Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Theemile and 74 guests

Heavy Tri-barrels

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by dreamrider   » Sun Jun 29, 2014 8:56 pm

dreamrider
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:44 am

Portion of Wikipedia article on the U.S. Army's standard .50 cal sniper rifle. Note that it is not the only caliber or mark of sniper rifle in service.

(bolding added by me)

M82 to M107

The XM107 was originally intended to be a bolt-action sniper rifle, and it was selected by the U.S. Army in a competition between such weapons. However, the decision was made that the U.S. Army did not, in fact, require such a weapon. The rifle originally selected under the trials to be the XM107 was the Barrett M95.

Then the Army decided on the Barrett M82, a semi-automatic rifle. In summer 2002, the M82 finally emerged from its Army trial phase and was approved for "full materiel release", meaning it was officially adopted as the Long Range Sniper Rifle, Caliber .50, M107. The M107 uses a Leupold 4.5–14×50 Mark 4 scope.

The Barrett M107 is a .50 caliber, shoulder fired, semi-automatic sniper rifle. Like its predecessors the rifle is said to have manageable recoil for a weapon of its size owing to the barrel assembly that itself absorbs force, moving inward toward the receiver against large springs with every shot. Additionally the weapon's weight and large muzzle brake also assist in recoil reduction. Various changes were made to the original M82A1 to create the M107, with new features such as a lengthened accessory rail, rear grip, and monopod socket. Barrett has recently been tasked with developing a lightweight version of the M107 under the "Anti-Materiel Sniper Rifle Congressional Program", and has already come up with a scheme to build important component parts such as the receiver frame and muzzle brake out of lighter weight materials.

The Barrett M107, like previous members of the M82 line, is also referred to as the Barrett "Light Fifty." The designation has in many instances supplanted earlier ones, with the M107 being voted one of 2005's Top 10 Military Inventions by the U.S. Army.[4]

dreamrider
(I think I'd best be done with this thread now.)
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Theemile   » Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:20 pm

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5247
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Weird Harold wrote:
Theemile wrote:As KZT points out - the total mass of a Pod is 2x or more than that of the missiles. So if no handwavium were involved, the Pod would be move backward with at most the same velocity as the missiles.


I haven't seen any texev detailing the mass of modern missile pods.

However, one of the points made when the new pods were introduced was that they could launch missiles at the same velocity a ship could. They couldn't do that with Newtonian physics unless the Pod was as massive as a warship.

The same argument applies to pulsers and pulse rifles: the reported velocity and mass of pulser darts would make recoil Unmanageable unless the weapon was extremely massive.

Pods aren't as massive as warships, and Honor's prosthetic arm doesn't weigh as much as she does; ergo there's some handwvium physics involved and the same sort of handwavium physics can make a 25mm Heavy Tribarrel that can be operate by one man in battle armor.


No, missiles can be fired out of pods and warships at the same velocity using the same energy to do so. The difference is whether the warship is kicked sideways at 10m/s or the pod is kicked back at 75000m/s. Once again, Simple newtonian mechanics - the firing point is in the center and each component of the equation is moved in opposite directions in proportion to it's mass.
******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Tenshinai   » Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:10 pm

Tenshinai
Admiral

Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:34 pm
Location: Sweden

dreamrider wrote:This is what I saw.

It is unclear to me how I was supposed to interpret #### as "This is another poster whose name I am not including". However, if it was not your intent to attribute that quote to me, I apologize for putting you on the spot.

However, I will point out that apparently attribution to me was the way that at least one other reader interpreted your post. See second quote below.



Hmm, clumsy quoting by Vince there that i missed.



Portion of Wikipedia article on the U.S. Army's standard .50 cal sniper rifle. Note that it is not the only caliber or mark of sniper rifle in service.


Oh i know what it´s called and all, and do note i did not say it was NOT used as a sniper rifle, just that it wasn´t the usual usage.

