The furthest I've shot is 500 meters and that was a bitch to keep steady, even prone! But I'm not such a great shot and was keeping it steady with my arm
An F88 AusSteyr (Aug) with standard scope. Effective range is 300 meters with a max range of 500m, so it was really pushing it. Using standard issue out of the box 5.56 mm NATO round. I forget what the drop at 500 was. It was a fair bit. If I recall (it was 12 years ago) at 300 meters the drop was 10cm, while at 100 meters the scope was dead on.
Nice. Only shot the SLR in the res, before the Steya became available. Went to Texas to do Thanksgiving with some MUD friends in Texas years ago though. Guy I stayed with had a locker full of firearms. AK47 was a really nice weapon and hella accurate at 30m or however far away that defenseless softdrink bottle was. Good times good times.
What is the Steyr like? There was lots of good vibes about it. M16 were plastic pieces of junk. Our sarge was funny, discussing the rat tail for the SLR to render it inoperable and someone pipes up and says, what about the M16? He holds it horizontally, raises a knee and says, "Just break it over your knee". hehehe. Funny bugger.
I liked it. Felt great to carry, comfortable to hold. Easy to strip and clean. The safety is in a perfect spot. Because it's bullpup and the hammer unit is inside the stock, you can't really break it. The plastic shell is pretty tough. Magazines are transparent, so easy to see what's left. But when you pull the trigger you can't find the bite point, if that makes sense, so you never quite know when it will fire. I didn't like that. Unlike the m249, where you know exactly when it will fire.
1/Google Recoilless rifles, and you'll get anti-tank weapons of anywhere up to 105mm. These weapons are recoilless by virtue of both ends of the barrel being open, so that the "equal and opposite reaction" is expelled out through the rear of the gun. This, obviously, reduces the effective propellant charge, and would militate against achieving any kind of range. 2/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M60_machine_gun "The weapon (M60) is heavy and difficult to aim when firing without support, though the weight helps reduce the felt recoil"
We are talking about a fictional novel construction, yes? I don't remember the recoil of the M60, but it was a lot less feel than the SLR. And you don't aim them, you just start firing and walk the round hits up to the target. Looks like a damn cool recoilless sniper rifle to me: NB: Maximum firing range 3.97 km (2.47 mi) Sorry @Cave Troll it came up 30m short of your 4km. Design something like this and you don't even need to be accurate ;-)
Funny how nobody mentions having to lead a target in general (at least a moving one). Besides it seems that most are trying to compare reality with an imaginative and slightly unrealistic future tech. This whole thing got a little out of hand. Was just wondering what other Sci-fi fans would think about it. Not over analyze it to death. Unless your a physicist that can explain how such a weapon could not be possible. We can all agree at the end of the day it is B.S. for a little fun. Besides it is for a secondary character that had gone through the necessary training to achieve such a skill in the first place (not to mention put that training to extensive use in the field.) So when does your sense of imagination surface, versus well that's horse shit? Sci-fi and Fantasy kind of have an allowance on how crazy things can get within their made up universes. Starting to think it would be simpler to discuss the absurd and highly fantastic Unicorn fart propelled vampire fangs type device. At least then would get some interesting theories as to how the key components are harvested. Perhaps I shall write about that type of thing used by a sassy gay assassin in medieval times, getting rid of those parasitic blood sucking leaches.
