Manji-ish concept, but I'm not saying it has to work

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-10-01 04:56pm

One of the ideas in my demented mind is a sniper rifle.

It uses mass-drivers to propel the bullet, about the same weight as a regular rifle bullet, at mach 30. It also has a high-powered IR scope, with night-vision, heat scanning, and a laser pointer.

Since getting a bullet to such a spped would require energy, the rifle would require a power source, which would be replaced after every shot, or recharged. Since the battery would be quite heavy, you couldn't carry many. I would also expect a loud sonic boom, and many problems with the design. DOes anyone hee know what such a gun would be like, besides "dumb"?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2002-10-01 05:10pm

IMO it would make one hell of a sniper rifle. It would also likely be powerful enough to take down a tank with a well placed shot.

Thats better then Manji's 120mm sniper rifle (3 month ROF, one shot, 3 months to heal your shoulder before you can fire again.)

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2002-10-01 05:25pm

Alyeska wrote:IMO it would make one hell of a sniper rifle. It would also likely be powerful enough to take down a tank with a well placed shot.

Not really. You could get soft kills with repeated shots and damage internal equipment, but it could not 'destroy' the tank.

Thats better then Manji's 120mm sniper rifle (3 month ROF, one shot, 3 months to heal your shoulder before you can fire again.)

Well, propelling a rifle bullet at 30 times the speed of sound would still produce a MASSIVE amount of recoil, probably enough to make it functionally useless.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-10-01 05:28pm

why not use antimatter bullets while you are at it?

RadiO · Post by **RadiO** » 2002-10-01 06:16pm

What if it was on top of a light vehicle in a stabilised mount? You could carry several batteries and a fair supply of ammo, and recoil wouldn't necessarily be as much of a problem as it would against your shoulder. Liquidate the enemy, one hypersonic headshot at a time.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-10-01 06:27pm

Recoil would be impossibly high for an infantry men, the user would be thrown backwards at 30+ MPH, and the bullet would shatter on impact with any form of armor.

I fail to see any actual use for such a weapon anyway. Normal weapons and missiles will work infinitely better for most any task.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-10-01 08:46pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:Recoil would be impossibly high for an infantry men, the user would be thrown backwards at 30+ MPH, and the bullet would shatter on impact with any form of armor.

I fail to see any actual use for such a weapon anyway. Normal weapons and missiles will work infinitely better for most any task.

I knew you would say that. Would it be possible to have some sort of anti-recoil thingy, and a stronger, denser bullet?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-10-01 09:00pm

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:Recoil would be impossibly high for an infantry men, the user would be thrown backwards at 30+ MPH, and the bullet would shatter on impact with any form of armor.

I fail to see any actual use for such a weapon anyway. Normal weapons and missiles will work infinitely better for most any task.
I knew you would say that. Would it be possible to have some sort of anti-recoil thingy, and a stronger, denser bullet?

On an infantry weapon no. A recoil absorption system simply spreads out the time of the recoil, and nothing in existence would sufficiently spread it out to allow a person to use it. Even doubling the time would result in something far to bulky and heavy for a man to carry

If you mount it on a Hummer with a very strong mounting you might be okay. A denser bullet greatly increases the recoil, and only helps to a point, at mach 30 I don’t think anything in existence would work. They're all going to end up melting and basically going splat against armor. Anyway, you really dont want your basic kentic rifle ammunition to cost 10$ a round.

However, if your mounted it on a vehicle you might as well use a missile, and if you want to kill infantry, then a ultra high speed is a bad idea. The round will punch clear through and do minimal damage to the person; they might not even be knocked over unless you hit a substantial bone.

Bob McDob · Post by **Bob McDob** » 2002-10-03 12:22am

Bob McDob · Post by **Bob McDob** » 2002-10-03 12:26am

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:Recoil would be impossibly high for an infantry men, the user would be thrown backwards at 30+ MPH, and the bullet would shatter on impact with any form of armor.

I fail to see any actual use for such a weapon anyway. Normal weapons and missiles will work infinitely better for most any task.
I knew you would say that. Would it be possible to have some sort of anti-recoil thingy, and a stronger, denser bullet?

Mount retro-rockets and make the bullet out of pure lead!

:Rimshot: