The NS Infantry Discussion Thread, L5A1

[Purpelia]

Weight is a component of volume (assuming equal density), which is a cube function of the dimensions. There may be a slight difference not shown by a simple 27% reduction of all characteristics. I would expect it to weigh... more than 73% original mass? Not sure.

As I understand it, no changes to the propellant density means that the weight should scale normally. If I have a steel cube that weighs 100g, and I shave it down by 25%, logic says it should weigh 75g.

No it does not. Mass = Volume x Density
Volume scales with the cube of the dimensions. Thus Volume_0.75 = Volume₁ x 0.75³ = Volume₁ x 0.42

Assuming the density remains the same that means your mass would be 42g.

[Imperializt Russia]

Weight is a component of volume (assuming equal density), which is a cube function of the dimensions. There may be a slight difference not shown by a simple 27% reduction of all characteristics. I would expect it to weigh... more than 73% original mass? Not sure.

As I understand it, no changes to the propellant density means that the weight should scale normally. If I have a steel cube that weighs 100g, and I shave it down by 25%, logic says it should weigh 75g.

If you cut it down by 27% in volume, it will cut down in weight by 27%, and its individual dimensions will be the cube root of 27% less (or something - cube root of 0.73 actually comes to 0.9 per side).
If you reduce its dimensions by 27%, it would be smaller than 27% smaller in volume. It would be about ~39% the volume, assuming a cube, and such 39% the weight.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

Right, I've played around with things a bit, and think I've managed.

The cartridge is a rectangular prism, 6x6x25mm, with a volume of ,9cm³. Taking away ,17cm³ for the projectile, and ,081cm³ for the primer/booster charge, leaves us with ,649cm³ to work with. Assuming I'm a madman, and make the entire propellant brick out of RDX, that gives a weight of 1,18g propellant.

Add to that the 1,87g projectile and we have a very rough cartridge weight of 3,2g. Assuming, for the time being, that the primer/booster is also RDX, of course.

So, in all I have a slightly more accurate string of measurements, a slightly larger cartridge and an additional 3m/s in velocity.

[Fordorsia]

More wippity wip

[Vancon]

More wippity wip

(Image)

The one in the middle is my favorite. Can you make a sickle, and/or a scythe?

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

More wippity wip

(Image)

What's with the top two?

[Purpelia]

I like the center one best as well. The others are just not my type.

[Fordorsia]

More wippity wip

(Image)

The one in the middle is my favorite. Can you make a sickle, and/or a scythe?

What, a sickle variation of this sabre, like a forward-curving blade?

More wippity wip

(Image)

What's with the top two?

What about them? They just use copies of the 1796's blade. They're both the earliest models of this sabre.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

What about them? They just use copies of the 1796's blade. They're both the earliest models of this sabre.

They're a tad longer and more curved than I would have expected, is all.

[Sevvania]

Bam!

Sevvanian semi-automatic 12 gauge, circa WWII. Still a bit of a work in progress. Whaddaya think?

[Fordorsia]

What about them? They just use copies of the 1796's blade. They're both the earliest models of this sabre.

They're a tad longer and more curved than I would have expected, is all.

I know what you mean, but it's probably because the hilt is straight. In most pictures where the hilt isn't straight, it looks significantly less curved.

[Vancon]

The one in the middle is my favorite. Can you make a sickle, and/or a scythe?

What, a sickle variation of this sabre, like a forward-curving blade?

No, just a new sickle variant and a new scythe. You seem to only make swords, and I'd think that you'd do a good job.

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Bam!
(Image)
Sevvanian semi-automatic 12 gauge, circa WWII. Still a bit of a work in progress. Whaddaya think?

I like it.


Ford hurry up and make a Killij dammit.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

I know what you mean, but it's probably because the hilt is straight. In most pictures where the hilt isn't straight, it looks significantly less curved.

Huh. I didn't think something as small as the hilt could have such a dramatic impact on the sword's overall look. Neat.

[Purpelia]

Too bad you are doing the wrong century. I am working on some viking era weapons my self that I will publish any day now. And it's kind of a shame to newer be able to cross swords.

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Too bad you are doing the wrong century. I am working on some viking era weapons my self that I will publish any day now. And it's kind of a shame to newer be able to cross swords.

Careful. He's into that kind of thing, you know.

[Korva]

Too bad you are doing the wrong century. I am working on some viking era weapons my self that I will publish any day now. And it's kind of a shame to newer be able to cross swords.

You can always cross swords with me

[Purpelia]

Well to be fair, the blade I am making is really for the rear end of the viking age. Circa mid-late 11th century. And it is not so much a sword as it is a sword on a shaft. A long rigid wooden shaft that you thrust in someones face repeatedly until the effect is achieved.

[Korva]

A long rigid...shaft that you thrust in someones face repeatedly until the effect is achieved.

[Immoren]

A long rigid...shaft that you thrust in someones face repeatedly until the effect is achieved.

[Fordorsia]

What, a sickle variation of this sabre, like a forward-curving blade?

No, just a new sickle variant and a new scythe. You seem to only make swords, and I'd think that you'd do a good job.

Well I already have this infantry sabre from nearly a century earlier.

I also draw guns, tanks, sometimes planes and rarely ships.

Bam!
(Image)
Sevvanian semi-automatic 12 gauge, circa WWII. Still a bit of a work in progress. Whaddaya think?

I like it.


Ford hurry up and make a Killij dammit.

A Kilij is just a sabre. They're also ugly as shit and Fordorsia isn't Turkey, so no.

I know what you mean, but it's probably because the hilt is straight. In most pictures where the hilt isn't straight, it looks significantly less curved.

Huh. I didn't think something as small as the hilt could have such a dramatic impact on the sword's overall look. Neat.

Neither did I until I drew the blade for them. It's quite unsettling, especially since I hate blades that curve back a lot.

Too bad you are doing the wrong century. I am working on some viking era weapons my self that I will publish any day now. And it's kind of a shame to newer be able to cross swords.

Vikings are overrated. Celtiberians gogogo

[Purpelia]

Vikings are overrated. Celtiberians gogogo

Is it roughly the right time frame (10th - 11th century in my case)? Also yes, all vikings are overrated because they sailed on seas. Purpelian vikings though. Now those were men. They sailed on rivers!

[Fordorsia]

Vikings are overrated. Celtiberians gogogo

Is it roughly the right time frame (10th - 11th century in my case)? Also yes, all vikings are overrated because they sailed on seas. Purpelian vikings though. Now those were men. They sailed on rivers!

If more than a millenium earlier is around the same time, then sure.

[Purpelia]

Is it roughly the right time frame (10th - 11th century in my case)? Also yes, all vikings are overrated because they sailed on seas. Purpelian vikings though. Now those were men. They sailed on rivers!

If more than a millenium earlier is around the same time, then sure.

That depends on how hot you are on time traveling river vikings.

[Immoren]

Vikings are overrated. Celtiberians gogogo

Is it roughly the right time frame (10th - 11th century in my case)? Also yes, all vikings are overrated because they sailed on seas. Purpelian vikings though. Now those were men. They sailed on rivers!

Uh.
Vikings did sail those too.