Rifles in .338 have effectively taken over much of that part even if it is mostly unofficial so far, due to being much more portable and still capable of very long ranges, up to the point where distance is no longer an issue for the ammo, but for conditions, sights and the shooter.
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Weird Harold   » Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:56 pm

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Theemile wrote:No, missiles can be fired out of pods and warships at the same velocity using the same energy to do so. The difference is whether the warship is kicked sideways at 10m/s or the pod is kicked back at 75000m/s. ...


If that is true, why did pods fall out of favor until GRAM/Ghostrider came up with better mass drivers for LACs and Pods?
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Theemile   » Sun Jun 29, 2014 11:08 pm

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5247
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Weird Harold wrote:
Theemile wrote:No, missiles can be fired out of pods and warships at the same velocity using the same energy to do so. The difference is whether the warship is kicked sideways at 10m/s or the pod is kicked back at 75000m/s. ...


If that is true, why did pods fall out of favor until GRAM/Ghostrider came up with better mass drivers for LACs and Pods?

Because the original pods before the series didn't have ANY mass drivers to give the missiles the initial kick. It has never been mentioned, but I would expect they got their initial separation via chem rockets, as we've seen in the Travis Long story in Beginnings.
******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by akira.taylor   » Sun Jun 29, 2014 11:21 pm

akira.taylor
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:28 pm

Weird Harold wrote:
Theemile wrote:No, missiles can be fired out of pods and warships at the same velocity using the same energy to do so. The difference is whether the warship is kicked sideways at 10m/s or the pod is kicked back at 75000m/s. ...


If that is true, why did pods fall out of favor until GRAM/Ghostrider came up with better mass drivers for LACs and Pods?


The "better mass drivers" are (as far as I recall) described as "light-weight." Basically, ships carried bigger mass drivers (since they have a lot more mass, and are expecting to get more shots off per launcher).
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Weird Harold   » Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:29 am

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

akira.taylor wrote:The "better mass drivers" are (as far as I recall) described as "light-weight." Basically, ships carried bigger mass drivers (since they have a lot more mass, and are expecting to get more shots off per launcher).


That's essentially what I'm trying to point out: Pods are lighter and have lighter mass drivers, yet the new "better mass drivers" can match the missile acceleration of ship-board launchers. (often with heavier missiles than the ship controlling them.)
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Lord Skimper   » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:02 am

Lord Skimper
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:49 am
Location: Calgary, Nova, Gryphon.

The Barrett M109 is the replacement AMR for the now M107 sniper rifle.

It fires a 25mm round.

Unlike the Steyr IWS 2000 which is a flat trajectory high velocity weapon the M109 is a brute force light cannon. Both do a similar job, the Barrett is better for soft target fighting the Steyr for long range anti armour / sniper with variable conditions. Both work, overkill vs infantry, pretty much the same but the Barrett can use explosive anti infantry / soft target ammunition options.

The IWS is pretty useless against a tent full of provisions.
________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars.
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Theemile   » Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:35 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5247
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Weird Harold wrote:
akira.taylor wrote:The "better mass drivers" are (as far as I recall) described as "light-weight." Basically, ships carried bigger mass drivers (since they have a lot more mass, and are expecting to get more shots off per launcher).


That's essentially what I'm trying to point out: Pods are lighter and have lighter mass drivers, yet the new "better mass drivers" can match the missile acceleration of ship-board launchers. (often with heavier missiles than the ship controlling them.)


And I'm trying to point out that the mass of the launcher does not matter from a newtonian point of view - a lighter launcher just means that the launcher recoils with a higher velocity - the projectile launched still has the same initial velocity for the same KE put in the system.
******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top
Re: Heavy Tri-barrels
Post by Tenshinai   » Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:13 am

Tenshinai
Admiral

Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:34 pm
Location: Sweden

Weird Harold wrote:
That's essentially what I'm trying to point out: Pods are lighter and have lighter mass drivers, yet the new "better mass drivers" can match the missile acceleration of ship-board launchers. (often with heavier missiles than the ship controlling them.)


Once. Before needing maintenance/refurbishing.
Internal launchers clearly isn´t so limited.
Top

Return to Honorverse