|
|
|
#1
02-03-2010, 12:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Weapon choice for women.
I know many gaming system rules treat men and women as equivalent, but I am trying to come up with the most logical pistol, smg and assault rifle for an above average strength but average build woman. I am guessing recoil and grip size would be the biggest concerns.
This is really more for my morrow project, but this forum gets more traction and it is probably applicable. Even though I have logistical considerations I would rather not have them effect any comments here as I may start with a clean slate on weapons. Last edited by kato13; 02-03-2010 at 12:42 PM. 
|
|
#2
02-03-2010, 02:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
This really comes down to familiarity and mass. Fewer women than men are aught how to properly use a firearm, so don't hold it correctly. This increases effective recoil. Given sufficient training, a given weapon won't recoil worse for a 150-lb woman than a 150-lb man.
|
|
#3
02-03-2010, 03:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
 I am SOOOO not going to reply to this thread...lololol.
__________________
************************************* Each day I encounter stupid people I keep wondering... is today when I get my first assault charge??
|
|
#4
02-03-2010, 04:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
With regard to pistols, I heard somewhere that a larger, heavier weapon is usually better for women than light "plinking" pistols due to the greater mass - the weapon absorbs more of the recoil than a small frame.
Of course they still need to be able to wrap their hands around it in the first place....
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem
|
|
#5
02-03-2010, 06:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 )
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
|
|
#6
02-03-2010, 06:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well....my sister did NOT like my M1911A1, but she kicks but with my little .380 It's an old Spanish made Llama, built jus like a scaled down M1911.
__________________
Just because I'm on the side of angels doesn't mean I am one.
|
|
#7
02-03-2010, 06:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm honestly don't think I'm being sexist I'm being realistic. Women are smaller and less strong than men on average. That is simple biology. If you choose common armaments to accommodate the Midpoint of woman's strengths you will be well below the midpoint of men's superior strength. That seems like a waste to me.
Women are not on average going to be able to handle a M1911 as well as the average man can. I think that was a supplemental reason that the the M9 was adopted by NATO. I am also worrying that the M468 might be too powerful for an "average" woman. Last edited by kato13; 02-03-2010 at 07:14 PM.
|
|
#8
02-03-2010, 07:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The only time I can remember a woman expressing preference in weaponry, was a fellow ROTC cadet, who told me she liked carrying the M60 on exercises. In no way, was I going to argue with her!
That will probably skew your poll results....
__________________
My Twilight claim to fame: I ran "Allegheny Uprising" at Allegheny College, spring of 1988.
|
|
#9
02-03-2010, 07:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#10
02-03-2010, 08:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Source http://www.springerlink.com/content/jr2084844337kk82/
|
|
#11
02-03-2010, 09:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
ARGH! Statistics!
Run away, run away!
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem
|
|
#12
02-03-2010, 09:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, when the U.S. adopted the M9 9mm women were qualifying more often and higher than they had previously with the 1911. In part it was due to the recoil difference. Another part was not the mass of the weapon because the M9 is lighter with an allow frame, the .45 all steal, but it was the weapons design and the grips, the M9 was small so the smaller shooters most women could get a better grip, which means better control which means better accuracy. <I put the grips with finger grooves on my .45s and 9mms and my scores went up 10+%>
And yes the lighter recoil added to greater controlability as well. One could go with lighter calibers which is the same as a heavier weapon with the normal calibers too. Heavier mass for the force of the recoil to operate against theory. NOW, my opinion, A revolver in .38 for women, the weapons are compact enough, but heavier so they take alot of the recoil. And they are standard calibers. Otherwise I would say a .380 which is a none standard caliber on the battlefield. Another weapon which has come into its own is the Sig P228 which is now the M8 I think for the military, a lighter caliber with a smaller grip. Rifle, the 16 with its light caliber, ligher weight and the gas system do much. Its been eons since I fired a M4/CAR-15 and it was never my primary weapon, but those may be the thing as well, although on full auto all bets are off. Other weapons, the Glock 22 in .40 would be the greatest I would suggest. Shotguns, 16 gauge or the 20 gauge either an autoloader or a pump to absorb the recoil. Those are some of the weapons, I do not recomend the heavy weapons like belt feds due to their weight, the masses and weight of their ammo and the need to haul ass to put them in position and displace to do it over and over again. Over day and weeks of field conditions this will damn near kill a football lineman a woman will do it initialy but she will break sooner from the force and load.
