The Best That Never Was 2 (Prototypes)

[Vespers War]

I posted this in the Dark Conspiracy FB group, but it works just as well for this thread.

A space gun I didn't know about until today, the TOZ-81 "Mars." It never entered production, the TOZ-82/TP-82 being preferred. This one's interesting because it's a revolver that fires from the bottom of the cylinder, it's set up so the barrel and chamber combined are 33.6 of the gun's 35.5 centimeters of overall length, and the barrel can be swapped out to fire either 5.45x39mm or .410. It also has an over-barrel swiveling bayonet, which seems a bit over-the-top in more ways than one.

For purposes of calculating recoil, I used a mass of 1 kilogram since I couldn't find an actual mass. If it had entered production, my guess it it would have been issued with 10 rounds of each type of ammunition.

5.45x39mm: ROF DAR, Dam 2, Pen 1-Nil, Bulk 2, Mag 5R, SS 6, Rng 9
.410 (buck): ROF 3 (buckshot), Dam 1, Pen Nil, Bulk 2, Mag 5R, SS 6, Rng 8
Bayonet: Rng S, Hit Mod +2, Dam 1d6+(Str/2)

The bayonet is modified from the one in the core T2K v2.2 rules based on my interpretation of the guidance in FF&S regarding bayonets mounted on guns with Bulk less than 4.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...pace-revolver/

[copeab]

Ian covered the XM-8 rifle system on today's Forgotten Weapons:

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/alm...hk-xm8-family/

[Vespers War]

Back in September, Ian took apart the worst gun ever and then, for some mad reason, took it to the range. This really isn't a best that never was, it's a worst that never should have been.

USFA Zip 22
Weight 0.43 kg
Ammo .22 LR
ROF SA, Dam 1, Pen Nil, Blk 1, Mag 10, SS 6, Rng 13

On a 17-19, the gun jams and requires 1/1d2/1d3 actions to unjam (for a 17, 18, or 19 respectively). On a 20, the gun jams so badly it must be disassembled to be reset. This is being generous.

Accessories for the gun include a belt clip, a hold-open lever for the bolt, and a top cover that replaces the iron sights with a Picatinny rail (in case you want to mount a red dot sight to your short-barreled low-bulk .22 pistol).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I watched both those episodes and I think you're right... you are being generous.

Originally Posted by Vespers War

Back in September, Ian took apart the worst gun ever and then, for some mad reason, took it to the range. This really isn't a best that never was, it's a worst that never should have been.

USFA Zip 22
Weight 0.43 kg
Ammo .22 LR
ROF SA, Dam 1, Pen Nil, Blk 1, Mag 10, SS 6, Rng 13

On a 17-19, the gun jams and requires 1/1d2/1d3 actions to unjam (for a 17, 18, or 19 respectively). On a 20, the gun jams so badly it must be disassembled to be reset. This is being generous.

Accessories for the gun include a belt clip, a hold-open lever for the bolt, and a top cover that replaces the iron sights with a Picatinny rail (in case you want to mount a red dot sight to your short-barreled low-bulk .22 pistol).

I'm inclined to think that a roll of 14-17 should be a jam and 18-20 should be a jam requiring disassembly.

[Vespers War]

This time I'm bringing in a rather divisive firearm that did see military service with extremely mixed results during the US Civil War. Some units loved it, some hated it, and in the end the guns were sold for pennies on the dollar. I'm speaking, of course, of Colt's Model of 1855, the Root Revolving Rifle.

The gun had multiple calibers, but in military service was chambered in .56 with a 5-round cylinder, fired by percussion cap. The one held by Springfield Armory Museum has a 78.9 cm barrel and is 125 cm in total length.

Soldiers were afraid of the effects of chain fire. However, I'm aware of no reports of this happening with the rifle in service, and when Joseph Bilby tried to induce a chain fire, he was only able to do so by using poorly-fitted caps - even covering the face of the cylinder with powder would not cause chain fire because the bullets were slightly over-sized and swaged down to fit the chamber bore when rammed. They were used to fine effect by the 37th Illinois at Prairie Grove. They would spit lead fragments from the cylinder gap when fired, so it was recommended to place the off-hand under the trigger guard rather than on the forestock.

