Why does Gauss Rifle = no recoil?
- Thread starter drsarh
- Start date
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Well...
MT lists gauss weapons as "Low Recoil" (may be fired in zero-G without penalty) in the same category as laser's, snub pistols, and accelerator rifles.
TNE lists gauss weapons with very low recoil numbers, about the same as an accelerator rifle and snub pistol but not the 0-none of laser weapons.
T4 didn't really get into recoil and zero-G combat except a brief mention as an unusul environment that may increase the task difficulty.
So it would 'seem' its only T20 that went with zero recoil for gauss weapons though the broad yes/no is very close to MT's Low/Med/High so they may have gotten it there.
As it is I think I can live with the no meaning negligible, due in part to the high rof and (presumed) gravitic recoil compensation.
Anybody know what T5 has cooking in this area?
Addendum - I do note that the text descriptions for the snub pistol and accelerator rifle go out of the way to mention they are designed for zero-G while there is no such note for the gauss rifle. Perhaps it is just a table error and the gauss rifle was supposed to have a yes for recoil from the start.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Well I think mistake may be harsh, it never gave us any problems in the day. Of course tastes change, we mature and some of us expect more. I'm kinda a closet MT fan, once you get the eratta figured out.
I expect Hunter will mention "Its your game..." but I suspect you're like myself and no doubt most of us Traveller's. We just want an internally consistent, hard-edged, mildly operatic, science fiction rpg.
And I'm not saying you didn't deliver a great product Hunter et. al. just that you can't please everyone, but maybe in this case the small change in the table would be the way to go?
I expect Hunter will mention "Its your game..." but I suspect you're like myself and no doubt most of us Traveller's. We just want an internally consistent, hard-edged, mildly operatic, science fiction rpg.
And I'm not saying you didn't deliver a great product Hunter et. al. just that you can't please everyone, but maybe in this case the small change in the table would be the way to go?
How did I miss this?
But tell us about the rifle. A coil gun I suppose, but how big and what power source? The capacitors must have ben enourmous.
I am not going to hold you to that 1.5%, Keklas, since two rounds of the same brand of ammunition rarely manage that, and I wouldn't call the recoil of a 22 LR a jolt, nore of a kiss. I presume you are talking about a 3 g projectile at about 350 m/s, for about 175 J/rd.
But tell us about the rifle. A coil gun I suppose, but how big and what power source? The capacitors must have ben enourmous.
Just a thought, but couldn't the gauss rifle (at TL12) be designed to use electromagnetism to reduce the weight of the round of ammunition to negligible, before propelling it at high speed down the barrel? This would surely give very little recoil.
Isn't this similar to a maglev train?
Isn't this similar to a maglev train?
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Nope sorry, wouldn't help. All you'd be doing is eliminating some friction during firing but as I understand it that's already a part of the design. It's not the 'weight' (as in a downward force due to gravity between two masses) but the acceleration of the mass (bullet) at the target that generates the recoil (an equal and opposite force). The maglev train is similar to the bullet in a gauss gun, except it never leaves the barrel (track). The maglev part is designed just to reduce the rolling friction to some negligable fraction, in fact it is still in contact with the track guides for control.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Hmm, I recall playing with FF&S in an attempt to design a recoiless assault rifle, might have been gauss rifle based, I'll have to check my notes. True recoiless rifles are fun toys when you want a big kick in the targets pants with none in your own. Basically you offset the recoil of the 'bullet' with another mass (or several more usually) going the opposite way out the back of the rifle. Some are even designed as closed (or semi-closed?) systems using a hydraulic ram piston iirc. I know I had a link, maybe someone else knows the one I'm thinking of, the name escapes me now.
Another aspect of recoil is peak versus average acceleration. An electromagnetic gun can be designed to produce constant acceleration, ramping up very quickly at the beginning and dropping to 0 as the projectile leaves the barrel. Gunpowder, on the otherhand, will burn, producing high pressures which then dissipate as the projectile travels down the barrel. Typically, pressure (and force) will ramp up and then down in a curve. This will give a higher peak acceleration (and force) which will lead to a higher felt recoil force.
As someone else pointed out, electromagnetic guns will have a smooth push rather than an inconsistent jerk.
I worked at a lab that designed and built railguns and they observed that the recoil was much less than for a similar chemical gun.
In game terms, I would classify most gauss weapons as being "no recoil" from a game standpoint, excluding particularly powerful weapons or particularly high rates of fire.
Bolie IV
As someone else pointed out, electromagnetic guns will have a smooth push rather than an inconsistent jerk.
