Register Register

Author Topic: Infantry weapons theory  (Read 485 times)

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3664
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Infantry weapons theory
« on: 28 May 2020, 21:43:25 »
Thought of this today, three guesss where I was?

I doubt this is all that unique a theory, but I thought I'd float it.

It's often been noted how freaking HEAVY many infantry weapons are in BattleTech, I don't know what made me think of it; but what if the original writers got mixed up with kilograms and pounds? At that, the Mauser 960a starts looking positively reasonable.

What do you folks think?
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21928
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #1 on: 28 May 2020, 21:52:37 »
I believe many of the original BT team had experience in the USN, on aircraft carriers. This I believe explains much about the 'Mechwarrior mythos, and how infantry and armour are represented ;)

However, as they were all USAians, in 1984 I'd doubt kilos meant much more to them than an easily divided number for equipment. So you may have something there.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

Goose

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 930
  • … the Laws on his tail, burning for home …
    • Home of HeavyMetal Pro
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #2 on: 28 May 2020, 23:18:11 »
Wasn't there a gag 'bout how much heavier things where in Shadowrun? :-X
Goose
The Egyptian God of FrustrationSurprisingly Enlightening©Not Write: Post Good!
"I am always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught."
- Winston ChurchillThus Yorinaga Kurita threw his daishō out of the cockpit of his Warhammer in disgust

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3664
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #3 on: 29 May 2020, 18:52:10 »
Wasn't there a gag 'bout how much heavier things where in Shadowrun? :-X

ha! That would be cute actually!
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

Caedis Animus

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1997
  • The origin story of an American-Austrian Birdman.
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #4 on: 30 May 2020, 15:18:50 »
It's often been noted how freaking HEAVY many infantry weapons are in BattleTech, I don't know what made me think of it; but what if the original writers got mixed up with kilograms and pounds? At that, the Mauser 960a starts looking positively reasonable.
What's funny to me is that while a lot of other guns look more reasonably weighted, mostly stuff like the Federated Barrett rifles, the Mauser 960 actually seems sillier.

Granted, the Mauser 960 is one of the greatest things for flat 'whats' in Battletech, so I guess it still makes sense.
Unapologetic degenerate with an unhealthy love for melee, gardening tools, and battlemechs.

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16529
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #5 on: 30 May 2020, 15:36:08 »
Now you can add a 14 kg Sniper Rifle to the list (from Shrapnel #1)...


Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16529
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #7 on: 30 May 2020, 15:42:44 »
If you look at the cybernetic boosts, myomer enhancement lets you reduce CREW REQUIREMENTS for Support Weapons (1E and 2 become 1, for example), AND allows 3 Support Weapons per squad.  That means those MD jokers can fire a 150kg Support Pulse Laser from the hip!  :o

Wolf72

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1248
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #8 on: 30 May 2020, 16:56:25 »


but I thought I'd float it.


I think your 'float' is affecting your cognitive reasoning! ... HAH, J/K ... I was guessing where you were and then 'floated' this idea.

kg v lb ?  I'm with "kg's sound more futuristic and stuff", and possibly if they were veterans in the 80's they were fairly used to heaving firearms.  The military moves kinda slow on brand new tech that spreads to everyone and wouldn't care if an old rifle is heavy, as long it works.
War does not determine who is right, only who is left. -- said no Clanner ... ever!

KS #1357

Failure16

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • Somebody had to say it...
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #9 on: 31 May 2020, 13:52:14 »
Now you can add a 14 kg Sniper Rifle to the list (from Shrapnel #1)...

I once had the honor of carting around an 11ish kilo sniper rifle throughout NTC (otherwise known as an M-60 machine gun; fun story). It sucked. But it was better than the traversing unit for the dismounted TOW system, which sucked infinitely worse. The point being: infantrymen have been carrying around heavy, awkward weights for a long, long time.

Just look at what the Roman legionaries carried around routinely.
Thought I might get a rocket ride when I was a child.          We are the wild youth, 
But it was a lie, that I told myself                                              Chasing visions of our futures.
When I needed something good.                                                One day we'll reveal the truth,
At 17, I had a better dream; now I'm 33, and it isn't me.        That one will die before he gets there.

But I'd think of something better if I could
                           --E. Tonra
--A. Duritz

Wolf72

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1248
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #10 on: 31 May 2020, 14:00:44 »
I once had the honor of carting around an 11ish kilo sniper rifle throughout NTC (otherwise known as an M-60 machine gun; fun story). It sucked. But it was better than the traversing unit for the dismounted TOW system, which sucked infinitely worse. The point being: infantrymen have been carrying around heavy, awkward weights for a long, long time.

