Got a Real-World Weapon or Armor Question? Mk. IX

[Spiryt]

This is going to sound a tiny bit non-d&d but...

Given the level of armor and weapon technology in the 3rd edition D&D books, (full plates, seige engines, etc). At the current time of the most advance non-variant weapons and armor technology. How advanced in real life would gunpowder and musket technology be.

.

15th century European metallurgy and stuff was more than perfectly sufficient to make AK-47, even though it would be a bit of a fuzz, and of course mass production for 200$ each wouldn't be possible.

It's simply not any rocket science in any kind. Some metal containers, springs, levers....

Idea, knowledge, to form such working idea is everything, not technology per se.

Obviously no one, no matter how genius, is going to build AK-47-like something before modern cartridges, repetitive fire systems and so on aren't devised in the first place.

[Diamondeye]

Yes, technically.

But, military doctrine can drive design. Medium or heavy machine guns for defending a position might be part of military doctrine, like artillery, which is how the first machine guns were used. Gatlings, maxims, and so on.

But maybe the army doesn't want to have the average infantryman carrying an automatic weapon, for supply purposes. The idea of conserving ammo kept the US army with breech loaders long after reliable magazine rifles were available.

So, maybe they encouraged semi automatic rifles, but not light machine guns, or submachineguns.

It can work with a little creative storytelling.

This is true. In fact, it's the reason that the M-16 and most M-4 in later versions have a "burst" selection rather than full automatic. It's to prevent the temptation to flip to full auto and go to town.

Initially, the full automatic function was really for suppressive fire. However, the SAW was later introduced. The SAW is issued to a soldier as his individual weapon unlike a larger machine gun and can be used as a rifle, but is heavy enough and designed for belt-fed operation to act as a (small) crew-served weapon as well. With 2 SAWs per infantry squad, the need for a full-automatic feature was eliminated (and was questionable int he first place; a soldier can pull a semi-auto trigger or use a burst fire feature to suppress pretty well, and it will last longer than full auto fire.)

Recoil on a full-automatic rifle or carbine isn't excessively hard to control; in fact most video games exaggerate it. However, it's also not necessary for most infantry combat. What it's useful for is suppressive fire(already discussed) and close quarters fighting where there may not be time to pick up a sight picture or aim carefully at a moving target. 25 meters is about the absolute maximum for effective engagement of individual targets with full automatic rifle fire. Farther than that, you should be using aimed shots. Really, you want to be even closer than that, and generally inside buildings you will be.

[Joran]

15th century European metallurgy and stuff was more than perfectly sufficient to make AK-47, even though it would be a bit of a fuzz, and of course mass production for 200$ each wouldn't be possible.

It's simply not any rocket science in any kind. Some metal containers, springs, levers....

Idea, knowledge, to form such working idea is everything, not technology per se.

Obviously no one, no matter how genius, is going to build AK-47-like something before modern cartridges, repetitive fire systems and so on aren't devised in the first place.

Wouldn't a AK-47 foul up if fired with black powder? Going to a smokeless powder is a non-trivial step that requires a fair bit of chemistry to do it right.

I wouldn't be surprised if 1600's-1700's engineers could put together something like the Sten gun, especially looking at those old fuseé pocketwatches that are really intricate inside.

The two innovations in firearms that seem so simple that they should have been invented earlier than they actually were are the flintlock and the Minié ball.

[Roxxy]

Don't forget that black powder has more power than most smokeless powders.

[DrewID]

15th century European metallurgy and stuff was more than perfectly sufficient to make AK-47, even though it would be a bit of a fuzz, and of course mass production for 200$ each wouldn't be possible.

I have to question this assertion, in light of the number of works that have stated that the delay in the adoption of breech loaders was the inability of the metallurgy of the day to seal the breech properly. And if you cannot seal the breech properly, you are not going to have an effective gas-operated repeater.

And a related question that I have wondered abut: what level of technology would be required to produce mercury fulminate primers?

