www.ditl.org

So just a rifle then?

Mikey wrote:IIRC, the microtransporter was a later addition.

O'Brien claimed it was a later addition. Looking at it, however, the transporter and it's associated targeting systems are clearly integral parts of the weapon. He was probably just following the cover story establish to protect the party line that the Federation doesn't assassinate people.

McAvoy wrote:I agree it would make for an excellent spiner weapon but not a soldier proof battle weapon. But why not go the next step and start creating grenade launchers with that transporter device?

Maybe bullets were the largest/most massive items the micro-transporter could handle. Alternatively, the Feds realised that its vulnerability to jamming severely reduced its effectiveness to the point it wasn't worth bothering with.

Perhaps. But the bigger the weapon, the bigger that transporter device could be to handle the bullet/shell.

I am more inclined to believe the Feds just realized it could be jammed or certain messed with. That and the weapon works, then so can a regular transporter or sensor to locate the person.

Either that of the Feds didn't bother because it didn't have enough blinking lights on it.

McAvoy wrote:Perhaps. But the bigger the weapon, the bigger that transporter device could be to handle the bullet/shell.

By which point you're probably going to start stretching the definition of "man-portable". Even the bullet transporter was a pretty big box - imagine scaling that, which only took a 9mm equivalent, up to the size required for a 203 round, let alone a 66 or Milan.

Either that of the Feds didn't bother because it didn't have enough blinking lights on it.

Probably true.

I don't know. Depends really. Are we talking about some sort of artillery weapon that can be moved by a few men before being moved to another location by a vehicle? A 203mm gun isn't exactly a 'man portable' gun to begin with.

But what is the weapon would be really for? 203mm round isn't what I'd call a sniper weapon neither is a 88mm. A regular 203 or 88 gun should do nicely especially with the advanced targeting sensors of the Feds. Or hell using a new type of explosive or metal for AP rounds.

M203, not 203mm.

I just had an image of an M4 with a 203mm sling...

Captain Seafort wrote:M203, not 203mm.

Oops. Yeah screw that. If you can somehow make a 203mm cannon portable for a guy to fire, you don't need anything else.

Deepcrush wrote:I just had an image of an M4 with a 203mm sling...

If you could find a guy who can carry a 203mm gun around, then he doesn't need a gun to kick ass.

A real life Ogryn... lol

Mikey wrote:

Deepcrush wrote:I just had an image of an M4 with a 203mm sling...

If you could find a guy who can carry a 203mm gun around, then he doesn't need a gun to kick ass.

True.