[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/1-7.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/6-2.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/8-2.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/7-2.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/2-4.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/3-2.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh229/CoilingTesla/4-2.jpg[/img_thumb]
Still adding details, along with modeling the "Hopeless Diamond"
Uhmmm..... its.... unique
That was fast...
Look badass
Since you look like you know, .50 = how much in mm?
The round is 25x240mm, or 98.4 caliber. That is why the parts of the gun you hold, are independent, so that you aren't injured by the immense recoil.
That's big, but I want to know the dimensions of the .50.
12.7x99mm
Shit, thanks, I needed that info. Btw, how much recoil that rifle gets?
[editline]07:33PM[/editline]
And why the crank?
[QUOTE=Joxalot;17343956]Shit, thanks, I needed that info. Btw, how much recoil that rifle gets?
[editline]07:33PM[/editline]
And why the crank?[/QUOTE]
Don't know. The "crank" is the bolt handle, like on the M2 Browning. [url]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/M2_-_24th_MEU.jpg[/url]
The way you did it the Bipod should also be independent. Else you have to reset it every single time.
Though the whole gun looks pretty shitty, I really don't see how this could be made to look like a sexy gun no matter how many fine details you add. It is going to look like a peice of shit from on of those gun generators.
Make the the rest of the weapon idependent from the barrel + firing chamber
And put some shield thingy covering the barrel, to make it look bulky
[QUOTE=CoilingTesla;17343712]The round is 25x240mm, or 98.4 caliber. That is why the parts of the gun you hold, are independent, so that you aren't injured by the immense recoil.[/QUOTE]
I surely hope you mean .984
[QUOTE=Perfumly;17347085]I surely hope you mean .984[/QUOTE]
Yes, but when it comes to the caliber of a cannon round, .98" = "98 caliber".
[url=http://i26.tinypic.com/s5zhoo.gif]360 View[/url]
Why use such an elaborite method to control recoil when you could just make it operate like a recoilless rifle and turn the recoil into backblast? Like on the RT-20?
[url]http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn56-e.htm[/url]
Also, why is the actual bullet so small? Or does it fire that whole big thing, and the smaller tip acts like an APDS round?
Also, why clips as opposed to mags?
Edit:
Also, a weapon of such immense caliber would require a fairly sizable muzzle break, as a rule. (Also adds to the badass factor of a model)
Probably APDS
Who would design a huge bitch to shoot a small bullet?
[QUOTE=Joxalot;17347529]Probably APDS
Who would design a huge bitch to shoot a small bullet?[/QUOTE]
I suppose, but on the other hand, whats more fun? Blowing someones torso off, or making a nice neat hole? :v:
(Nobody uses AM rifles for AM stuff these days anyway lol)
[QUOTE=Timebomb757;17347564]I suppose, but on the other hand, whats more fun? Blowing someones torso off, or making a nice neat hole? :v:
(Nobody uses AM rifles for AM stuff these days anyway lol)[/QUOTE]
blowing someone's nice neat hole off.
[QUOTE=Perfumly;17347588]blowing someone's nice neat hole off.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. For this purpose, I propose we mount a 66mm rocket launcher to the underside of the weapon, to be fired right after the rifle.
[QUOTE=Timebomb757;17347496]Why use such an elaborite method to control recoil when you could just make it operate like a recoilless rifle and turn the recoil into backblast? Like on the RT-20?
[url]http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn56-e.htm[/url]
Also, why is the actual bullet so small? Or does it fire that whole big thing, and the smaller tip acts like an APDS round?
Also, why clips as opposed to mags?[/QUOTE]
Because for one, a muzzle brake forces the shockwave back towards the user, which risks hearing and also makes firing the weapon much louder.
Making it use the backblast will endanger anyone behind the user, basically for the same reason as not using a muzzle brake.
This gets rid of recoil without risking hearing loss, a dropped lung, or death.
The bullet does not need to be that long, since it is such a large round, it is heavy enough to kick anythings ass into itself, this lets the user carry more ammunition anyways.
The bullet is an armor piercing Hydrashock round, which on impact, will pierce nearly a foot of steel armor.
A magazine can be used, but for the sake of showing the round, I modeled a clip.
[QUOTE=CoilingTesla;17347644]Because for one, a muzzle brake forces the shockwave back towards the user, which risks hearing.
Making it use the backblast will endanger anyone behind the user.
This gets rid of recoil without risking hearing loss or a dropped lung.
[/QUOTE]
Nope, a muzzle brake forces the shockwave AWAY from the user, it actually reduces the felt energy for the shooter.
