31 replies to this topic

[ChapeL]

(Crossposting from general discussion)

I like the concept: You can shoot that monster and place 25 points of damage exactly where you want but anything else you want to fire immediately after is going to go all over the place. It's logical, you have to hold your guns for half a second to get stable again.

Whether the weapon is effective or situational, that's for every pilot to decide.

---------------------------------

Now I was testing the new IS U-AC20 last night and thinking ( considering the low ammo count): Wouldn't the same mechanic help keep this weapon in check even if it was a single slug round ? I mean, it's bigger and heavier than the clan version. It needs to have something going for it. One 20 pts shell per trigger pull ought to do it but the massive recoil from the first round is going to make placing a quick second pull on target tricky to say the least.

At worst you get a mech sacrificing 30 tons ( so it can mount two ) with an ungodly amount of ammo to feed them and at best it can place a 40 pts alpha on target before his reticle starts dancing around on its own and the pilot has to wait for it to stabilize before an other double pull ( that will likely send him into shutdown ).

This proposed recoil for UAC20 and HGauss too while we're at it ) could be mitigated somewhat by the Improved Gyro skill nodes in an all or nothing fashion. ( all four nodes active or nothing happens )

[Ced Riggs]

ChapeL, on 29 June 2017 - 07:15 AM, said:

It's logical

Since nothing except for the projectile moves in a Gauss rifle, and there are no propellants used, there is as much "recoil" in a Gauss Rifle as in a laser. The projectile in question does not even touch the "barrel", which is a series of magnets. If anything, recoil would be highly illogical and ruin authenticity.

[Dick Shipley]

Sir isacc newton would disagree with you Its not the propellant that causes recoil, its the bullet and the acceleration thereof. For every action theres an equal and opposite reaction. You propel a (insert correct values) metal slug in one direction, there's an equal and opposite force in the other. If the slugs were somehow self propelled, like a rocket, that would be a different story but the acceleration is provided by the weapon just like our 20th century boom sticks.

[ShadeofHades]

Ced Riggs, on 29 June 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

Since nothing except for the projectile moves in a Gauss rifle, and there are no propellants used, there is as much "recoil" in a Gauss Rifle as in a laser. The projectile in question does not even touch the "barrel", which is a series of magnets. If anything, recoil would be highly illogical and ruin authenticity.

What? There's ALWAYS recoil of some flavor - action and reaction can't be separated. There are mechanical methods of decreasing impulse (increasing the time over which that reaction is received) but the EM charge pushing the projectile most assuredly DOES push back on the equipment propelling it.

Edited by ShadeofHades, 29 June 2017 - 08:17 AM.

[ChapeL]

Ced Riggs, on 29 June 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

Since nothing except for the projectile moves in a Gauss rifle, and there are no propellants used, there is as much "recoil" in a Gauss Rifle as in a laser. The projectile in question does not even touch the "barrel", which is a series of magnets. If anything, recoil would be highly illogical and ruin authenticity.

It's logical for-you-to-have-to-wait-since-your-mech-is-unstable. Now is the reason for such instablility logical? Probably not.

On to the UAC20 which IS the topic here... and mind the carpet, it's been known to trip people

[Stridercal]

Ced Riggs, on 29 June 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

Since nothing except for the projectile moves in a Gauss rifle, and there are no propellants used, there is as much "recoil" in a Gauss Rifle as in a laser. The projectile in question does not even touch the "barrel", which is a series of magnets. If anything, recoil would be highly illogical and ruin authenticity.

You don't understand physics, do you? What do you think happens when you propel a slug away from you?

According to that old quack Newton, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This doesn't matter whether the slug is propelled by gas or magnetic force. This is very, very elementary science here, dude. If you don't understand this, i recommend you repeat middle school.

Maybe you are confusing magnetic acceleration with recoil-less rifles (which are basically rocket launchers firing a self-properly projectile).

[pyrocomp]

**** Shipley, on 29 June 2017 - 08:15 AM, said:

Sir isacc newton would disagree with you Its not the propellant that causes recoil, its the bullet and the acceleration thereof. For every action theres an equal and opposite reaction. You propel a (insert correct values) metal slug in one direction, there's an equal and opposite force in the other. If the slugs were somehow self propelled, like a rocket, that would be a different story but the acceleration is provided by the weapon just like our 20th century boom sticks.

