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.

Lynata: You're right to mention the not-canon policy but it isn't as fuzzy as you make out, since that policy is changing with the Word of Ward approach; and there is (and has always been) a hierarchy of hardness to info given, depending upon source. You know what that hierarchy is as well as anyone does (though we might weight certain things differently). I never bought it but doesn't the 5th Ed rulebook state that a Bolter can fire four round bursts (with non-specified RoF)? If it does then that's 'hard' data, where the 'many interpretations' rule doesn't really apply (at least as much).

''Sup to you' isn't always the right (or most helpful, more importantly) answer. I hope that you know that I mean this with the utmost respect, genuinely.

As to the AA-12 - yeppers. Fuse that with a Gyrojet and you're away! I really don't get why folks make Bolters out to be so confusing and complicated... there's nothing about them that doesn't draw upon principles and tech from decades to a century old.

The designers pointed to the gyrojet rifles of the 1970s as their inspiration. It's not really hard to imagine a few tens of thousands of years would make leaps and bounds improvements on the design. They made it two stage because the real world gyrojets had problems with barrel stressors, but realistically, given how heavy duty the Bolter appears to be, and the strength of 40K materials, the concern is probably irrelevant.

But you just have a two stage cartridge. The initial propellant moves the projectile down the barrel, and cycles the weapon to feed and chamber the next round. In a piston based system like the AK-47, it probably doesn't even require that much maintenance like the M-16 family of weapons are notorious for, being direct impingement (the gases from the propellant ignition enter the firing mechanicals). The second stage of the round ignites once the round has left the barrel and the exhaust ports provide the necessary spin required to stabilize the round in flight. I'm somewhat skeptical of that being the most efficient way of doing it, but we'll accept the GW explanation of their own fantasy tech since it isn't impossible for it to function that way. The round has a delayed fuse that is either proximity triggered or impact triggered. Impact triggering with some kind of crush point is most likely, but that could cause problems of over-penetration in soft targets.

But yeah. There's nothing terribly mysterious or impossible about bolter technology. Aside from stubbers, they're about the most easily believable of the weapons in terms of function. Practicality may be another thing, but hey.

tsz52 wrote:Lynata: You're right to mention the not-canon policy but it isn't as fuzzy as you make out, since that policy is changing with the Word of Ward approach; and there is (and has always been) a hierarchy of hardness to info given, depending upon source. You know what that hierarchy is as well as anyone does (though we might weight certain things differently). [...] ''Sup to you' isn't always the right (or most helpful, more importantly) answer. I hope that you know that I mean this with the utmost respect, genuinely.

That's what I used to believe - but frankly, the "it's all right" approach (which has also been printed in WD once) is the only way to bring the conflicting statements in line. In the end, we can only go by what the creators of this setting have in mind for the franchise, and when they say that consistency between studio and licensed material is a non-issue, then we just have to adapt.

Unless you have more recent statements from the "behind the scenes" people on that matter? I'm always open for more information on this, but given that I spent quite some time on hunting down comments from authors and game designers a year ago (as I was argueing a lot with people convinced that it should all fit together) ...

Personally, I actually do follow a hierarchy, but I cannot expect of anyone to do the same. The "do as you will" approach as mentioned by Gav Thorpe is, I suppose, the only way for everyone to be happy, avoiding a lot of senseless discussion about conflicting sources.

tsz52 wrote:I never bought it but doesn't the 5th Ed rulebook state that a Bolter can fire four round bursts (with non-specified RoF)?

Sadly, no - the 5E rulebook doesn't contain much in the lines of fluff. The boltgun is only mentioned shortly in an example of rapid fire weapons (which are said to be both capable of "hails of shots" but are also "commonly semi-automatic weapons" - yeah, not helpful) as well as a bit on its symbolical importance to the Space Marines. The 3E book contained way more extensive data (including a sentence on common RoF), but that excerpt has already been posted here.

They keep Bolter RoF vague so the 40k blogsphere doesn't complain about whay bolters arent Assault- whatever

Lynata wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:I'm sorry, what? What is "A Left?"
Anyway, your head would explode. That's what a bolter shell does.

He's referring to a left-handed person. A potential issue for "lefties" in the military is that spent shells tend to be ejected right in front of their face. As you can imagine, this may hurt.

It's the reason for why some few weapons now come with ejection ports on both sides of the gun, adaptable to the individual user.

There are several references in the various munitions books describing bolt guns as ambidextrous and having switchable ejection ports.

