark with the 6.xxmm class bearing properties of both the 5.56mm or 7.62mm rounds (the 6.8mm SPC and 6.5mm Grendel particularly of real life fame). It'll probably be more the light and flight 5.56mm than the heavy and ready 7.62mm though, but it does mean more speed with a smaller and presumably lighter round.

With regard to the question of calibre, what I think Doshii's getting at is that where you've listed both size and calibre within the article, you could easily get away with just having the size dimension as that includes the (metric) measurement of the cartridge's calibre. When you see 6x65mm, one typically assumes they are looking at a cartridge with a calibre of 6mm and a case length of 65mm (which reminds me, an OAL of 65mm makes much more sense for an assault rifle than a case length of 65mm).

I noticed (a little too late) that you've got other types of rounds up for approval. Assuming Doshii is okay with it, why not roll all of the various projectile types into the one article dedicated to the 6x65mm cartridge? It'll probably be easier on the tech vetters, and easier for you to manage in the future, as in the end, they are just effectively permutations of a base cartridge type.

If you want, I'd be happy to spin up a revised round/cartridge and pull some measurements from the end result. Just for that extra touch of authenticity. Happy designing!

The reason all the articles are separated was because a long time ago someone had the wise idea that all the ammunition articles for each and every single weapon in SARP needed to be listed on their own page. Someone very important thought this would be a wonderful idea, and then most of SARP moved to one round that did everything for every single last weapon in each faction because suddenly having to get dozens of ammo articles through NTSE and not being an admin is almost impossible. Which is why I'm the only one silly enough to try it. I admit to a small sense of petty revenge with all these threads, though.

Six-by-six-five easy easy to remember, so I guess I'll just stick it like that. Lotta powder behind the bullet. Makes me feel shiny and special-snowflake-y. Honestly, if the tech reviewers are cast back by these bullets, they're probably going to start going into cardiac arrest when they see the 17mm, 24mm, 45mm, and 70mm rounds start flying past. That's not including the super-smart-heat-seeking-life-hating-radar-guided-soul-hunting-kill-you-dead smart rounds that may or may not show up in the future. Not to mention the guns they're made for.

I'll start editing the article itself tomorrow morning when I return to the land of the living.

Not intimidated. Reviewers can handle it.

No revenge felt. I'll still make you edit them, after all. ^_^

OK, so we can skip No. 1. If the template has it that way, I won't change it.

For No. 3, 1,000 m/s is a nice round number, and Chelti are buff mofos. Roll with 1,000 m/s.

For No. 4, another miscommunication on my part. I've fixed it for you on this submission, so you can apply it to your other submissions.

And for No. 5, I've corrected it here as well. It also can be applied to your other submissions.

Which, honestly, means that this submission is good to go, so I've approved it.

That said, your others await your changes.

Retroactively edited all 6 x 56mm Chelti ammunition articles to new spec. Should be up to snuff. Sorry about the wait, you run late on one thing in the morning and it spills over to everything else. -_-

@Zunther should probably continue refining that diagram of his, it's a nice little infograph. Be nice to compare all the different bullets of SARP.