Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

TrollPie wrote:So, obviously, bolters are rare. They're hard to produce, hazardous to use and generally impractical (high recoil, heavy, unnecassary power).
But then heavy bolters, which are even bigger, more powerful and even harder to produce are readily available to pretty much any tank in the Imperium. Literally, any vehicle except a Rhino. Why?

Bolters are not rare. They're just harder to make, harder to supply ammo for and harder to maintain than a Lasgun; hence why they are comparatively uncommon.

But you will find that Bolters are issued to specialists that can be trusted with them.

because they are BFGs (Big Fething Guns) the imperium is obsessed with disproportionately large weapons.

I remember reading that heay bolters were actually simpler to manufacture and maintain than the standard ones. It's like the difference between building a powerful gaming pc and trying to stuff the same amount of electronic power into a laptop or a handheld.

I think the most logical reply to the OP is simply logistics.

Bolters are not denied to guardsmen because they are hard to produce, they are denied because they require maintenance and ammuniton, where lasguns barely do. As any device with lots of moving parts, boltguns often jam etc, which means extra training and time for each guard to learn to clean his weapon and unjam it in case of an emergency. This is much like modern armies, and it takes quite a bit of time. Even more importantly bolt ammunition is expensive and heavy.

Vehicles don't have that problem, they already have to be routenely maintained by specialists, and they can carry lots of ammo. Boltgun technology is ideal for ant personnel use, so they use heavy boltguns.

There is nothing mystical or special about boltguns, or about guardsmen not having them. It's just cheaper to skip the training and resources required to equip people with them, when the lasgun can kill most things almost as effectively AND charge in the sun. Hell, I say the lasguns are actually superior weapons in long engagements, which IG typically finds themselves on. Denying your enemy ammunition and supply is asymmetric warfare 101 after all. If the enemy has practically infinite ammunition for their line troops, it makes a huge difference.

the color purple wrote:I remember reading that heay bolters were actually simpler to manufacture and maintain than the standard ones. It's like the difference between building a powerful gaming pc and trying to stuff the same amount of electronic power into a laptop or a handheld.

more aproprietly it would be impossible to make a handeld minigun of the same power, so the bigger it is, the easier it is to build

Handheld minigun is mostly impossible due to recoil, you'd just break yourself.

You'd have to make it like a .22 cal, not only to reduce the recoil to manageable levels, but to be able to carry an ammunition payload large enough to make use of the weapon's rate of fire.

The Calico M950, though not multi-barreled, has an interesting magazine build that might permit such a thing to exist. These same weapons become absolutely hell-on-wheels when certain, uh, aftermarket modifications are done.

I think the top-load P90 system could also be adapted, although it would probably need a talented gun design crew to manage it.

SSsilverskullSS wrote:

the color purple wrote:I remember reading that heay bolters were actually simpler to manufacture and maintain than the standard ones. It's like the difference between building a powerful gaming pc and trying to stuff the same amount of electronic power into a laptop or a handheld.

more aproprietly it would be impossible to make a handeld minigun of the same power, so the bigger it is, the easier it is to build

If you want a minigun use an assault cannon.

Leigen_Zero wrote:As for bolter ammo, I don't think it would be that heavy - the ammunition doesn't look very big (judging by official pictures, a bolt round is ~2x5cm) - but the weapon itself looks like it'd weigh a dozen kilos at least, which is much more than any modern assault rifle does. And of course it all adds up, considering that a Guardsman would still have to carry other gear as well...
I also imagine Guardsmen marching a lot more than the more mobile Marines/Sisters, so heavy weight would seriously hamper their efficiency and slowly steal away their strength!

Have you been in the military? A full combat load of 5.56 rounds (for an M4 / M16) is heavy. (This is in addition to all of your other gear, to include water which is heavy too) That is .223 caliber or 1/4" (roughly) diameter. Boltgun ammo is .75 caliber, meaning the rounds are 3/4" in diameter. This is a HUGE bullet. It is literally 3 times the width of today's bullet (twice the size if you're former Warsaw Pact and like to run around with AK74s and what not). And, with the way characters fire willy nilly in the fluff, EVERYONE would be out of ammo in the first 12 seconds of combat.