Colt M1855 Revolving Rifle
Wt 4.17 kg, SAR, Mag 5i, Dam 2, Pen Nil, Bulk 8, SS 2, Rng 83

Note that this is not a metallic cartridge revolver, and it should reload 1 round per action because it requires loading 45 grains of powder and the bullet, ramming, and capping. Thus, the Mag is 5i rather than 5R to reflect the slower loading.

[copeab]

On Christmas Day, Ian posted a half hour video on the G-11k2, the gun actually approved for issue to West German troops. You get a detailed view of how th thing operated.

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/kra...ic-the-hk-g11/

[Legbreaker]

Watched that earlier today. Beautifully complex while oh so simple!
Such a shame it had to be dropped by the Germans - the world would all probably be using caseless rounds by now I'm guessing after nearly years of military service to iron out the last few problems.

[Vespers War]

The Panzermuseum got a new display last month, receiving the sole example of an experimental Leopard 1 with anti-radar and anti-IR systems. Director Ralf Raths describes it here.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

The Panzermuseum got a new display last month, receiving the sole example of an experimental Leopard 1 with anti-radar and anti-IR systems. Director Ralf Raths describes it here.

Very happy that the Panzermuseum chose to present that tank in both German language and English language videos*

* for those who haven't checked out the Panzermuseum's youtube channel, they only started doing English language videos at the start of this year (or the end of last year).

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Very happy that the Panzermuseum chose to present that tank in both German language and English language videos*

* for those who haven't checked out the Panzermuseum's youtube channel, they only started doing English language videos at the start of this year (or the end of last year).

They announced they'd start doing them back in November or December, but AFAIK this was the first one (with the exception of a couple videos where English-language channels visited the Panzermuseum).

In theory, one can set up English subtitles (click CC, then click the gear, then Subtitles, then Autotranslate, then English), but Youtube is terrible at translating German to English. I've tried it with a couple videos, and it's bad.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

They announced they'd start doing them back in November or December, but AFAIK this was the first one (with the exception of a couple videos where English-language channels visited the Panzermuseum).

In theory, one can set up English subtitles (click CC, then click the gear, then Subtitles, then Autotranslate, then English), but Youtube is terrible at translating German to English. I've tried it with a couple videos, and it's bad.

Oh yeah, I've used the auto"translate" feature a few times and while sometimes it's a little annoying, other times it's completely nonsensical (and if you're lucky, maybe somewhat amusing, but mostly not!) And it's not just German to English that's badly done, I've had pretty much the same experience with Russian, Korean, French, Vietnamese and Chinese to English.

As for the Panzermuseum, that video on the Leopard was their first tank vid in English, the only other English language vids I've seen from them are messages saying "Hey we're going to be making videos in English" but 2019 should see a good number become available (given their posting rate is about one video per month for their German language vids).

[Vespers War]

Ian's videos are still a great source of weird stuff, and today I saw for the first time his video on the SSK .950 rifle. Using shortened and necked-out 20mm Vulcan cases, it's effectively a 24.1x70mm centerfire round fired from an 85.1cm barrel. Only three of these rifles were made and ammunition is accordingly rare, but if you really need to reach out and touch a light armored vehicle, this is the rifle with which to do it. These rifles were built in 2006 and cost $4,000, with each round of ammunition priced at $40. No ammunition has been made since 2014.

SSK .950 JDJ
Wt 50.0 kg, SS, Dam 16, Pen 2-2-2, Blk 15, Mag 1i, Rcl 4 (7 without the 8.2 kg muzzle brake), Rng 278

The prototype has the following changes: Wt 23.0 kg, Rcl 5/8.

This is one of those situations where it might actually make more sense in Traveller as a marksman's rifle for powered armor troopers just because of the sheer mass of the rifle, even the prototype.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Although this is all just idle speculation on my part, I think there's a use for the SSK .950 in alternate T2k timelines, say 2030+ due to the potential for exo-skeletons becoming a possible military item as well as the possibility of greater use of armoured robots by the military.
The 12.7mm and 14.5mm anti-material rifles in current use might not be enough if exo-skeletons and robots get the benefit of more advanced types of armour. The obvious step would be to go up to 20mm but the .950 may well be just as suitable.