While this may free up space behind the shooter, it is overly complex, and assuming it works on springs, would wear out very quickly. If it is powered by hydraulic pressure, it would require constant maintinence.
In a clean room it would work like a charm, out in the field, the weapon would seem to have alot of weak points that could be prone to breakage or wear and tear.
[QUOTE=Timebomb757;17347792]Nope, a muzzle brake forces the shockwave AWAY from the user, it actually reduces the felt energy for the shooter.
[/QUOTE]
"The advantages of brakes and compensators are not without cost, however. The most obvious of these to the shooter or gun crew is the increase in sound pressure level as well as the increase in muzzle blast for the shooter or gun crew. This occurs because the sound, flash, and pressure waves normally projected largely away from the shooter are now partially-redirected outwards to the side or even at backward angles towards the shooter or gun crew. While eye and ear protection should always be used when shooting, even this is not enough to avoid hearing damage with the muzzle blast directed back towards the shooter or gun crew."
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_brake#Disadvantages_of_muzzle_brakes[/url]
[QUOTE=CoilingTesla;17347644]
The bullet is an armor piercing Hydrashock round, which on impact, will pierce nearly a foot of steel armor.
.[/QUOTE]
I also just cant see this penetrating that much armor on kinetic energy alone, especially if the armor was sloped. Unless the penetrator was some rediculously hard metal, and it was at very very close range.
Then again, what kind of armor are you looking to penetrate? By the looks of it, tank armor. In which case this would definatly not work, considering most tanks arent straight up steel armored.
I prefer that my bullets make normal person make pop and dissapear in a nice red mist
That's why I'm sending hatemails to ammo developers, asking them to make exploding 9mm rounds :eng101:
[QUOTE=CoilingTesla;17347812]"The advantages of brakes and compensators are not without cost, however. The most obvious of these to the shooter or gun crew is the increase in sound pressure level as well as the increase in muzzle blast for the shooter or gun crew. This occurs because the sound, flash, and pressure waves normally projected largely away from the shooter are now partially-redirected outwards to the side or even at backward angles towards the shooter or gun crew. While eye and ear protection should always be used when shooting, even this is not enough to avoid hearing damage with the muzzle blast directed back towards the shooter or gun crew."
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_brake#Disadvantages_of_muzzle_brakes[/url][/QUOTE]
"Though there are numerous ways of measuring the energy of a recoil impulse, it's generally true that between 10% and 50% reductions can be measured."
I said it reduced the felt energy, not blast.
[QUOTE=Timebomb757;17347840]I also just cant see this penetrating that much armor on kinetic energy alone, especially if the armor was sloped. Unless the penetrator was some rediculously hard metal, and it was at very very close range.
Then again, what kind of armor are you looking to penetrate? By the looks of it, tank armor. In which case this would definatly not work, considering most tanks arent straight up steel armored.[/QUOTE]
True, but tanks aren't the only moving metal targets on the field. If the enemies have armored vehicles that can't be penetrated, then find some enemies that are in/behind something that it can penetrate. You have an extremely powerful weapon. Have some fun while the government lets you hold one.
[QUOTE=CoilingTesla;17347908]True, but tanks aren't the only moving metal targets on the field. If the enemies have armored vehicles that can't be penetrated, then find some enemies that are in/behind something that it can penetrate. You have an extremely powerful weapon. Have some fun while the government lets you hold one.[/QUOTE]
But a .50-20mm round can penetrate most APC and light vehicle armor, not to mention pretty much any cover present on the modern battlefield, why scale up the recoil and round size for something a smaller round can do?
You know. If I was in Iraq and using that rifle, I would play baseball with that in the spare time
Btw cover the open space in the recoil system. If you shoot with your finger there... Ouch
[editline]11:53PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Timebomb757;17347930]But a .50-20mm round can penetrate most APC and light vehicle armor, not to mention pretty much any cover present on the modern battlefield, why scale up the recoil and round size for something a smaller round can do?[/QUOTE]
Because people alway take the hard way, letting simpleicity behind
[QUOTE=Joxalot;17347948]You know. If I was in Iraq and using that rifle, I would play baseball with that in the spare time
Btw cover the open space in the recoil system. If you shoot with your finger there... Ouch[/QUOTE]
Another valid point. Its advisable to try and limit the external moving parts on a weapon.
Just FYI, Im not trying to shoot down (Lolpuns) or hate on your design here, just pointing out some possible potential flaws so you can improve upon your current design. Not that it would probably ever go into production anyway since this is more the likely just you messing around with a model maker.
But its fun to play pretend sometimes lol :v:
Edit: Sleeping now BTW, will respond tommarow.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.