A heavy bolter is 1.00 caliber or 1" in diameter. To put things in perspective, todays machine guns are 7.62 (roughly 30 caliber) and the ma deuce at .50 cal. Have you ever held a .50 caliber round? It is big, fat, and thick. Now, imagine carrying 400 of those. This is why they are belt fed and mounted on vehicles.

Now, back to the original topic, bolters are not issued as common weapons because the logistics of carrying and supplying that kind of ammunition would be unfeasible. Standard combat load is around 400 rounds (in today's terms). Now, triple it in size and multiply by the kabillions of PDF and IG around the universe. It is much simpler to give them recyclable las clips.

Lastly, firing a .75 caliber round would NOT break your arm.... ever. The physics required to generate the necessary kickback from a round of that size would require the bullet to be travelling at extremely high speeds. But, while it would not break your arm, this would be a wild weapon to control on full automatic. (However, this may be controllable as well. Please look at the AA-12 of today. A fully automatic 12 gauge shotgun with zero recoil. If we can do it today, I am sure it is possible in the far flung future of aliens and space travel).

Green is Best! wrote:Have you been in the military?

I have, and my G36 fired the same rounds as your M4/M16 so I know the weight of its ammunition first-hand.
Perhaps "it's not heavy" was a poor choice of words, but the idea that a Guardsman would be overwhelmed by the weight of just "one or two magazines" is still somewhat ridiculous (I doubt it'll be heavier than an entire box of M60 or M249 ammo). Keep in mind that a Commissar's bolt pistol uses identical ammunition, and boltguns are (afaik) still an IG wargear upgrade.

Green is Best! wrote:It is big, fat, and thick. Now, imagine carrying 400 of those. This is why they are belt fed and mounted on vehicles.

Whilst I agree on the general principle on heavy bolters generally being too heavy for people, there's still exceptional individuals like the Last Chancers character Bull who are able to lug one around. In this instance, 40k simply trumps realism, I guess. And in the end, a heavy weapons team still is just two people carrying everything - if two shmocks are supposed to carry a heavy bolter, a tripod and 400 rounds of ammunition then I can believe an obscenely muscular hero carrying just the heavy bolter, no tripod and, say, 100 or 200 rounds of ammunition on his own. Rule of cool.

I pretty much agree with your comment regarding the AA-12, though. For what it's worth, the Soviet Union already used .90 caliber guns (->KS-23), and I doubt those were as advanced.

Lynata wrote: but the idea that a Guardsman would be overwhelmed by the weight of just "one or two magazines" is still somewhat ridiculous (I doubt it'll be heavier than an entire box of M60 or M249 ammo). Keep in mind that a Commissar's bolt pistol uses identical ammunition, and boltguns are (afaik) still an IG wargear upgrade.

Yes, but who would go into combat with only two magazines? One in your rifle. At least six more on your person. Then toss in water, armor, any other equipment, and it all adds up.

Plus, how big would these magazines have to be? They are basically holding 12 gauge shotgun shells. They would be huge and still only hold like 10 rounds.

And, as far as the heavy bolter is concerned, I once carried an entire .50 cal (barrel removed and strapped to my ruck) with the tripod on a gun sling. I carried this on a 12 mile road march. This was to prove a point (and to win a bet). No ammo. Not much else but an MRE and a poncho liner (iirc). It completely kicked my butt (and I am a 6'3" 260 lb - not fat... then - guy). Ammunition would have been impossible. A heavy bolter would be twice the barrel size of a .50 cal. So, definitely some creative license going on here with the ICs in the fiction.

Night's Blood wrote:Why do most modern tanks have a heavy machine gun?

Protection against infantry and light vehicles.

Gotta love that .50 cal!!!

Magtherion_Soulsaver wrote:

Night's Blood wrote:Why do most modern tanks have a heavy machine gun?

Protection against infantry and light vehicles.

Gotta love that .50 cal!!!

M2 for the win. When I was in Korea, we had 4 HMMWVs. Two with .50 cals and two with MK-19 automatic grenade launchers. To this day, I am still not sure which one I like better.

Green is Best! wrote:

Magtherion_Soulsaver wrote:

Night's Blood wrote:Why do most modern tanks have a heavy machine gun?

Protection against infantry and light vehicles.