And there's a high likelihood of its use in Dark Conspiracy!

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

And there's a high likelihood of its use in Dark Conspiracy!

You mean the Storm Gun won't cut it?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

You mean the Storm Gun won't cut it?

As much as I like the idea of the Storm Gun for a big "boom stick", I really hated the image they made for it so I never much used it in any games I ran. I ditched it in favour of things like the 14.5mm anti-materiel rifles. Some time later I read about some of the attempts to make 20-25mm man-portable weapons like the PAW-20 and the Barrett XM109 and I used them instead.

In regards to the image they used, if you're going to draw up something based on the Barrett M82, why bother messing with all the other crap to make it look different and just make a 20mm version of the Barrett? If I was really pushed for an image for a fictional 20mm then I'd rather go with the Panther Assault Cannon from Shadowrun, it has a way better picture!

[Vespers War]

One I just found enough information for after seeing it six months ago, the Winchester-Pugsley Anti-Tank Rifle, patented in 1919. It uses a 1911 pistol grip for both the trigger assembly and the bolt; rotating the pistol grip counter-clockwise and pulling back is how the bolt is drawn back. A 10-round box magazine feeds .50 BMG into the rifle, and the grip is pushed forward and rotated back down to lock the bolt. As Ian mentions, the only known survivor is cracked through the receiver, and I only have information on the barrel length and total length, so the weight is probably not accurate (according to the Cody Museum, it's "stupid heavy").

Winchester-Pugsley Anti-Tank Rifle (12.7x99mm)
Wt 19.76 kg, BA, Dam 8, Pen 2-3-4, Blk 11, Mag 10, Rcl 5, Rng 186

While it wouldn't be much today, it would be effective against most WW1 tanks at some range. Beutepanzer were more common than A7V, and the Mk IV was 2/1/1 for HF/HS/HR and the Mk V 3/2/2. The A7V would be immune to frontal shots, but the 5/2/3 armor would be vulnerable to flank shots.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I have a question for you regarding the Winchester AT rifle, how did you determine the magazine was 10 rounds?
In the video Ian says "apparently five rounds" and he mentioned single stacked but that box looks plenty big to hold more than five rounds. Without the internals for the magazine it's impossibe to see if it was designed for single or double stacked but it also appears wide enough to be double stacked.
However he does mention that the early versions of the cartridge were rimmed and the design was built around that rimmed cartridge so I'm wondering if there's some confusion on his part because of that?

The few websites I checked that had any details all state 10 round but aside from Historical Firearms site, none had any reference sources so I'm also wondering if you got access to better info that what's on the web? From what you wrote it sounds like you made inquiries at the Cody Museum?

Regardless of all that, thanks for bringing another obscure piece of kit to our attention

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I have a question for you regarding the Winchester AT rifle, how did you determine the magazine was 10 rounds?
In the video Ian says "apparently five rounds" and he mentioned single stacked but that box looks plenty big to hold more than five rounds. Without the internals for the magazine it's impossibe to see if it was designed for single or double stacked but it also appears wide enough to be double stacked.
However he does mention that the early versions of the cartridge were rimmed and the design was built around that rimmed cartridge so I'm wondering if there's some confusion on his part because of that?

The few websites I checked that had any details all state 10 round but aside from Historical Firearms site, none had any reference sources so I'm also wondering if you got access to better info that what's on the web? From what you wrote it sounds like you made inquiries at the Cody Museum?

Regardless of all that, thanks for bringing another obscure piece of kit to our attention

No, no better sources. I used Gun Wiki for as much as possible, and the Cody Museum's collections page for the rifle lists the barrel length and overall length, which were the key bits of data I didn't already have. If I was doing something more professional, I would inquire regarding the weight, but I'm happy enough with the ballpark figure that FF&S kicks out to not feel the need to take up museum staff time.

With regards to the ammo, I agree with the general consensus that the magazine looks too large to only hold five rounds, especially for a gravity-feed that doesn't have extensive springs.

[Vespers War]

One more because I'm bored - the Cei-Rigotti automatic rifle of the late 1890s.