I worked at a lab that designed and built railguns and they observed that the recoil was much less than for a similar chemical gun.
In game terms, I would classify most gauss weapons as being "no recoil" from a game standpoint, excluding particularly powerful weapons or particularly high rates of fire.
Bolie IV
Constant accelleration in a gauss rifle will require that power peak as the bullet leave the barrel. I hadn't realized current technology was there yet.
A constant power level will give you a high initial g-force, as incremented energy causes a rapid change in velocity, tapering off as at high velocities it takes more energy to get a delta-vee. In fact, accelleration (and recoil) declines on a curve very similar to a chemical-energy weapon.
A gauss rifle will recoil 10-40% less than a conventional rifles of the same performance because it is not expelling propellant gas. OTOH, it cannot use a "muzzle brake" to reduce recoil by redirecting gas. Percieved recoil can be managed by design, but a 10 rd burst of 4 g bullets at 1500 m/s will, eventually impart the momentum of a 5 rd burst from a G-3 (7.62x51 NATO, a 9 g bullet with 3 g propellant at 850 m/s). I assure you, that kicks like a mule.
You can trick Sir Isaac, but he allways wins in the end.
A constant power level will give you a high initial g-force, as incremented energy causes a rapid change in velocity, tapering off as at high velocities it takes more energy to get a delta-vee. In fact, accelleration (and recoil) declines on a curve very similar to a chemical-energy weapon.
A gauss rifle will recoil 10-40% less than a conventional rifles of the same performance because it is not expelling propellant gas. OTOH, it cannot use a "muzzle brake" to reduce recoil by redirecting gas. Percieved recoil can be managed by design, but a 10 rd burst of 4 g bullets at 1500 m/s will, eventually impart the momentum of a 5 rd burst from a G-3 (7.62x51 NATO, a 9 g bullet with 3 g propellant at 850 m/s). I assure you, that kicks like a mule.
You can trick Sir Isaac, but he allways wins in the end.
Sounds like the Armbrust...
Look here for a real-world recoilless LAG
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/gustav.htm
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
That's it Uncle Bob, thanks!
trader jim
SOC-14 1K
Whats realy scary about the gauss rifle....we already have them!!!, and the pistol!!!...AND you all know the U.S. govt is improving them every day!!! 
The real railguns I've seen are powered by a compulsator, a spinning kinetic energy storage device that releases pulses of energy. These pulses can be shaped to give you whatever current profile you want (constant power, constant acceleration, etc...). As it discharges, the compulsator slows down and the reaction torque can be coupled with the barrel recoil (by locating the compulsator and rigidly fixing it to the barrel) so that the torques cancel and all you get is linear recoil.
A Traveller gauss handgun probably doesn't use a compulsator, rather some super-advanced battery/capacitor, but it could have a flywheel linked into the circuit that spins up to reduce the offset of the recoil so that it acts only on the center of mass of the gun. This would eliminate the barrel flipping up (which is what gas venting does in a standard gun).
Bolie IV
A Traveller gauss handgun probably doesn't use a compulsator, rather some super-advanced battery/capacitor, but it could have a flywheel linked into the circuit that spins up to reduce the offset of the recoil so that it acts only on the center of mass of the gun. This would eliminate the barrel flipping up (which is what gas venting does in a standard gun).
Bolie IV
A compulsator is a variation on the homopolar generator. The lab I worked at had both, homopolar generators to power various devices, including a large test railgun, and compulsators for development and testing of later designs. That was all about eight years ago, though, so who knows what they've developed since then.
Bolie IV
Bolie IV
Recoil energy is the term that is usually used to describe recoil, although sometimes free recoil is used. The following factors effect recoil:
Projectile mass
Projectile velocity
Propellant mass (if any)
Weapon mass.
That's it.
A CT Gauss rifle generates 5 Joules of recoil energy, about the same as an M16.
Felt recoil is a completely different matter and is highly subjective.
Projectile mass
Projectile velocity
Propellant mass (if any)
Weapon mass.
That's it.
A CT Gauss rifle generates 5 Joules of recoil energy, about the same as an M16.
Felt recoil is a completely different matter and is highly subjective.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
If the gauss needle is accelerated over the whole of its time in the barrel rather than by an explosive initial impulse, would that reduce felt recoil?
rhoneycutt
SOC-11
Who cares about the difference of actual recoil and felt recoil in the game? In Zero-G, does it really matter whether you're shoved or kicked backwards by shooting the gun? Whats the difference?
Similar threads