__________________
"God bless America, the land of the free, but only so long as it remains the home of the brave."
|
|
#13
02-03-2010, 09:40 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Game-wise all of the female NPCs in the PCs' group in my campaign used 9mm pistols but one carried a G3 (she was a pretty solid lass though and very strong and aggresive for a girl). Major Po's signaller/girlfriend (Sgt Li-Li Fang) was a tiny little Chinese-American woman and she carried an M16A2 that looked huge in her hands. I can't imagine her carrying anything bigger, she barely had enough mass to handle the recoil of that weapon. I liked playing Fang as an NPC, she had a tendancy to emit long, shrill screams during firefights if she was scared but it didn't prevent her from accurately shooting. She saved Po's butt on a couple of occassions, including once when they were attacked while "in flagrante delicto" Interesting article you linked to by the way Kato.
__________________
 "It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
|
|
#15
02-03-2010, 10:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#16
02-03-2010, 10:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem
|
|
#17
02-03-2010, 10:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It depends on the women - not just physique, but mindset and training. Much like male shooters, come to think of it.
Now, having said that, the common physiological issues I've seen in an admittedly small sampling of female shooters are lower overall upper body strength, lower grip and forearm strength, and smaller hands. The last is arguably the most critical for handgun use because you can't train a shooter's fingers to be longer, so grip circumference and the distance between the trigger face and the backstrap become criteria in weapon selection. The placement of a decocker or manual safety, if present, is a secondary aspect of the same issue. The near-universal solution for this, at least in the T2k timeline, is likely to be the Browning Hi-Power (original 9mm, not .40 S&W - the heavier recoil spring makes the slide significantly harder to rack). I am certain there are female shooters out there who do not like the ergonomics of the BHP but I have yet to hear reports of them and will call them filthy heretics if they do speak up. If you're in the 2013 timeline, based in North America, and desirous of polymer, the S&W M&P9 with the small backstrap insert is an excellent option. For SMGs, ergonomics of specific models are the only real question. You're looking at something with significantly lower recoil impulse than a handgun in the same caliber, with more points of contact (more stability) and less weight than an assault rifle. As far as rifles, I'm pretty sure the optimum solution is a scoped Mosin-Nagant. - C.
__________________
Clayton A. Oliver • Occasional RPG Freelancer Since 1996 Author of The Pacific Northwest, coauthor of Tara Romaneasca, creator of several other free Twilight: 2000 and Twilight: 2013 resources, and curator of an intermittent gaming blog. It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't. - Josh Olson
|
|
#18
02-03-2010, 11:15 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Women had been used as snipers and performed very well (often better than men). They were used as machinegun crews (gone with the weapon weight problem) and they were excellent, keeping firing while men crew were already gone running like rabits. About weight, we have been talking of soldiers child and if 12 years old kids can hold AK-47s, a woman can (not the lightest of all). Actually, the only type of weapon I would find to be the least adapted could be pump-action rifles (and still I'm not sure). Women are currently used as soldiers in many areas and the most striking exemple remains that of Polisario. All of what I'm saying comes from previous experiences in places were the situation has been that of a total war. As long as men are not in short supply, we tend to make women stay at home. Then, in some cultures (such as Germany), bringing women to the field is unthinkable even during the worse of times. Of course, all of this doesn't work for our too common western barby type. Not really a problem, they would have been killed, vaporized or raped...
|
|
#19
02-03-2010, 11:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I would think the Beretta 92/M92 would be a better solution for female shooters in the T2k timeline. The Hi-Power has a grip that's quite wide in comparison and a number of female military and police personnel in Australia had some problems with it.
|
|
#20
02-03-2010, 11:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Granted, they would be some nasty pointy-out breasts but... Maybe it's just me 
|
|
#21
02-03-2010, 11:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#22
02-04-2010, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mo;
The Sovs didn't toss their machineguns over their shoulder and hump the bastards along with their ammo. The soviets had their machineguns on carts, and they had horse drawn wagons to carry their stuff too. I am talking about small unit tactics carrying 120 pounds of equipment for weeks on end living on little water and little food and little rest over rough terrain. And as for the whole "women were the best snipers" routine. How much of it was propoganda? And where were they fighting? Call me bias, but Marine snipers are the standard to which all others are put to the test in my book. If one is operating close to their own lines then the task is VERY EASY! It is little different than being a good marksman. To be a sniper again my view takes ALOT of excellent field craft. Shooting, is not the only thing a sniper does. But infiltration, locating and getting to a good place to take your shot, having an escape plan and being able to make it is another consideration, and waiting. Lots and lots and lots of waiting is also needed. Waiting to study your target, the area around your target and deciding on what the target is going to be and when to engage it. I would say the skills needed for a good sniper are: Intelligence Endurance Nerve <Coolness> Observation or Recon skill Stealth to a lesser extent Feildcraft as I said Combat Rifleman Forward Observation <this is needed ALOT to determine your shot to target as well as cover and other obstacles> Anyhow, in my view those are the T2K skills one would need to be a sniper. And operating in an urban enviroment is different than in field conditions, one can operate in the shadows and not require very much gear to sustain ones self but rather just a rifle, scope and a couple spare rounds and they move out. In the field or T2K conditions well you are also rucking a pack with all the things you own on your back. But really, you are talking about female troops operating from the relative luxury of operating out of their own lines with all the support it provides which is far far different.