Sir Isaac Newton would've noticed that it is not only the bullet but also a jet of hot gases exit the barrel. Thus the full momentum that a weapon receives is significantly greater than the momentum of said bullet alone. If to go numerical in son average case of a standard rifle cartrige you have gases at an average 70% initial powder charge mass (few grams) exit the barrel at 1.5-2 the bullet velocity (depend on bullet mass and barrel length). Thus the weapon has the momentum double to the that of a bullet.
GRs will receive the momentum equal to that of a bullet.
The laser recoil will... Well, calculatable, but insignificantly low.

[Dick Shipley]

pyrocomp, on 29 June 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

Sir Isaac Newton would've noticed that it is not only the bullet but also a jet of hot gases exit the barrel. Thus the full momentum that a weapon receives is significantly greater than the momentum of said bullet alone. If to go numerical in son average case of a standard rifle cartrige you have gases at an average 70% initial powder charge mass (few grams) exit the barrel at 1.5-2 the bullet velocity (depend on bullet mass and barrel length). Thus the weapon has the momentum double to the that of a bullet.
GRs will receive the momentum equal to that of a bullet.
The laser recoil will... Well, calculatable, but insignificantly low.

Good to know. I wasnt really aware of that. Still, propelling a large slug at substantial velocities would create a buttload, technically speaking, of recoil

[ChapeL]

So yeah, I'm proposing that the IS UAC20, being that it is larger and heavier that the Clan's, could benefit from being single shot weapon PROVIDED that it suffers from large HGauss-like recoil inbetween each. Say 2 seconds of it's overall 4 seconds cooldown ?

Thanks for the physics lessons folks now let's get back on topic please

[MechaBattler]

I think the IS UAC20 is fine with the burst fire it has. Only three shots and their grouping is pretty good.

Though I do think the HGauss is hit hard enough without the need for recoil.

[pyrocomp]

**** Shipley, on 29 June 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:

Good to know. I wasnt really aware of that. Still, propelling a large slug at substantial velocities would create a buttload, technically speaking, of recoil

Surely. But here the projectile velocity and it's mass (from the ammo per ton) does not translate anyhow into the damage, so, techically no way to tell just how much of that recoil there shuold be.
Sometime ago here on forums the discussion went weather the AC20 shot should rock the firing and fired upon mechs. As it seems the AC20 is alike to the WWI naval main caliber... But recoil still had no place in MWO to play with and around it.

[pyrocomp]

Stridercal, on 29 June 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

According to that old quack Newton, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This doesn't matter whether the slug is propelled by gas or magnetic force. This is very, very elementary science here, dude. If you don't understand this, i recommend you repeat middle school.

A side note, all you wrote is more or less true in the intertial reference frames. In non-inertial reference frames the second Newton's Law of motion is not applicable. And, to be fair, realistically inertial reference frame cannot be found withing this universe. Only the reference frames that can be considered inertial for some period of time to some extent. But that's not to the point of proposed IS UAC20 to be single slug weapon with recticle shake. I'm for that and for lowering of the GH on AC20 (IS at least).

[Tunanya]

pyrocomp, on 29 June 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

Sir Isaac Newton would've noticed ... calculatable, but insignificantly low.

Stridercal, on 29 June 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

You don't understand physics, do you? What ... recoil-less rifles (which are basically rocket launchers firing a self-properly projectile).

ShadeofHades, on 29 June 2017 - 08:16 AM, said:

What? There's ALWAYS recoil... push back on the equipment propelling it.

Do...Do none of you understand how Gauss works? By the laws that we understand today, a Gauss projectile would generate a lot less recoil than say an AC20 counterpart. As there are no gasses to expel, there is one less variable to account for. The length of coils required to produce the magnetic PULL, not push, would also help dissipate the pushback values. The majority of the forces would be exacted upon the coils themselves...and why would we not load them with recoil tracts?

Yes, there IS recoil, but the stuff we see in game is for gameplay balance, not reality.

Reference:

https://physics.stac...ve-any-kickback
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coilgun (yeah, yeah, it's Wikipedia).

[Ced Riggs]

**** Shipley, on 29 June 2017 - 08:15 AM, said:

Sir isacc newton would disagree with you

Stridercal, on 29 June 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

You don't understand physics, do you?