DrewID

[Spiryt]

I have to question this assertion, in light of the number of works that have stated that the delay in the adoption of breech loaders was the inability of the metallurgy of the day to seal the breech properly. And if you cannot seal the breech properly, you are not going to have an effective gas-operated repeater.

And yet, breech loaders were known as far back as in 14th century. Air guns in 16th century... Modern machining can certainly cut/cast well fitting parts more readily, but back then it could be done as well - again, obviously as rather precise and expensive piece of work.

Problems with powder would be indeed biggest one - although technologically it would most probably be easily attainable in 15th century - nitric acid, sulfuric acid, sodium carbonate and so on were known from quite some time, processes they need to go trough wouldn't be above the capabilities of some alchemist workshop...

Obviously, no matter how high 'Intelligence" would someone have, coming up with all of that stuff before more advanced chemistry and what else had happened to give him fundamental 'base' - would be snowball chance in hell, to say at least. Maybe with some freak accident, maybe....

[Thiel]

And yet, breech loaders were known as far back as in 14th century. Air guns in 16th century... Modern machining can certainly cut/cast well fitting parts more readily, but back then it could be done as well - again, obviously as rather precise and expensive piece of work.

And they were cranky, unreliable, comparatively fragile and didn't have the power of their muzzle loaded cousins.

[No brains]

I thought the predominant strategy for dealing with elephants was to run flaming pigs at them to make them flip out.

I was serious. I had sworn I've heard that somewhere.

Sorry, GraaEminense.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I was serious. I had sworn I've heard that somewhere.

Sorry, GraaEminense.

Nope. Pretty certain that's a myth, or it was used once and then never again.

[Talakeal]

Nope. Pretty certain that's a myth, or it was used once and then never again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_pig claims it did happen at Megara in 266 BC, but that doesn't rule out either of the above possibilities.

[GraaEminense]

I was serious. I had sworn I've heard that somewhere.

Sorry, GraaEminense.

I'm sure you are forgiven, not quite sure for what though?

Regarding the flaming pigs, I've always considered it an event that was tried once at Megara. Can't have been terribly effective if it wasn't used regularly, and there's no mention of it in later times while war elephants kept on being used in the region.
On a side note, Caesar's most important tool to defeat elephants in the civil war was another elephant: keeping it in camp so the soldiers got used to the huge animal.

[Autolykos]

Wouldn't a AK-47 foul up if fired with black powder? Going to a smokeless powder is a non-trivial step that requires a fair bit of chemistry to do it right.

While nitrocellulose is definitely the better option for smokeless powder, for example a mix of powdered sugar and sodium (per-)chlorate, which can be made from table salt once you have electricity, would probably work as well. Still, pretty hard to discover by accident - but there are plenty other alternatives as well, and you only need to find one of them.

I was serious. I had sworn I've heard that somewhere.

I'm pretty sure it was in Rome:TotalWar, where this is one of the methods to fight elephants. I prefer massed archers and artillery because they are also useful for lots of other purposes, but the pigs are an option.

[Thiel]

I'm pretty sure it was in Rome:TotalWar, where this is one of the methods to fight elephants. I prefer massed archers and artillery because they are also useful for lots of other purposes, but the pigs are an option.

Plus, they're hilarious

[DrewID]

I'm pretty sure it was in Rome:TotalWar, where this is one of the methods to fight elephants. I prefer massed archers and artillery because they are also useful for lots of other purposes, but the pigs are an option.

Flaming pigs have another purpose. It's called BBQ.

DrewID

[Galloglaich]

15th century European metallurgy and stuff was more than perfectly sufficient to make AK-47, even though it would be a bit of a fuzz, and of course mass production for 200$ each wouldn't be possible.

It's simply not any rocket science in any kind. Some metal containers, springs, levers....

Idea, knowledge, to form such working idea is everything, not technology per se.

Obviously no one, no matter how genius, is going to build AK-47-like something before modern cartridges, repetitive fire systems and so on aren't devised in the first place.