Allegedly chambered for 6.5mm Carcano, all the surviving rifles are in 7.65mm Argentine Mauser. Rifles were equipped with 10, 20, or 50 round fixed magazines fed by 5-round stripper clips; the rifle has to be partially disassembled to change the magazine. Its relative lightness would probably make it difficult to control under automatic fire, as indicated by the recoil rating. The gun had some tendency to overheat, as it seized during a test after firing 300 rounds on full automatic.

Cei-Rigotti 7.65mm Automatic Rifle
Wt 4.3 kg, ROF 5, Dam 4, Pen 2-3-Nil, Blk 7, Mag 10c5/20c5/50c5, Rcl 4/10, Rng 73

The "c5" for the Mag entry designates that a 5 round clip can be loaded for each action used to reload the gun.

If there was a 6.5mm Carcano version, it would have the following changes to its statistics:
Dam 3, Pen 2-Nil, Rcl 3/7, Rng 63

Honestly, the Carcano version isn't a half-bad automatic weapon for the early 20th century. The recoil's a bit high for a shoulder-fired weapon and I can see why it wasn't accepted during the era of the Cult of Slow Accurate Long Range Marksmanship, but for trench warfare (either attacking or defending), it would have been extremely useful.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

You mean the Storm Gun won't cut it?

And what about the Splat Gun? (from an issue of Space Gamer, for Traveler) It's an 8-chamber grenade launcher (can't remember what caliber) that fires one chamber at a time -- or all once, in a tight group...

[StainlessSteelCynic]

@ Vespers War.
Here's one that may interest you (assuming you don't already know about it!), the Faucon Fusil Équilibré or in English, the Faucon Balanced Rifle.
https://www.historicalfirearms.info/...tenant-colonel
https://www.all4shooters.com/en/shoo...rifle-designs/

Brief mentions in these articles: -
https://armourersbench.com/tag/francis-bannerman/
https://www.smallarmsreview.com/disp...darticles=1822

And just to pique people's interests, a picture of the beastie in question...

[Vespers War]

I hadn't seen the Faucon before, so thanks for posting it. Assuming it is using a 6.5mm round, then the statistics are:

Wt 5.5 kg, SA, Dam 3, Pen 2-Nil, Blk 7, Mag 6(c)6, SS 4, Rng 93.

According to the 1910/11 patent (filed 1910, issued 1911), the barrel was 120 calibers in length (my French is just good enough to glean that), so the bullet diameter matters for calculating the barrel length.

Unsurprisingly for an early bullpup, it had issues with the trigger system when tested after the war.

For logistical reasons, this was never going to win out over an RSC using 8mm Lebel. An RSC 1918 was .7 kilos lighter and had the same range, bulk, and recoil, with a more powerful cartridge out of a shorter barrel and similar overall length, and only 1 less round per clip. If the Faucon could get at least two out of the three of lighter weight, a 10-round capacity, and using 8mm Lebel, it might have had some chance of adoption if it was also made mechanically reliable.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

For logistical reasons, this was never going to win out over an RSC using 8mm Lebel. An RSC 1918 was .7 kilos lighter and had the same range, bulk, and recoil, with a more powerful cartridge out of a shorter barrel and similar overall length, and only 1 less round per clip. If the Faucon could get at least two out of the three of lighter weight, a 10-round capacity, and using 8mm Lebel, it might have had some chance of adoption if it was also made mechanically reliable.

The 8mm Lebel was an obsolete cartridge based on the old 11mm Gras black powder cartridge. It was rimmed with a severe taper, making it a poor choice for self-loading weapons (look at the magazine of the Chauchat).

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by copeab

The 8mm Lebel was an obsolete cartridge based on the old 11mm Gras black powder cartridge. It was rimmed with a severe taper, making it a poor choice for self-loading weapons (look at the magazine of the Chauchat).

8mm Lebel didn't start being replaced until 1936, and was only slightly more obsolete than .303 British (which was also a rimmed cartridge converted from black powder to smokeless that didn't work well in self-loading actions). The taper wasn't an issue if ammunition capacities were kept reasonable (by contemporary standards, not modern ones). The RSC 1918 used the same Mle 16 5-round en bloc clip as late bolt-action Berthier rifles. During the Occupation, they were used by Vichy and Volksturm troops under the name Selbstlade-Gewehr 310(f).

