How accurate are equipment failures on 2 to the universe?

[CloaknDagger]

A lot of equipment in Battletech fails catastrophically on a snake eyes roll, representing their less than perfect reliability. It's not unique to Battletech either, other TT RPG also have infamous critical failure rolls.

My question is, how accurate is that to the actual Battletech universe? Non-TT adaptations barely acknowledge those types of failures, with Mechwarrior Online for example just having a jam chance for Ultra Autocannons that quickly unjams them automatically after a small delay, while MASC has a gauge that you're safe as long as you stay below.

If I'm a Mechwarrior in universe that has a mech with U/ACs and MASC and a Supercharger, what would my actual experience be? Are the added capabilities safe to use as long as I don't strain the machine to hard, or are the rules as written failure on 2 in effect, and I have to sell the U/ACs and MASC and Supercharger on the open market because they're far too unreliable for combat use?

Secondly, if it is more granular than random failures and a pilot just has to be careful with their machines, are the gouges canon? Do Mechwarrior have that little danger bar when MASC is in use that warns them about the danger level before their legs explode?

Lastly, how does this apply to even more finicky equipment? Hyperlasers are overcharged to hell and back and famously exploded catastrophically when used in combat, but RISC nevertheless thought they were promising enough to put on quite a large number of different mechs, which seems to imply that they aren't completely hopeless and are reliable enough to be used even if they have a short service life.

Hyper Velocity Autocannons occasionally explode when fired, except when babied by infantry crews as field guns. Does this mean HVACs on vehicles and mechs are actually fine as long as a pilot gives them time to cool off?

Similarly, Caseless Autocannons jam or explode (depending on edition of rules, in universe I expect both models exist), but that's specifically intended to link to how caseless weapons IRL have overheating problems. Does that mean that conservative use of Castles Autocannons is 'safe' and that they're valid options in universe rather than just a liability?

Feel free to comment on other equipment too if you're interested, it's a pretty expansive topic and these are just a few examples of what I'm asking.

[Xotl]

This isn't an answerable question in any meaningful sense.  You're asking about many different items and rules, but there's no charting of what a "2" means in the game to all pieces of equipment that suffer a failure from such in a specific sense on an item by item basis, or even in a broader general sense.

It's unlikely that there are any items in active miltary use that explode 1 in 36 times they are used, so it's likely safe to bet that the universe and the game do not match up there, as indeed they do not in a host of other areas.  It cannot be emphasised enough that Battletech the board game is not a simulation, even of a fictional universe.  It is a game first and foremost and that aspect will, god willing, always take priority over the larger fictional ramifications of what any given game rule might "mean" in a wider fictional sense.

No one is going to ever map out items to "real" use in the manner that you suggest, at least in a broad, one-size-fits-all way.  Sorry.

[CloaknDagger]

It's unlikely that there are any items in active miltary use that explode 1 in 36 times they are used, so it's likely safe to bet that the universe and the game do not match up there, as indeed they do not in a host of other areas.

That's the short of what I'm asking. It's more of a meta question than a game specific one.

[Xotl]

All the same, I can say that, and I have no doubt that it's true, but you're not going to get "an official pronouncement" about the topic.