In fact to build upon what he said, I remember seeing a documentary one time showing a village in a tribal area of Pakistan which has traditionally been a center of a very archaic iron-working industry. Traditional sword and knife makers were making Ak-47s and RPK machine guns there using basically medieval forges and tools. The same guys had figured out how to make Muskets in the 19th Century during the British occupation of the area.

G.

[Galloglaich]

This is going to sound a tiny bit non-d&d but...

Given the level of armor and weapon technology in the 3rd edition D&D books, (full plates, seige engines, etc). At the current time of the most advance non-variant weapons and armor technology. How advanced in real life would gunpowder and musket technology be.

For example, at the time of the creation and mass production of the full plate in europe, how advanced could a blacksmith using the same level of production technology create a mundane musket.

Basically can I justify my 24 intelligence artificer mass producing muskets for my kingdom's soldiers, without having to have her first invent a time machine.

By the time plate armor came out, firearms were well established in Europe. In the height of plate armor, say early 16th Century, matchlock muskets were already a popular weapon and wheel-lock pistols were coming on the scene. Most people don't seem to understand this for some reason I can't grasp.

I remember on that idiotic show Deadliest Warriors, in the pirate vs. knight episode, they made a big deal about how the pirate had guns but the knight didn't. Actually by the mid 16th Century it was common for knights to carry pistols on their saddles along with a sword... in fact a lot of German knights used to carry up to six pistols instead of a lance. Polish Winged Hussars carried both.

G

[Galloglaich]

If they exist in the setting, equipping troops with hand cannons or arquebuses should be possible. Mass production to equip whole armies, however, require specialized industry on a level unlikely in a late medieval/early renaissance society. Especially since gunpowder is difficult to produce and keep in quantity.

Actually that isn't true. It's amazing to me the myths that persist about the Middle Ages. They were mass producing all kinds of weapons and armor by the 14th Century. The Arsenal at Venice was producing thousands of guns per year by the 15th C with basically all the technology of a modern factory, interchangable parts, an assembly-line, automation etc. Automated production (based on hydro power) was widespread throughout Europe by that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venetian_Arsenal

As for the powder, they came up with corned powder by the mid 15th Century, that was the real step which allowed them to pre-measure out loads which quickly became cartridges, a pre-measured load of powder, with a primer and a ball, just like you saw in the 19th Century.

Breech loaders were very common by the same time period (mid 15th C) and were neither unreliable nor weak, they just only used them for relatively small cannons, in the 15mm - 80mm range very roughly. Some larger than that were used but that is where it got tricky. The main reason for breach loaders is that you could reload without putting powder down a hot gun barrel. They would often have several breeches ready with powder in them, which looked a little like beer mugs, and would take the old breach off and put the new one on, drop a ball down the barrel and fire. This was very common in the Baltic on ships and river-boats.



Here are some examples, all without the breach in them. on the bottom you can see one of the breeches. Some of the guns are made in 'hoop' style, some forged in a single piece. Both technologies were available in the 15th Century, the latter worked better but was more expensive and required a very skilled gunsmith to forge.

An improvement on this was pioneered in Flanders in the 15th C where early use of coal led to some of the first true Blast Furnaces in Europe and the subsequent use of cast iron, which was used by the Duke of Burgundy to very good effect with large cast iron cannon that could fire lead balls.

G

[Yora]

I remember on that idiotic show Deadliest Warriors, in the pirate vs. knight episode, they made a big deal about how the pirate had guns but the knight didn't.

Well, there's your problem.

I pretty much have stoped entirely watching american "documentaries". They are almost all complete garbage. Don't recall ever seeing anything by History Channel that didn't suck.

[Galloglaich]

Yeah we aren't making many friends with American Media these days I think. Jersey Shore probably does more to recruit enemies of the US than predator drones do.

Well at least we still make decent zombie movies once in a while...

G

[Mike_G]

Yeah we aren't making many friends with American Media these days I think. Jersey Shore probably does more to recruit enemies of the US than predator drones do.

Well at least we still make decent zombie movies once in a while...

G

I often refer to the Real Housewives franchise as "al Qaeda recruiting films."