Right back at 'cha. Maybe you should read up on Gauss Rifles. There is no force exerted on the base, as the projectile is not in contact with the weapon system, but suspended in a magnetic field. The force to propel the projectile is fueled with electricity, rather than gas explosions. It's not a Recoilless Rifle in the sense of a rocket launcher. It's a coil gun. Nothing moves except for the projectile, and no part of the weapon system is in contact with the projectile - there is no energy transfer other than magnetic forces.

Coil guns have no recoil. No smoke, no explosions.

Here's a coil gun someone made in their workshop, small as it may be:



Notice how during firing, despite penetrating over an inch of hardwood, the firing assembly does not budge, yet the table shakes? The firing assembly has no force affecting it, but when the penetrator hits the target, which rests against supports bolted to the table, the table shakes. That is the first time a kinetic energy transfer happens.

Which is also why you are wrong. Not all energy transfers are equiform. Kinetic energy does not always come from kinetic energy. In a coil gun, electric energy creates a magnetic field which imparts kinetic energy onto the projectile. Since the projectile never pushes against the weapon (except for the air inside the guidance channel of coils), there is no kinetic energy that could cause recoil.

I swear, you should read the back of your cereal more often, and not just parrot things in the wrong context.

[Stridercal]

Wow, just... wow.

Ced, Tunanya... you both fail at basic physics.

Yes, there is something to be said about the mass of propellant. So, yes, a project of mass X, accelerated to velocity Y, would indeed involve less recoil in a linear drive motor than with a conventional chemical round (as we are not having to also accelerate the propellant mass).

But the projectile is the FARRRRR greater mass in such systems. For example, the main guns of an Iowa-class battleship fired a 2,700-lb shell using 660 pounds of propellant. Now i'm not a math major, but the last time i checked... 2,700>660.

So you are saying that the mass of 660 lb (even accounting for velocity delta of the propellant gases versus the muzzle velocity of the shell) somehow manages to create more recoil than the 2700-lb shell?

Again, that... is an interesting take on how the known reality of our world seems to work. And the idea that somehow PULLING ignores the same physical laws as PUSHING.. that transcended into comedy gold, Tunanya

I think maybe both of you are confusing total recoil with delta recoil. Yes, a magnetic accelerator could conceivably deliver more controllable recoil, due to ramping force delivery. But, again, repeating myself because you don't seem to be able to read: mass X at velocity Y is always going to delivery recoil Z (unless mass X is self-propelled). Period. End of story. At least in the version of reality that we all inhabit.

Put another way: A bullet doesn't have to touch the gun to impart its reactive momentum during firing. Magnetic force pushes the bullet, and in turn, the same force is pushing back against what created it... aka, the ******* gun.

But please, please keep going. This is getting fun to watch, as you both seem intent on debunking the most basic of physical laws.

[Stridercal]

Also, from wiki:

Materials used[color=#555555][[/color]edit[color=#555555]][/color]

The rails and projectiles must be built from strong conductive materials; the rails need to survive the violence of an accelerating projectile, and heating due to the large currents and friction involved. Some erroneous work has suggested that the recoil force in railguns can be redirected or eliminated; careful theoretical and experimental analysis reveals that the recoil force acts on the breech closure just as in a chemical firearm.^{[21][22][23][24]}

[Stridercal]

And since i can't make it any more clear:

[Ced Riggs]

Stridercal, on 29 June 2017 - 12:31 PM, said:

And since i can't make it any more clear:

That video is clearly a fake.

For starters, it's too short, and no one is shouting. I also don't see any America flags, nor do I hear screaming eagles. I also stand by my belief that gauss rifles have no recoil, and facts will not deter me in these convictions.

[Stridercal]

So your stance is: "My opinion is worth more than confirmed science."

At this point, i have to guess you've simply descended into Troll Mode, yes? You just can't be that stupid. If you were, how would you still manage to turn on the MWO client, play a round, and not somehow accidentally strangle yourself with your own mouse cable?

[Ced Riggs]

Stridercal, on 29 June 2017 - 12:44 PM, said:

So your stance is: "My opinion is worth more than confirmed science."

At this point, i have to guess you've simply descended into Troll Mode, yes? You just can't be that stupid. If you were, how would you still manage to turn on the MWO client, play a round, and not somehow accidentally strangle yourself with your own mouse cable?

At this point, I have been thorough ly schooled, so I am making jokes. You were right, I was wrong.