The loss of modern infantry weapons

[Targan]

Originally Posted by jester

As for grenades, fulminate of mercury <like in caps> can be the detonator, make the "grenades" into dart like shapes with a weighted end where your "cap" igniter is thus setting the bomb off.

I like this. It would be easy to attach some kind of tail to a grenade to make the end with the impact fuze hit the ground first.

Originally Posted by jester

Another option, regular grenades in a jar or even a can with the top cut off, pull the pins, let the jar or can hold the lever down. When the thing flies it will come loose and well you will have a good number of airburst explosions <more effective than impact for troops> or when they hit the ground the jar breacks, letting the lever fly or is tossed from the can again letting the spoon fly, end result lots of explosions.

They use that very method in Airlords of the Ozarks. It is a clever idea.

Edit: Legbreaker already pointed out the Airlords of the Ozards connection.

[jester]

Or a simple cast iron two piece body that screws together, that looks like a "teardrop" shape thus, the heavy explosive end will always hit first and blow.

The fat or bottom end of the teardrop will have a hole about 1 inch in the bottom, a pressure plate will also be there on the outside covering a large portion of the bottom so when it hits the plate slams the fulminate of mercury inside igniting a quick or instant fuse.

So basicsly the bomb will look like a inverted icecream cone with a nub on the end, or even an icecreamcone with a cherry on top, the cherry is the detonator, the scoop of icecream the explosive and the cone the body.

You could potentialy have a dual charge weapon with these too.

A charge in the icecream which propels the cone into the air where a quick fuse causes it to explode a half second after the ball side explodes.

Another item, a cheap tincan or sheet metal device with an explosion inside of course and then filled with a combination of metal fragments and manuer to cause greater casualties.

Another item, clay pots with metal built in them and filled with explosives, the clay shatters and sends the clay shards and metal fragments fliying.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by jester

Or a simple cast iron two piece body that screws together, that looks like a "teardrop" shape thus, the heavy explosive end will always hit first and blow.

The fat or bottom end of the teardrop will have a hole about 1 inch in the bottom, a pressure plate will also be there on the outside covering a large portion of the bottom so when it hits the plate slams the fulminate of mercury inside igniting a quick or instant fuse.

So basicsly the bomb will look like a inverted icecream cone with a nub on the end, or even an icecreamcone with a cherry on top, the cherry is the detonator, the scoop of icecream the explosive and the cone the body.

You could potentialy have a dual charge weapon with these too.

Excellent ideas. And that cone shape is also what you need if you arre making shaped charges. Simple anti-armor weapon anyone? Love it.

[neuk]

I think making weapons would be easy for a well orginised community. The task is a skilled metal workers job. You would need the lathes, drill presses etc. Then you would need to power them, that is already covered by the rules. You would have to people producing fuel to power generators, or, the tools directly by an overhead belt drive using a car on blocks and the belt attached to the drive wheels, the engine would idle and the belts would turn. The rest is just gearing the belts (look at an old workshop from 1850-1920's), or a water wheel which is the easier method for reliable regular power. The rest would be having a patern to work from, or the broken item. What becomes hard for the community is the ammount you would produce. 'I want an M16, OK come back in a month.' The stocks you could produce from colapsable designs. Front grips could be shortened or produced like the old thompson submachine gun front pistol grip. You could also go down the recycle way. Barrels for the guns would be just about impossable to make to any high standard, it is not a normal steel (something about the carbon content), so I bars would not work. Unless you used a smooth bore design.

[Legbreaker]

What about plans? It's awfully hard to produce something as technical as an M16 without them.
Far better to stick with simpler designs with greater tolerances (such as the Sten or basic bolt action weapons) in the early years and rely on prewar supplies of the more advanced and complex systems such as belt fed machineguns, assault rifles and so on. Chances are ammunition isn't going to be all that available for the more complex weapons anyway...

[Targan]

What Leg said.

[kalos72]

Are .223 and .308 the same rounds are 5.56 and 7.62Nato rounds, just the civilian versions? If so I can see the logic in making bolt action rifles to those calibers for a bit of standardization at least.

[Legbreaker]

Generally yes.

[neuk]

This is more a case of making a gun, the mechanics is the same regardless of the weapon. If it is a case of not having the skill pool, then you would be taking a barrel of an existing but broken weapon. Then manufacturing a hammer system to fire it. These weapons would be single shot. But not as poor as a Zip gun.

There is little difference between the complexities of a bolt action and say a AK47 (I have left out the M16 because I agree it is a complex weapon) Having seen and stripped AKM’s they are SO simple, and used to ‘play’ with SMLE 7.62 Nato rifles (India conversion from British .303).

If you have the original item I believe any competent person with a set of decent hand tools could over time manufacture any item, using the original as your plan or pattern. History proves this time and time again, will it be as good as the original? No! Will it work most of the time yes, will it jam more often, not except new parts, brake at the worse time, of course. But that can be great fun as the GM to give the players kit that is dodgy at best.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by kalos72

Are .223 and .308 the same rounds are 5.56 and 7.62Nato rounds, just the civilian versions? If so I can see the logic in making bolt action rifles to those calibers for a bit of standardization at least.

The general differences between the civilian and military versions are the propellant charge and the thickness of the case walls. Military ammunition generally is more powerful than its civilian counterpart due to the composition and amount of its propellant, and most civilian rifles are not actually stressed to fire it without causing damage to the rifle in the long term.

And of course, I will stress that this is a generalization, and like all else, is not always true.

[Legbreaker]

Back in the early 90's when we used to use the local civilian range for our L1A1's, it was fairly common to trade the expended issued brass with the local gunclub. The .308 brass they had wasn't as good for reloading as the 7.62N.