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.

I was wondering if anyone knows how often Space Marines holster their weapons. I am pretty sure I have read stories in which it is mentioned that a SM holsters their ranged weapon to use their melee weapon more easily and visa versa (e.g. exchanging a bolter with a two handed power sword), yet I have not seen many models that actually have holstered weapons (with the exception of pistols and knifes).

Another question that I have is what if a terminator wants holster their storm bolter, I've have read sources in which the terminator is described "clipping" his storm bolter to his belt but I find this difficult to imagine when looking at the terminator models.

I would like to hear your opinion on this subject.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but aren't marine weapons and armor magnetized to the extent that they can just stick knifes / pistols / clips / their guns to unobstructed parts of their armor and then pull them off later?

Other than that, I think it would be subjective. the bolters which Astartes use is much larger than the ones issued to Imperial Guard, but doesn't seem to be any different firepower wise. As such it seems most likely that they're heavily reinforced and rugged, to the point that they can reliably be used as a close combat weapon themselves without much harm to the weapon itself.

Rifle combat techniques are surprisingly effective and very, very important.

 morganfreeman wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but aren't marine weapons and armor magnetized to the extent that they can just stick knifes / pistols / clips / their guns to unobstructed parts of their armor and then pull them off later?

I also remember reading that somewhere.

Maglock.. Nuff said..

Maglock the stuff in, done. And I'm pretty sure Lexicanum says that Terminator weapons are built into the armour and looking at the models support this. Besides, the point of the stormbolter is that it can be reliably fired one handed because the side-side barrels' alternating recoil stabilises it, and they wield it one handed in TDA with their melee weapon, a power fist usually, only being 1 handed

Space marines on duty don't need holsters or maglocks since they never put down their weapons for anything. If one absolutely has to swing a sword and pistol in close combat he'll throw his bolter at the enemy while charging then pick it up after killing him.

 Deadshot wrote:
the side-side barrels' alternating recoil stabilises it

What.

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
the side-side barrels' alternating recoil stabilises it

What.

You have two barrels, both firing at a very high ROF, off-centre. Logically speaking, because they are off-centre, the barrel on the right would fire and push the gun slightly right, and the one on the left to the left, recoil pushes it back off the centre line. You alternate the barrels firing (going left-right-left-right instead of having seperate) means that when one barrel pulls the gun left, the next shot pulls it right again and realigns it, meaning you don't have to correct it for recoil to the sides, only pull it down as with a single barrel weapon. Its not dissimilar to double-barrel shotguns, although the difference with those is that a DBS has a low ROF and so you have time to correct aim manually, but the huge ROF of a SB would have it spraying rounds everywhere if you needed a trigger per side. Alternating the shots instead of firing 2 rounds at once also increases ROF and artificially increases magazine capacity. What I mean there, is instead of firing 2 rounds at once you fire 1. Example being this; you have a boloter with a 30 round magazine, firing 1 round at a time. Stormbolter with 60 rounds, firing two rounds at a time. Assuming ACTUAL ROF is the same, both will run out at the same time, even though ROF is technically higher for the SB (60 rounds per minute vs 30, for example). If you alternate the shots on the stormbolter, you have twice as much ammo at the same time as you can raise the mechanical ROF to match that of the bolter, so you fire 30 rounds in half the time, but still have 30 left for the other half. Simple, right?

 Deadshot wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
the side-side barrels' alternating recoil stabilises it

What.