Gotta love that .50 cal!!!

M2 for the win. When I was in Korea, we had 4 HMMWVs. Two with .50 cals and two with MK-19 automatic grenade launchers. To this day, I am still not sure which one I like better.

M2's on MRAPS for me, and I agree, the only bad thing is the MK19 isn't as "people friendly"

Going back to the OP... I think a different way to think of it is that given the ubiquity of heavy bolters in the Imperial Guard and how many Imperial Guard are in the galaxy it would be fair to say there are more heavy bolters in the galaxy than standard bolters. Their are a million Space Marines... lets say for everyone of them they have 3 bolters (lots of spares)... thats 3 million bolters... SoB their are maybe 300,000 of them and assuming a similar volume of spares... we're still looking at only 4 million bolters. That is in contrast to the Imperial Guard, where underestimating a single company has 10 heavy bolters... meaning you only need 400,000 companies of guardsmen across the galaxy to have more heavy bolters than bolters... and that doesn't count the heavy bolters the SoB or Astartes have in their armories. Given the 71% of Cadia's population of 850,000,000 is Imperial Guard you have enough guardsmen for ~2,000,000 three hundred man companies and that doesn't even consider armored companies.

Green is Best! wrote:
Have you been in the military? A full combat load of 5.56 rounds (for an M4 / M16) is heavy. (This is in addition to all of your other gear, to include water which is heavy too) That is .223 caliber or 1/4" (roughly) diameter. Boltgun ammo is .75 caliber, meaning the rounds are 3/4" in diameter. This is a HUGE bullet. It is literally 3 times the width of today's bullet (twice the size if you're former Warsaw Pact and like to run around with AK74s and what not). And, with the way characters fire willy nilly in the fluff, EVERYONE would be out of ammo in the first 12 seconds of combat.

Well its only a little larger than a 12ga shotgun slug. While bolters are depicted as fully automatic there really isn't a statement to their rate of fire... for example a M16 has a rate of fire of between 700-900 rounds per minute while an AA12 sutomatic shotgun has a rate of fire of ~300 rounds per minute, for the sake of controlability. It's just a necessary detail to really grasp the repercussions. Also while loaded bolters are heavy they wouldn't be that bad for a genetically enhanced power armored super human. What's normally regarded as the weight for a squad support weapon is easily the weight of a Space Marine's bolter... and even then they can comfortably carry 300+ lbs. If bolter shells weigh double that of a shotgun slug... you're looking at ~.175 lbs ... or about 300 rounds at 60lbs. Additionally Marines wear fully environementally sealed armor and can survive without food or water for some time... so there are alot of things they don't have to carry.

Perhaps they should adopt a side fed magazine/belt?

Green is Best! wrote:Yes, but who would go into combat with only two magazines? One in your rifle. At least six more on your person. Then toss in water, armor, any other equipment, and it all adds up.

Absolutely. I was just reacting to another poster claiming one or two magazines would already be too much. For the record, I *did* agree on lasgun magazines giving you much more shots for their weight. "Hundreds more", to quote myself.

Green is Best! wrote:Plus, how big would these magazines have to be? They are basically holding 12 gauge shotgun shells. They would be huge and still only hold like 10 rounds.

That's a good question, but I think the artworks are actually pretty much spot on. I've got an older storm bolter cross section that shows they are actually stacked in a zig-zagging manner instead of shell-to-shell, so whilst the magazine would end up pretty wide (which fits to the weapon, though!), you would probably be able to get to the number of rounds mentioned in the studio material (15 in straight, 20 in sickle, 30 in belt, 40 in drum). It's semi-realistic enough for me, anyways.

Lynata wrote:

Green is Best! wrote:Plus, how big would these magazines have to be? They are basically holding 12 gauge shotgun shells. They would be huge and still only hold like 10 rounds.

That's a good question, but I think the artworks are actually pretty much spot on. I've got an older storm bolter cross section that shows they are actually stacked in a zig-zagging manner instead of shell-to-shell, so whilst the magazine would end up pretty wide (which fits to the weapon, though!), you would probably be able to get to the number of rounds mentioned in the studio material (15 in straight, 20 in sickle, 30 in belt, 40 in drum). It's semi-realistic enough for me, anyways.