Coz you won't hit a target at 4km by leading it. I think if you ask a question Just wondering what your thoughts are about a precision rifle that is so surgically precise in build and effective ness. Thanks. and people answer it, then it's been a good thread. I am not sure why you're throwing your spent shell casings out of the pram, but that's also your prerogative. I find asking specific questions if I am looking for specific types of answers helps, sometimes. I don't personally look at the sub-forum name, so would not necessarily keep in mind the question is being asked in a sci-fi context, despite its location within the forum structure. In this instance, qualifying your question with "(This is for a sci-fi novel), do you think this sounds too far fetched?" may have netted you the sort of answer(s) you were looking for. I offer this in the spirit of assistance. I've noted your couple of indirect digs at me to date, so please do let me know if you'd rather I not interact at all, that can easily be arranged
It is still a work in progress. I am kind of stubborn (if you haven't noticed). I have plenty of insight on how to tweak things so it is not so ridiculous in specs. I apologize for the indirect digs. It is my fault for getting defensive in the first place. Hope I am not the first to try and defend their fictional constructs. Then again some times you need somebody to come and rain on your parade to put things in perspective. Thank you. Again apologies for the jabs. Sorry for acting like an inept clown at times, unwilling to see the facts for what they are and what I want them to be.
Anyway, it can't be 'surgically precise' because there are too many elements beyond the weapon that influence the projectile. And sci-fi is not an excuse for bullshit. You usually have intelligent readers. Yes, you can come up with incredible (literally) things, but unless it's tongue in cheek or a comedy you can't just 'make it up.' The reader needs to invest in the plausibility, not the possibility, of the gadgets. Even if it is actually impossible it can still be used if it makes sense to the reader. But ignoring all the factors that lead to quality marksmanship beyond the weapon simply to have a 'surgically precise always bang on never fail from 4k away weapon' you need to make it plausible. And for that, you need to answer the questions naturally raised. An explosive based projectile weapon has limitations that no amount of engineering will ever solve. Having it be surgically precise then just sounds 'made up' and the author loses credibility. To me the only way to make a weapon like that plausible is to remove the variables, and you do that by removing what causes the variables, which is weapon stability and the projectile (both the explosive force needed to drive it and the way it behaves after leaving the barrel). Even rail guns have their limitations, but are far closer to what you need. Recoil-less and throwing the projectile with far more momentum, but still, it's a projectile even though it would go faster so the environment has less of an impact. Also, considering the current rate of weapon design, an explosive based projectile weapon would seem archaic in sci-fi for sniping, especially if they have the engineering skills you mention. I mean, right now and for the last fifty years they are researching new and better alternatives to this old design, which armies the world over understand has almost reached it's limit for sniping. Rail guns as mentioned above, for example. Sound weapons. Laser weapons. A laser weapon would be recoil-less and not influenced very much by atmospheric conditions (there would still be some, and that can add drama), so with a steady base I'd buy into that kind of weapon being so accurate it would able to kill surgically with an effective range over 4km (which would also eliminate target movement while the projectile is in flight considering light is relatively instantaneous). These weapons are being trialled currently. Just not battlefield able yet because of power requirements and stability issues. They can, today, make infra red lasers that cut through metal. Imagine being killed by a silent, invisible beam burning a whole instantly through your chest. Now that's cool sci-fi!
That is most interesting. Can one not see the obvious way that by design to make outlandish claims on a 'legendary' weapon that is also 'coveted', be part of the overall exaggeration to how great it really is. Damn, really takes a genius to overhaul a fictional legend as literal over all. Besides from what I understand projectile based weapons have been used in numerous sci-fi stories/movies. Lasers are a cliché copout for those who lack any imaginative ability. Though from the way you have presented the whole spiel, it seems you are what I understand are a Hard Sci-fi fan. Must be extremely hard to find anything worth your while to read. I already dealt with this spanking and have since rethought a few things (perhaps you missed the part where I conceded that I was being a stubborn idiot to the facts). I feel sorry in the fact that you let some minor details ruin a story for you. Best run from mine as it is full of things you would simply call bullshit on, just because you don't know how to enjoy an adventure/action story. Creativity should count for something in the land of cliché beam weapons. Then again what do I know (despite my spanking and re-evaluation), seems you miss out on the more important part called the story. Further more lasers (having already slammed their cliché status) are not quite as fun to write about, seeing as every Tom, Dick, and Harry has incorporated them into their own futuristic saga. On top of that it takes no imagination to conclude being sliced up with a super heated beam (seeing as it would be much more humane than using ballistics). For fun I am glad that at least a pair of my MCs are not real, because they would laugh at you if you brought a laser to a fight. As they would simply destroy it with an EMP Grenade .