You have two barrels, both firing at a very high ROF, off-centre. Logically speaking, because they are off-centre, the barrel on the right would fire and push the gun slightly right, and the one on the left to the left, recoil pushes it back off the centre line. You alternate the barrels firing (going left-right-left-right instead of having seperate) means that when one barrel pulls the gun left, the next shot pulls it right again and realigns it, meaning you don't have to correct it for recoil to the sides, only pull it down as with a single barrel weapon. Its not dissimilar to double-barrel shotguns, although the difference with those is that a DBS has a low ROF and so you have time to correct aim manually, but the huge ROF of a SB would have it spraying rounds everywhere if you needed a trigger per side. Alternating the shots instead of firing 2 rounds at once also increases ROF and artificially increases magazine capacity. What I mean there, is instead of firing 2 rounds at once you fire 1. Example being this; you have a boloter with a 30 round magazine, firing 1 round at a time. Stormbolter with 60 rounds, firing two rounds at a time. Assuming ACTUAL ROF is the same, both will run out at the same time, even though ROF is technically higher for the SB (60 rounds per minute vs 30, for example). If you alternate the shots on the stormbolter, you have twice as much ammo at the same time as you can raise the mechanical ROF to match that of the bolter, so you fire 30 rounds in half the time, but still have 30 left for the other half. Simple, right?

That actually doesnt make much sense from a physics standpoint. Your magazine part does, but not the barrels. If you have two barrels firing one after the other, side by side, it should create a rocking motion between the two, leading one of the barrels to fire forward and the other to fire askew.
The real reason a storm bolter would be easier to control is the fact that its shorter than a normal bolter.

 Jollydevil wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
the side-side barrels' alternating recoil stabilises it

What.

You have two barrels, both firing at a very high ROF, off-centre. Logically speaking, because they are off-centre, the barrel on the right would fire and push the gun slightly right, and the one on the left to the left, recoil pushes it back off the centre line. You alternate the barrels firing (going left-right-left-right instead of having seperate) means that when one barrel pulls the gun left, the next shot pulls it right again and realigns it, meaning you don't have to correct it for recoil to the sides, only pull it down as with a single barrel weapon. Its not dissimilar to double-barrel shotguns, although the difference with those is that a DBS has a low ROF and so you have time to correct aim manually, but the huge ROF of a SB would have it spraying rounds everywhere if you needed a trigger per side. Alternating the shots instead of firing 2 rounds at once also increases ROF and artificially increases magazine capacity. What I mean there, is instead of firing 2 rounds at once you fire 1. Example being this; you have a boloter with a 30 round magazine, firing 1 round at a time. Stormbolter with 60 rounds, firing two rounds at a time. Assuming ACTUAL ROF is the same, both will run out at the same time, even though ROF is technically higher for the SB (60 rounds per minute vs 30, for example). If you alternate the shots on the stormbolter, you have twice as much ammo at the same time as you can raise the mechanical ROF to match that of the bolter, so you fire 30 rounds in half the time, but still have 30 left for the other half. Simple, right?

That actually doesnt make much sense from a physics standpoint. Your magazine part does, but not the barrels. If you have two barrels firing one after the other, side by side, it should create a rocking motion between the two, leading one of the barrels to fire forward and the other to fire askew.
The real reason a storm bolter would be easier to control is the fact that its shorter than a normal bolter.

^ This, the storm bolter as a handheld weapon is not really a good choice from a physics standpoint. There is a reason that nearly all hand held weapon systems fires along a central line. Firing one at a time would absolutly push the end of the barrel to one side, but firing the other one wouldnt move it back to the exact same position since it is not possible for you to hold the grip with the exact same force to resist the rotation as it pushes away from your body vs pulls toward your body. Both barrels would have to fire at the same time to maintain any degree of accuracy.

If you really wanted to offset the kick it would make more sense to have a barrel on the top and bottom. As long as they were equidistant from the centerline of the weapons (ie, the center of your wrist is exactly in the middle) then it would offset alsmot all of the kick since the force would push directly back.

So, breakdown of the side by side firing, alternating: Shot 1: I Shot 2: / Shot 3: / Shot 4: -
Firing at the same time/overunder: ====

So, looking at a Storm Bolter, there is a hole on the side of each barrel to act as a compensator. The only problem is that due to how high the boreline is versus where you hold the weapon, whenever you pull the trigger the hole in the barrel is going to cause it to push to the opposite side, because there isn't a hole on the other side to balance it. Due to how high the barrels are, there isn't a hole at the top of the barrel to counteract the muzzle rising, it not being a shoulder fired weapon so there is nothing to brace it against (ie. Your body), it is going to significantly rise upwards. When pulling the trigger on that thing and holding it one handed, it is going to fly all over the place.