A single stack saiga12 10 round magazine... is about 9.75" long... if it were double stacked at the same length you could expect about 18 rounds.

I wonder if standardization might have something to do with the comparative ubiquity of the heavy bolter over the heavy stubber in 40k armies. There are tons of mutually incompatible local variations of the heavy stubber because it's such a simple weapon it can be independently developed anywhere. The heavy bolter seems likely to be an STC so it'd be much more consistent across the galaxy. That's really important for the Guard since they move around a lot. PDF can afford to rely on local supplies so they'd be more likely to use heavy stubbers. PDF will also be more likely to use autoguns over lasguns for similar reasons.

aka_mythos wrote:A single stack saiga12 10 round magazine... is about 9.75" long... if it were double stacked at the same length you could expect about 18 rounds.

Sounds about right for the bolter artworks, then. Thanks for confirming my admittedly very rough guess!

Raxmei: True. I guess bolt rounds are universally compatible, but stub ammunition really varies from world to world?

Green is Best! wrote:Plus, how big would these magazines have to be? They are basically holding 12 gauge shotgun shells. They would be huge and still only hold like 10 rounds.

24 bolter shells is normal.

Melissia wrote:

Green is Best! wrote:Plus, how big would these magazines have to be? They are basically holding 12 gauge shotgun shells. They would be huge and still only hold like 10 rounds.

24 bolter shells is normal.

So. 24 rounds at 3/4" per round means you have 18" of shells alone. This would give you a clip around 1" thick and 20" tall. That is pretty big for a magazine. Even if you cross-stacked (?), you might condense that down to 12", but it would be like 1.5" thick. Either way, big and cumbersome and yet still.... totally awesome.

Just as a little thing for the bullet size thing:

This image is actual size - should match up on screen to irl.
From Left to Right: 6mm, 8mm, 9mm, 10mm, .22cal, .36cal, .45cal, .50cal and 1.2cal Snub

and:

This one isnt actual size, but still to scale.
From Left to Right: 1cal BME, 1.2cal Snub, 9mm Parabelum, .50cal BME.

They are not hard to make.
Think of them as our modern machine guns. Its just many of them are so big, heavy, over powerful against infantry (basically what you said) that they are not used by that many soldiers in ur modern times.

And since they are really good against infantry, why not put them on tanks?

Green is Best! wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Green is Best! wrote:Plus, how big would these magazines have to be? They are basically holding 12 gauge shotgun shells. They would be huge and still only hold like 10 rounds.

24 bolter shells is normal.

So. 24 rounds at 3/4" per round means you have 18" of shells alone. This would give you a clip around 1" thick and 20" tall. That is pretty big for a magazine. Even if you cross-stacked (?), you might condense that down to 12", but it would be like 1.5" thick. Either way, big and cumbersome and yet still.... totally awesome.

While scale in 40k has always been inconsistent... if we assume the Bolter model to be remotely correct the magazine is about ~3" thick and 11+" long. At those dimensions I think its reasonable that by the 41st millenia... they could make reliable tripple stacked magazines for a high caliber weapon like a bolter that holds about 25 rounds; they now have tripple and quad stack M16 rifles that can carry 60 rounds, so its not unrealistic. The only reason shotguns don't have magazines that large is because of rim jamming issues in the magazine that afflicts that type of rimmed cartridges.

Also its big and cumbersome to us because we aren't 7+ foot tall super humans... and because marines where power armor and are as tall the ergonomics are different.

Oh, I was speaking of magazines for bolters used by humans.

Well, the only difference there is that the Marines apparently slap a bit of armour around their magazines. Given that they do the same for their boltguns, it evens out.

Though I suppose it is not inconceivable that many humans will still prefer magazines with a few bolts less, so if the ~20 round sickle mags will be too much, they could always go for the ~15 round straight ones. All depending on the individual, i.e. how big he is by nature and/or if he is wearing power armour or not.

I think its fair to say there is either a compromises made for the sake of a normal person to wield a bolter that brings it down a peg, at least a little bit... or that a large caliber weapon with that much ammo would have to be a little cumbersome for a non-power armored individual.

Also, from what I gather, Marines essentially use magnum ammunition compared to the normal ammunition in most "human" bolters.