Just look at what the Roman legionaries carried around routinely.

you poor soul.  My buddy got stuck with the '60 during PLDC field exercise, the Ranger's thought it was great -- give the smallest guy the heaviest weapon.  I 'only' got the tripod, that was enough of an extra 'suck' for me.  I least I didn't loose a boot in the swamp! -- silver linings my friends!
War does not determine who is right, only who is left. -- said no Clanner ... ever!

KS #1357

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16529
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #11 on: 31 May 2020, 14:08:20 »
My wife got that same sniper rifle at the 8th Army NCO Academy back in the '80s!  :D

Failure16

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • Somebody had to say it...
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #12 on: 31 May 2020, 14:17:34 »
For sure. The tripods weigh nearly as much as the weapons themselves (9ish kilos for a -60 and -240B), plus spare barrel, optics...

A fully kitted out M4 weighs considerably more than the rated 3.5 kilos (loaded), though not 14 kilos. The real issue here is not the weight in the short term. It would be a world of suck to carry around some of the weapons in the BattleTech universe on a regular basis. But it could be (and is today) done, though only by a few in each infantry unit. The trouble is that in the long term, all of the infantrymen are going to be broken down physical wrecks.

Luckily, in the BTU, that isn't a problem. Most infantrymen don't live past their first firefight or two.  :(

My wife got that same sniper rifle at the 8th Army NCO Academy back in the '80s!  :D

Well, tell her thanks. I appreciated it. By the time it got around to me, it had a distressing tendency to lose its buttstock, and the spring, the bolt...

Did I mention that NTC is a dusty place?  Well, it is.

But back on topic, I think that the writers/developers should think more about the weights of the things they make. of course, in a world with fourteen-tonne autocannons and 500-kilo M2HB equivalents...
Thought I might get a rocket ride when I was a child.          We are the wild youth, 
But it was a lie, that I told myself                                              Chasing visions of our futures.
When I needed something good.                                                One day we'll reveal the truth,
At 17, I had a better dream; now I'm 33, and it isn't me.        That one will die before he gets there.

But I'd think of something better if I could
                           --E. Tonra
--A. Duritz

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16529
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #13 on: 31 May 2020, 14:23:10 »
500 kilos covers more than the M2HB, though... it covers the optics, the servos, and the feed mechanism for an entire Remote Weapon Station.  I've tried to make that leap around here somewhere…  ::)

Major Headcase

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 678
  • We're paid to win. Heroism costs extra...
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #14 on: 31 May 2020, 23:34:28 »
I always figured weapons in Battletech would be lighter than we expect if anything? 1000 years of materials advancements, common uses of what are expensive cutting edge materials and techniques today.
Years ago a group of friends in college calculated that if a 10 meter tall, 50 ton mech (using scaled human body for surface area) ,covered in 8 tons of armor that weighed the same as modern tank armor, due to the surface area covered, the armor would be 3/4 inch thick.... So future mech materials must be significantly lighter for the strength than modern equivalents. I would imagine the same would be true in personal equipment??

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 639
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #15 on: 01 June 2020, 03:09:16 »
There could just be a far more simple answer:

The standards of weights has changed between now and then.

What we call a kg could be the equivalent of 1.72 current lbs for all we know.  It's not outside the realm of possibilities, though a little less likely, because with new, over-reaching regimes, something they like to do is make "adjustments" to make things seem more incredible.

Of course, there's the Frank Herbert theory where 700+ years of humanity killing each other just lead to stronger/faster people.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16529
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #16 on: 01 June 2020, 03:37:32 »
I think all the weight savings went into making weapons more deadly.

Sharpnel

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11154
  • The Kanami Tsunami
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #17 on: 01 June 2020, 04:30:32 »
Now you can add a 14 kg Sniper Rifle to the list (from Shrapnel #1)...
This in keeping with some the heavier caliber weapons that use 12.7mm or 14.5 mm rounds
Consigliere Trygg Bender, KGC-01BL King Crab, The Blazer Mafia
Takehiro 'Taco' Uchimiya, VND-1R Vindicator 'Taco', Crimson Oasis Trading Company
Tai-i Shizuko Lofgren, Third Infantry Company, Oniwaka
Sergeant Franz Staudegger, T-12A1 Tiger, 42nd Avalon Hussars
"Of what use is a dream, if not a blueprint for courageous action" -Adam West
It's an Omni, so I can build it into whatever I please - JHB
"Life is too short to be living someone else's dream" - Hugh Hefner

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16529
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Infantry weapons theory
« Reply #18 on: 01 June 2020, 17:25:54 »
With up to 6 AP and 7 BD, I'd characterize that as 20mm or maybe even 25mm.  I figure .50 caliber (12.7mm) is 5AP/5BD.