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

8mm Lebel didn't start being replaced until 1936, and was only slightly more obsolete than .303 British (which was also a rimmed cartridge converted from black powder to smokeless that didn't work well in self-loading actions).

The French started replacing 8mm Lebel in machine guns in the mid 1920's with a new 7.5mm round that worked much better in autoloading weapons.

The Bren had a larger magazine than the Chauchat but wasn't nearly as curved, a clear indication the .303 wasn't nearly as obsolete as the 8mm.

I know the flaws of the cartridge (and the Lebel rifle) weren't the fault of the French designers; they were given an incredibly short amount of time to come up with a working rifle (as it was feared that if development took too long, France would quickly lose it's edge of smokeless powder). It only gained them a few years, as in 1889 the superior Mauser rifle was released.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think the British did view the .303 as obsolete but with the size of the British Empire at the time, they probably considered it far too expensive to change plus there was still the concept of single, well-aimed shots and the ability of most British soldiers to lay down a decent amount of fire from their SMLEs, (plus it was quite robust, able to take a lot of abuse, so why change something that works and works well)
I think they believed the financial cost probably wasn't worth the effort when they felt there wasn't any imminent need to change.

[Vespers War]

And now for something completely different - a vehicle, rather than a weapon.

Before the Great War and before Henry Ford pinched every penny he could on the cost of the Model T, automobiles were expensive things. A number of inventors, hobbyists, and industrialists had the idea of combining a motorcycle engine with a light (and cheap) chassis and frame to create a contraption known as a cyclecar. One of these was the 1914 O-We-Go, manufactured (appropriately enough) in Owego, New York, and sold for $385. With a top speed around 50 miles per hour, a 4 gallon tank of gasoline, and a range of roughly 45 miles per gallon, it was a potentially useful cheap vehicle. Estimated production during the company's one year of existence is 300 vehicles. One example survives today in a museum.

O-We-Go Cyclecar
10 hp V-2 engine
Fuel Type G
Load 150 kg, Veh Wt 276 kg, Crew 1+1, Mnt 1, Night Vision None, Radiological Open

Tr Mov 164/17, Com Mov 38/4, Fuel Cap 15, Fuel Cons 8, Config Stnd, Susp W(1), HF0, HS0, HR0

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

Before the Great War and before Henry Ford pinched every penny he could on the cost of the Model T, automobiles were expensive things. A number of inventors, hobbyists, and industrialists had the idea of combining a motorcycle engine with a light (and cheap) chassis and frame to create a contraption known as a cyclecar.

Oh good god, I'm not even going to bother with that one...

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Oh good god, I'm not even going to bother with that one...

It sort of made sense at the time, since some jurisdictions taxed vehicles based on horsepower. Illinois and Georgia did so in the US (and IIRC Missouri still does), and most of Europe had some sort of horsepower-based tax, so a small car with a very low-powered engine was economical. It also drove oddities in engine design, because the calculated horsepower was based on bore size, but stroke length didn't matter. That incentivized small-bore, long-stroke engines, which tend to run at low RPM and have high torque and low power for their displacement.

A fair number of early British cars will have their taxable horsepower and actual horsepower in their name - the Talbot 14/45 was taxed at 14 horsepower, but the engine delivered 45 horsepower, while Alvis had a 12/50 that did well in racing and MG developed the long-stroke engine all the way to an 18/80. If the Model T had had a similar name, it would have been a Ford 22/20, equaled in actual power by the lower-taxed Triumph 10/20.

Most cyclecar manufacturers lasted only a handful of years (something true of a lot of Brass Era car makers), but there were a few marques that stuck around either on their own or by being acquired, such as Frazer Nash, AC Cars Ltd, and Scripps-Booth (which was acquired by Chevrolet early in that marque's history).

[cawest]

How about the F-18L I cut his from a wiki page

From a strict technical point of view the F-18L (the Northrop version) was the better aircraft for the NFA project, with performance roughly equal to the F-16, Sparrow capability, and the twin-engine design that the Canadian Forces favored. Compared to the F/A-18A (the McDonnel-Douglas version), its lower weight and resulting better range would also be very useful in the air defence role over Canada. The F-18L was also offered with a lucrative industrial program; Northrop agreed to move major portions of the F-18L project to Canada