Have you ever watched videos of people firing fully automatic weapons? Even on an MP5, which fires a pistol round, the natural tendency is for the muzzle to rise upwards. So firing a .75 caliber (I think that's what it is) rocket propelled projectile from two side by side barrels is going to follow the same principal.

I got to experience a lot of automatic weapons while I was in the army, and now I am a gunsmith. Trying to think logically about weapons in the 41st millennium is an absolute exercise in futility. Very little of it makes sense, they are just made to look cool. And Space Marines are power armoured gods apparently, to them recoil is for sissies, their faith in the God Emperor tames all recoil obviously.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

taurising wrote:

 Jollydevil wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:

 KharnsRightHand wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
the side-side barrels' alternating recoil stabilises it

What.

You have two barrels, both firing at a very high ROF, off-centre. Logically speaking, because they are off-centre, the barrel on the right would fire and push the gun slightly right, and the one on the left to the left, recoil pushes it back off the centre line. You alternate the barrels firing (going left-right-left-right instead of having seperate) means that when one barrel pulls the gun left, the next shot pulls it right again and realigns it, meaning you don't have to correct it for recoil to the sides, only pull it down as with a single barrel weapon. Its not dissimilar to double-barrel shotguns, although the difference with those is that a DBS has a low ROF and so you have time to correct aim manually, but the huge ROF of a SB would have it spraying rounds everywhere if you needed a trigger per side. Alternating the shots instead of firing 2 rounds at once also increases ROF and artificially increases magazine capacity. What I mean there, is instead of firing 2 rounds at once you fire 1. Example being this; you have a boloter with a 30 round magazine, firing 1 round at a time. Stormbolter with 60 rounds, firing two rounds at a time. Assuming ACTUAL ROF is the same, both will run out at the same time, even though ROF is technically higher for the SB (60 rounds per minute vs 30, for example). If you alternate the shots on the stormbolter, you have twice as much ammo at the same time as you can raise the mechanical ROF to match that of the bolter, so you fire 30 rounds in half the time, but still have 30 left for the other half. Simple, right?

That actually doesnt make much sense from a physics standpoint. Your magazine part does, but not the barrels. If you have two barrels firing one after the other, side by side, it should create a rocking motion between the two, leading one of the barrels to fire forward and the other to fire askew.
The real reason a storm bolter would be easier to control is the fact that its shorter than a normal bolter.

^ This, the storm bolter as a handheld weapon is not really a good choice from a physics standpoint. There is a reason that nearly all hand held weapon systems fires along a central line. Firing one at a time would absolutly push the end of the barrel to one side, but firing the other one wouldnt move it back to the exact same position since it is not possible for you to hold the grip with the exact same force to resist the rotation as it pushes away from your body vs pulls toward your body. Both barrels would have to fire at the same time to maintain any degree of accuracy.

If you really wanted to offset the kick it would make more sense to have a barrel on the top and bottom. As long as they were equidistant from the centerline of the weapons (ie, the center of your wrist is exactly in the middle) then it would offset alsmot all of the kick since the force would push directly back.

So, breakdown of the side by side firing, alternating: Shot 1: I Shot 2: / Shot 3: / Shot 4: -
Firing at the same time/overunder: ====

But, since both barrels are sitting at different levels versus where your hand is, the felt recoil on each barrel is still not going to match, and it is still going to rise just due to how the human body resists recoil. The Storm Bolter is an absolute crap design, it just looks badass. There is a reason why most militaries don't use machine pistols or submachine guns without an attached stock, very little your wrist can do without some serious help (Space Marine Power Armour). Also, due to the recoil rocking your body back, it causes your arm to raise. It was entertaining while doing live fire exercises with the M249 to put your blank adapter on, load up a belt of blanks andhip fire the SAW, watching how much that muzzle rises.

well I have seen space marine scouts use holsters, so that supports the maglock theory, since the scouts wear different armor.