Connor MacLeod wrote:
Bolters are/were supposed to be caseless in the sense they fired miniature, self propelled rockets. You don't really need a casing for that (a sabot maybe). But that was also of the same idea of 'bolters have little recoil' and that's mutated over time (both in terms of bolters ejecting casings and having recoil.) Nowadays I figure they are designed to fire both caesd and caseless (rocket propelled) ammo in the same wy they have diffrent kinds of payloads. but bolters are a pain in the butt to make sense of - not unlike chainswords or Titans (unless you opt for 'it just looks cool' - that's always a nice simple if out of universe answer.)

Bolters have always been bi-propellant. A small cased charge kicks the round out of the weapon before the jet takes over and takes it to the target. The other reason you want an initial kick charge is that it means you've got half a chance against targets that are really close. A pure rocket round may not have accellerated enough at the muzzle to do enough damage. There is a rather nice description of bi-propellant rounds in Against A Dark Background by Iain M Banks.

tsz52 wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:but bolters are a pain in the butt to make sense of

Maybe I'm missing a problem but I find that they're the least butt-pain weapon in 40k. As in the USMC could have something that looks and acts like a Bolter within 10-20 years of whenever they want one (though they'd probably get a better design).

OICW from a while back supposedly to replace the various 40mm grenade launchers currently in use. Designed to be twinned with a G36, firing 20mm explosive rounds with a funky laser designator to allow you to detonate them above cover/around corners etc. I think the original concept got binned but there is definately a similar weapon in MW3, which would indicate part of the tech has survived.

Flinty wrote:

tsz52 wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:but bolters are a pain in the butt to make sense of

Maybe I'm missing a problem but I find that they're the least butt-pain weapon in 40k. As in the USMC could have something that looks and acts like a Bolter within 10-20 years of whenever they want one (though they'd probably get a better design).

OICW from a while back supposedly to replace the various 40mm grenade launchers currently in use. Designed to be twinned with a G36, firing 20mm explosive rounds with a funky laser designator to allow you to detonate them above cover/around corners etc. I think the original concept got binned but there is definately a similar weapon in MW3, which would indicate part of the tech has survived.

It's more simple than that, since it doesn't use the OICW's indirect fire, area effect, smart fusing (for pre-programmed defilade and whatnot) - the XM25's the legacy of the GL component of OICW.

I hesitated to mention it before since I didn't want to muddy the waters and get inattentive readers shouting, "The Bolter isn't a grenade launcher!" but the best contemporary model for a Bolter I've found is the PAW20, with its PMP 20 x 42 mm rounds. Yes, it's a grenade launcher but is direct fire with (comparatively) flat trajectory designed to destroy point targets and suppress. The SAPHEI projectile penetrates then explodes - they all explode due to impact rather than using fancy fusing. Projectile is nice and efficiently high-subsonic.

The link has a vid there which is a bit long and with a horrendous voice-over (in English anyway), but there're plenty of vids on YouTube of it strutting its stuff, if you want short and sweet:-

http://www.pmp.co.za/index.php?page=mediumcalibre

Keep the front ~third of the above projectile as is but add excellent AP tip (in 40k most likely using nanotech to get a single molecule at the tip of your 'diamond'). Make rear ~two thirds of the projectile function like the Gyrojet's. It's now better at armour penetration but sacrifices warhead volume for rocket motor and propellant (assume that the IoM uses higher energy density explosives to offset this). Reduce diameter down by ~one mm (if you really want .75 Cal, though this is handy in reducing mass/initial recoil and equates to a few extra rounds in your magazine, for a given size of magazine). Reduce case length for lesser initial velocity/recoil (which will still be fatal at the muzzle, with noticable but perfectly manageable recoil - note muzzle brake). We've already got electrical ignition down.

Crop PAW20's barrel right down since the projectile provides most of the velocity and spin, and add big box magazine (and cut stock off...). For the Bolt weapons with magazine right at the front of the weapon, use action like the Boberg semi-autos; with breech directly above magazine (rather than the usual just in front) and the rounds pulled backwards out of the magazine, aligned then pushed forwards into the breech (this fits the 'temperamental' discription).

Job's a good un. Pretty sure that Denel could come up with roughly that in less than twenty years if someone wanted one; SOF, Anti Terrorist, Hostage Rescue Teams etc would be an obvious early application - which is how Astartes would realistically be employed and fight.