__________________
"God bless America, the land of the free, but only so long as it remains the home of the brave."
|
|
#23
02-04-2010, 12:26 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#24
02-04-2010, 12:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
|
|
#25
02-04-2010, 12:29 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#26
02-04-2010, 01:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 Found it -- One of the Matt Helm movies, The Ambushers.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com Last edited by pmulcahy11b; 02-04-2010 at 03:41 AM. Reason: Misspelling
|
|
#27
02-04-2010, 02:50 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
That post will take time and kato, feel free to put it somewhere else because it might not be entirely relevant to this thread. I realize that I'm opposing many on women issues (and I agree with myself on it
) but I'm not sure it brings us very far. Moreover, I agree with some of what the opposing camp is saying. As a result, I write this large post on women.First, I consider T2K to be more similiar to WW1, WW2, Polisario and Israel's wars than to foreign wars (Afghanistan, Angola, Iraq, Korea or Vietnam). For the foreigtn ones, no matter how hard they are, you can pull out whenever you want and women at war is reduced to a gender problem. Israel's wars and Polisario can be considered local wars but neither for Israel nor for the Polisario as both are fighting for their very existence. If you go to WW1 and WW2, you simply have to fight it to the end or surrender. In Israel, women had been involved in war and are accepted in the army. Nevertheless, they usually fill the ranks of second line units and artillery. It makes sense. In Western Sahara, all women were trained in fighting and used for rear guards. Therefore, it freed the men for offensive actions and it makes sense too when 500.000 people are fighting (and winning over) an army like that of Morocco. I you go to WW1, women were only used for health care. It makes sense given the time period. However, while men were in the trenches, women took over the entire economy, in the field and in factories. Anyone can imagine what a WW1 factory was looking like (no fancy carrying divices to help you out). In addition, in the fields and in these factories they were working 12-14 hours a day, often 7 days a week. As one of my friend says women won WW1 (the man is 78 years old). In WW2 the situation had changed again. In most countries, women were used not only in the health department but also in all types of technical departments (they had gained more profeciencies). In the Soviet Union, women were fighting as tank crewers, heavy weapon crewers (MG and HMG), anti-air artillery (at Leningrad, more than half of the anti-air batteries were crewed by women), pilots (including fighter pilots), truck drivers and snipers. In every occupied country they were highly involved in resistance movement and fighting (sadly, the last attack in Iraq, 2 days ago, was successfully carried out by a woman: 150+ casualties). In the resistance movements they were used as courrier, ammunition carriers, front line fighters and... to put up bombs... In the meantime, women were back in the factories. Many among us consider irrealistic to have women carrying a belt-fed MG in combat but you are forgetting about these times. As men were carrying them around only during the offensive times, women were already carrying them 12 hours a day, 7 days a week simply to make them. Can all women carry heavy weapons and are they all fit for fighting? Of course no but nor are the men. Are today's women as strong as then? Probably not in the West but those who can't adapt will be dead by 2000. Are women doing hard task today? Everywhere. Women in Africa are walking miles carrying liters of water while men do what they do best: fight, play and sleep (and while you go at work every morning, you think that you are civilized ). Equally true for Asia, Latin America, Part of Europe and Russia. Of course one, will say that women are better for housekeeping. Yeah!! The only reason men live in messy places is that it is too tiring to clean them.Will you have women in the front line? With the situation in T2K no doubt. Would they be better used in second line duties? I would say yes, especially if you need to freed more men for your infantry. As several among us said, men are often better suited for close combat. For the specific case of T2K I would also expect to see less women (18-45) around than men. Again, they would have been back in the factories and many would have been vaporized with them. Would men have a tendancy to leave them behind, I would think so. Would they be trained to use weapons? Of course unless you are the most stupid guy on the planet. About the idea that propaganda could have made up the bravery of women, Kato, you have it the wrong way. Propaganda did exactly the opposite: less women were made heroes of USSR, only six were recognized as heroes of the French resistance (outrageous!!). None was recognized for their war efforts (this didn't change over time). As soon as the war ended the Soviet Army reverted to its old sexist habits (except this time for propoganda). In the 15th century they were burnt as sorceress, in the 1920's they were forced back to housekeeping as it was the case in the 1950's. About their bravery, it shouldn't be put in doubt and I'm convinced that women don't give up when men do. Nothing to do with courage but it would probably be better explained by motivation. While men and women are both fighting for countries or families, women know better what they will loose (In most cases, they spend more time with the kids). That might also be the reason why they could be better suited for rear guard. About their hability to carry weapons in game terms, Kato you must be sexist (Forget about f... political correctness). The best option could be to check what the avarage women built is, and lower the stats accordingly. Then, you could design a system that will take into account physically stronger women. By the way, this is valid for men too. I had a friend who could throw a 6kg weight at more than 15 meters with ease (and no training) but he was one out of about 500 men in the college. My conclusion, Kato, be sexist and you'll have women capable of carrying belt-fed machineguns and men unable to lift properly an AK-47. The difference will reside in the proportion of both. One interesting point: women have never been excluded from the Foreign Legion but none has ever passed the selections and ever been accepted. IMO having the same stats for men/women is sexist, having all women weaker than men is sexist too but having differences could reflect reality. As a GM, I often give more importance to the background. If one players makes up a good story where his/her female athlete entered the military, I have no problems with it. However, if she has lifted weight her all life, she may be able to carry a mortar on her shoulder but can't look like a bimbo (as simple as that). You have more bimbos around. May be it could be good to have a difference at the starting point (depending on the method you use), having your players accepting it would be more difficult. Then, your answer should be given by your players background. Again players have a tendency to roll superior characters. Nice but as a GM, I always check and often modify this. Possibilities are endless and, then, you don't have to ask what weapon is better suited. Last edited by Mohoender; 02-04-2010 at 02:56 AM.
|
|
#28
02-04-2010, 03:49 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
female fighters
I have personal experience in working with female soldiers and officers and have to say that I pretty much agree with MO on this one .The girls in our platoon handled the G3s and MP-5s we had on average as well as the guys .Thats not to say that they wouldnt have preferred a lighter gun with less of kick like something in the 556 family .
Where they equal as soldiers ? Does recoil and gun weight have anything to say when it comes to girls ? Yes and no . Some were better grunts than some of the guys due to both mental and physical ability .Alot of guys were better -there were more of them ,and guys just get stronger on average . Of course - being bigger and stronger is often better when handling a weigthy gun -that goes for guys as well as girls.If you have to carry it for miles and miles it pays to be stronger. Bu training and mindset are the most important factors imho. If motivation and training is in place - pretty much any weapon commonly in use like assault rifles or SMGs or "battle rifles". If untrained and really just picking up the gun because she has to - something with a low recoil and easy handling is essential -as it would be to a guy in her situation . I am thinking a .22 pistol ( can be a nasty package with the right rounds ) or a handgun caliber carbine like the 9mm Beretta or similar . Easy to operate -ergonomics that bring barrel in line with eye and a recoil that doesnt scare them into closing their eyes when pulling off one. all imho -of course . Quote:
|
|
#29
02-04-2010, 04:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
In my first unit I was the machinegunner and carried an M60. I was also the smallest (65kgs) in the 9 man section (average weight somewhere around 80-85kgs). The M60 was used in a similar manner as LSW's such as the RPK and M249 are today - basically just another rifleman who happened to be able to put down a lot more fire.
As No1 gunner I was supposed to have an assistant to carry additional ammo, spare barrel, cleaning kit, etc. Unfortunately almost every No2 I ever had was near useless, some to the point where I wouldn't even trust them with spare ammo. I found being the gunner tough at times, but on the whole, no harder than being a standard rifleman. At the time I would say I was of a similar build as many women would be after a few months of physical effort. With the machinegun weighing about 10.5 kgs, 600 rnds about another 18kgs, plus all the other odds and ends a foot mobile infantryman carried and fought with....
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem
|
|
#30
02-04-2010, 04:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by copeab; 02-04-2010 at 09:04 AM.
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
