11-16-2019, 02:32 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Different Gyroc Designs
While gyrocs sound cool, their performance in Ultratech leaves something to be desired. Weapons that use gyroc ammunition should be lighter and cheaper than conventional weapons, as they do not have to contain the stress of the detonation that accelerates conventional ammunition, and they should have a lower ST requirement and a lower recoil, since the user does not have to absorb the impulse from the detonation of conventional ammunition. In essence, they should probably have half the unloaded weight and base cost, with -2 to minimum ST and -2 to Rcl (minimum Rcl 1).
When it comes to ammunition though, pistols and SMGs should probably not be gyrocs (pistol and SMG rounds are just too short to justify the rocket engines), meaning that only longarms should be gyrocs. They should not have rifling, as spin is a negative for rockets, and should instead depend on a flat trajectory (no real change in Acc, just an explanation of the differences). 15mm should probably be the minimum size, and 18.5mm and 25mm should also be available. Ammunition costs should probably by 8× for 15mm, 4x for 18.5mm, and 2× for 25mm to represent the expense of miniaturization. Viper rounds are +300% the base gyroc cost. 1/2D range would represent rocket speed. The rockets would use solid fuel to accelerate quickly and then use small fins to maintain their trajectory to Max range. In essence, the base damage represents the bullet slamming into the target. With these changes, gyrocs become an acceptable alternative to conventional weapons. The weapons are cheaper and lighter, though the ammunition is much more expensive. What do you think? |
11-16-2019, 04:11 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
I could have sworn there was another thread about this just yesterday.
|
11-16-2019, 04:14 PM | #3 | |
Night Watchman
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
Quote:
__________________
The Path of Cunning. Indexes: DFRPG Characters, Advantage of the Week, Disadvantage of the Week, Skill of the Week, Techniques. |
|
11-16-2019, 04:36 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
The difference is that this thread is about converting conventional guns into effective gyros rather than getting too focused on the details.
|
11-16-2019, 05:11 PM | #5 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
Quote:
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
11-16-2019, 05:36 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
This comes under the category of 'why would you want to do this?'. That's the basic problem with gyrocs anyway; you shouldn't be trying to use rockets to do a job that conventional munitions does just fine, you should be using rockets to do a job that rockets are good at.
|
11-16-2019, 06:07 PM | #7 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
Quote:
The Holdout Gyroc would appear to be simple break open single shot like the flare gun it can be used as (among many other things). The four shot Gyroc Pistol may be nothign more than a slightly larger version of that. Note that both of these are noted as reloading with the (3i) notation indicating that these is no magazine invovled, only loose rounds. Starting with the six round Launch Pistol the reloading notation becomes (3) indicating a detachable magazine of some kind. I'd put that magazine in front of the trigger like a Mauser C96 but with no barrel. Larger versions jsut add a shoulder stock. Only with the LSW version with a 30 round magazine does this become probably untenable. I'd not really sure what one of those looks like. If you wiodner I assume a 15mm diameter but at least a 60mm length giving it a shape like a supersonic rifle bullet. Another reason the pistol grip can not serve as a magazine well. But of course there is no rifling in the barrel because there is no need for a barrel. I'd bite the bullet (no pun intended) and skip the fold-out fins and go straight to a miniturized set of reaction control jets. This would make the rounds usable in vacuum and I suspect it might be easier to fit in the small rockets. I definitely assume reaction control jets in the 64mm and 100mm missiles. I might do away with unguided versions altogether.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
11-16-2019, 07:15 PM | #8 | |
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The plutonium rich regions of Washington State
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
Quote:
Luke |
|
11-16-2019, 07:20 PM | #9 |
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
The original gyrojet was smoothbore and relied on the direction of the vented ports to provide spin. I suppose if you rifled the barrel you could do away with the vented ports (although if you have 'sufficiently advanced' technology the engineering challenges would probably be trivial.)
3rd edition Warhammer 40,000 core rules actually listed bolters (another supposed 'gyrojet' knockoff from the 80s) having rifled barrels lol. |
11-16-2019, 07:31 PM | #10 |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Different Gyroc Designs
The fluff text in UT explicitly says that "Gyrcs" may not use spin stabilization though it suggests a Transhuman Space-ish michromechanical guidance system instead.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|