@Selbbin ain't got no time for no reading. The gun itself is not the story, is it? The acquisition and gifting is the story. It could be anything of value to the receiver, the object is not as important as the act, right?
Yup. Even if you were that amazingly good you could take into account speed and direction along with distance covered to work out how much to lead the target, a slight variation in speed or direction by the target while the projectile was in flight for, I'm guessing based on the sci-fi nature of the weapon, the hyper-velocity needed to cover such a distance and the reduction in energy in flight, 3 seconds (2.5 seconds currently for a 2.3Km shot using .338), would render your shot wasted.
Why ask If you're just going to bitch about people not having imagination when they answer? If you don't like honest answers don't ask questions. It's a shit idea. Go with it if you want. Oh, and no need to feel sorry for me. I'm happy not just making shit up because it's easy and passing it off as being 'creative'. I'm happy using my imagination to solve difficult problems to make stories feel authentic in order to draw in the reader, because true creativity requires thinking, especially sci-fi. My readers deserve it.
I just read the bit mocking me. Lol. 'Hey people interested in weapons, what do you think of this idea for a weapon?' 'It doesn't work for these reasons....' 'It doesn't matter! Get an imagination!'
I already told you I got my spanking. Further more I am taking it in stride to reconsider the specs. Yes though it seems a bit beyond you, I did mock you on lasers. And yes I alluded to my reasoning as they are cliché and a copout, as well as being too humane with in the fiction I am writing. So what is your point? I think I covered everything fairly well: Spanking by virtue of facts and evidence. Bias of cliché and beaten to death lasers in a fictional setting. Seems I have admitted that I need to recalibrate my thoughts. However, I don't have to go along with what is considered acceptable paradigms that most only equate within the genre. Feel better now. Perhaps you should not over look the admittance of myself being wrong, despite my stubbornness. I have accepted the facts and evidence in my stubbornness, and have seen that I am wrong. Yes I am wrong. Not going to take back the parts I said alluding to you having a hard time finding 'Realistic' Science fiction, or lacking an imagination. Hate to admit it, but we are at an impasse. Seeing as I have given way to those who legitimately schooled my ass, and accepted their feedback to reevaluate. It is a minor detail in the overall story anyway. You would have seen and understood all of this if you had followed the entire conversation. I admitted that I was wrong in the subject matter. Even apologizing for my degree of wrongness and defensive behavior. Yes I got my spanking, thanks for understanding that. I used your words against you as you clearly identified with one that would consider it a "deal breaker" if there was less than accurate representation within the story (even if it is made up). As much amusement as you may get out of me saying I am wrong, sadly it is not because of a damn thing you brought to the table. (Fantasy must really drive you nuts based upon your take of things.) But hey it takes a man to admit his mistakes. It takes a bigger man to accept responsibility for them. . By the way the poorly attempted joke at throwing a grenade four klicks, was really bad.
As Defined in Funk and Wagnalls Standard Encyclopedic Dictionary (AKA my Bible) Plausible- 1. Seeming to be likely or probable, but open to doubt. 2. Apparently trustworthy or believable. Possible-1.Capable of happening or proving true; not contrary to fact, natural laws, or experience. 2. Capable of being done or of coming about; feasible. 3. That may or may not happen. So no, not I. Thanks for explaining it though.
Knowing and understanding are two different things. But I guess you'll list their definitions too... whatever. You're free to wallow in your own crapulance. Your idea still sucks.
Mighty powerful words from a guy who clearly has a problem. Should have known after looking at your avatar that "I hate you" beneath your screen name, should have been my first clue that you are not exactly the sharpest nor the nicest of individuals. That and your inventive 'crapulance' is extremely juvenile. And your still an asshole. Thanks for the lovely chat, I think we are done now. Have a great day.