[No brains]

I pretty much have stoped entirely watching american "documentaries". They are almost all complete garbage. Don't recall ever seeing anything by History Channel that didn't suck.

Don't talk crap about Mythbusters!

By the time I comment a thread has officially derailed.
As for the apology, your avatar is a piggy.

Who's going to start the new thread? Don't let it be me!

[fusilier]

Well, there's your problem.

I pretty much have stoped entirely watching american "documentaries". They are almost all complete garbage. Don't recall ever seeing anything by History Channel that didn't suck.

While not as common, PBS productions are usually good. NOVA is typically excellent -- historical documentaries can be hit or miss, but Secrets of the Dead is typically pretty good, and History Detectives can be fun.

I'll take a PBS documentary over any of the cable channels' productions, any day of the week -- but there's not as many of them. :-(

Sometimes the cable channels surprise me, for example Mike Loades latest documentary, although that wasn't an American production, and it was really really condensed.

[fusilier]

Breech loaders were very common by the same time period (mid 15th C) and were neither unreliable nor weak, they just only used them for relatively small cannons, in the 15mm - 80mm range very roughly. Some larger than that were used but that is where it got tricky. The main reason for breach loaders is that you could reload without putting powder down a hot gun barrel. They would often have several breeches ready with powder in them, which looked a little like beer mugs, and would take the old breach off and put the new one on, drop a ball down the barrel and fire. This was very common in the Baltic on ships and river-boats.

As far as I know breechloading swivel guns were popular upon all European ships, until sometime around the mid 17th century (where muzzle loading ones became dominant). In the 15th century, they may be the only cannons on a ship. By the middle of the 16th century heavier cannon were being used, but the small swivel guns were still part of the armament of most ships, as they could be very useful ini a boarding action.

They were also sometimes used as light field guns on land -- typically on some sort of a frame instead of a wheeled carriage.

[Diamondeye]

15th century technology would be exceedingly hard-pressed to make an AK-47. It is not simply a matter of making a breach loader, but rather one that can repeat at a cyclic rate of 600 rounds per minute, and be accurate in single shot ode out to 400 meters with a muzzle velocity of 715 meters per second. Machining all the various parts of an AK-47 to the necessary tolerances should be very hard for 15th century technology, especially if they have never seen an example of an AK-47 when they make their first one.

This is why the remote village in Pakistan can make AK-47s and repair parts for them. They already know AK-47s exist and have seen them before. it's simply a matter of obtaining the necessary specifications, and it's not like it's hard to get your hands on an AK-47 to take apart and figure out.

It's much easier to make something once you know it can be made even if you don't have any working examples. This is why North Korea and Iran (or for that matter, India, Pakistan, South Africa, and Israel) don't need to start from scratch to make the atomic bomb. They already know it works.

[Spiryt]

15th century technology would be exceedingly hard-pressed to make an AK-47. It is not simply a matter of making a breach loader, but rather one that can repeat at a cyclic rate of 600 rounds per minute, and be accurate in single shot ode out to 400 meters with a muzzle velocity of 715 meters per second. Machining all the various parts of an AK-47 to the necessary tolerances should be very hard for 15th century technology, especially if they have never seen an example of an AK-47 when they make their first one.

This is why the remote village in Pakistan can make AK-47s and repair parts for them. They already know AK-47s exist and have seen them before. it's simply a matter of obtaining the necessary specifications, and it's not like it's hard to get your hands on an AK-47 to take apart and figure out.

It's much easier to make something once you know it can be made even if you don't have any working examples. This is why North Korea and Iran (or for that matter, India, Pakistan, South Africa, and Israel) don't need to start from scratch to make the atomic bomb. They already know it works.

Well, that was pretty much precisely my point.... Technologically, it's really nothing that hard.

But probability that someone, no matter how bright, will come up with all that stuff from blank, seeing only 'standard' cylindrical, black powder, one shot arquebuses, bombards, swivel guns of 15th century...

Just no way, little by little all that stuff had to be devised and tried.

And yeah, next thread please!

[hamishspence]

And yeah, next thread please!

Thread X