Starship Trooper's Gun's
gre...@sting.phx.mcd.mot.org
# Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
# Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
It looked like a combination Mini-14 and short barrelled shotgun hidden
under a lot of futuristic plastic. I found the following items interesting:
1) The alien bugs were largely impervious to the rifle rounds. But the
troopers continued to use them anyway even though they had the more
effective shotgun at the ready.
2) One small magazine apparently held thousands of rounds of ammo.
3) The magazine wouldn't work where it was mounted.
4) No one ever tried aiming. They were all shooting from the hip.
It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
waste your money or time to see it.
Regards,
Greg G.
(for email replies, replace org with com in my address)
James H Galt-brown
Sir:
They were ruger mini-14's in Hollywoodized muzzelite bullpup
stocks.
Robert Schommer
Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
Robert Henderson
On 10 Nov 1997 18:50:12 GMT, Scout <S...@My.Sig> wrote:
#
#
#Robert Schommer <glow...@systems-interface.com> wrote in article
#<647dsu$s...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#> Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
#> Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#
#I heard they were modified M-16's. (Cosmetic, Blank, and rate of fire most
#likely).
#
#The ejected brass seemed to be in the .223 family.
#
#
#> -Rob
#>
#>
Starships, space travel, future, brave new world, etc, etc, etc
and they are still using plain old smokeless gunpowder and a .223
at that? True, Han Solo's blaster was a tricked out Broomhandle
but at least a hellacious laser blast came out of the thing :-)
--
===============================
== R. A. Henderson ==
== r...@ntrnet.net ==
===============================
Sigstroker
#Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
#Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
Looked like Mini-14's to me. Looked like there was a slide with cocking handle.
ltl919
Robert Henderson wrote:
# Starships, space travel, future, brave new world, etc, etc, etc
# and they are still using plain old smokeless gunpowder and a .223
# at that? True, Han Solo's blaster was a tricked out Broomhandle
# but at least a hellacious laser blast came out of the thing :-)
Unfortunately, from a purely technological point of view, we're
kind of in a slump as far as radical changes in small arms goes unless
battery technology takes a major leap in energy density.
Surprisingly, our 'primitive' smokeless propellant/metallic cartridges
are a fairly efficient way to store energy for future
delivery to a target. Several texts mention that
firearms (specifically .308 Win rifles) are about 30-40% efficient in
converting chemical energy to projectile kinetic energy.
Various types of electromagnetic launchers using induction
can be as efficient as 50-60% in converting electrical to
kinetic energy, so if we have high density batteries, they are quite
a promising technology. (note
that 'rail guns' operate on a different principle - they are more
inefficient than induction-based launchers)
David Basiji
gre...@sting.phx.mcd.mot.org writes:
#It looked like a combination Mini-14 and short barrelled shotgun hidden
#under a lot of futuristic plastic. I found the following items interesting:
#1) The alien bugs were largely impervious to the rifle rounds. But the
# troopers continued to use them anyway even though they had the more
# effective shotgun at the ready.
#2) One small magazine apparently held thousands of rounds of ammo.
#3) The magazine wouldn't work where it was mounted.
#4) No one ever tried aiming. They were all shooting from the hip.
#It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
#waste your money or time to see it.
I think one of the soldiers said it was a "fully-automatic Beretta" during
the grade-school show and tell recruitment drive.
Just to set the record straight, word is that any similarity between "Starship
Troopers" the movie and Heinlein's "Starship Troopers" is purely coincidental.
As the fellow in the Heinlein newsgroup put it, "...based on the back cover
of Heinlein's 'Starship Troopers'!!!"
That said, I enjoyed the movie. It was classis Veerhoven (director of RoboCop),
cotton candy acting, cartoonish violence, light-as-a-feather plot, but plenty
of fun and lots of smirky celebration of the human condition (we're not as smart
as we think we are...)
-db
--
David A. Basiji
UW Bioengineering/Molecular Biotechnology
(206) 616-1020, bas...@u.washington.edu, http://weber.u.washington.edu/~basiji/
"I don't speak for the University of Washington."
Morgan Hart
Apologies if I am wrong, but I don't think that they were not made
from AR-15 parts. They looked like Mini-14 guts with a pump action
shotgun attached under the barrel, and then wrapped in a bullpup
stock. I see a lot of Mini-14 bullpups in the movies. I guess that
the prop houses have a lot of full-auto versions of them that they
have left over from before the 1986 ban. That they slap a slick
bullpup stock on and rent out to the movie companies.
On 10 Nov 1997 11:48:30 -0500, Robert Schommer
<glow...@systems-interface.com> wrote:
#Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
#Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#-Rob
James P. Girardeau
Robert Henderson wrote:
#
# #
# #> Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
# #> Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
# #
# #I heard they were modified M-16's. (Cosmetic, Blank, and rate of fire most
# #
# #The ejected brass seemed to be in the .223 family.
# #
# #> -Rob
# #>
#
# and they are still using plain old smokeless gunpowder and a .223
# at that? True, Han Solo's blaster was a tricked out Broomhandle
# but at least a hellacious laser blast came out of the thing :-)
# --
# ===============================
# == R. A. Henderson ==
# == r...@ntrnet.net ==
# ===============================
I noticed a close-up of the bolt of one of the weapons. They are dressed
up Ruger Mini-14's. At least the one in the shot I saw was stainless
steel. Probably the majority of the weapons in the movie were non-firing
plastic shells while automatic Mini-14's were used for the shooting
scenes and there was at least one mock up that had some kind of a pump
shotgun in it.
It's been so many years since I've read "Starship Troopers" I don't
remember if their weapons were a ray-gun or not. A number of Sci-Fi
authors of good repute have argued that some kind of chemically powered
projectile throwing weapon is likely to remain the small arm of choice
for many years to come. There are two reasons for this:
"Large doses of kenetic energy" as one author put it is still the best
means of disabling an opponent. This is opposed to a laser or plasma
beam that will burn and cauterize a wound while requiring a clear,
on-target, non-reflected shot for the duration of the beam or blast.
The other reason is that lasers and plasma weapons require an electrical
power source. In the case of personal weapons this means batterys. A
battery with a low charge will be unable to produce a beam of sufficient
power to cause injury while a machinegun belt with only one cartridge is
at least as effective as a rifle shot.
Granted in the "Starship Troopers" movie it's pretty clear that they are
using a .223 sized cartridge. Ignore it and enjoy the movie. In the not
too distant future caseless ammo will be perfected and a weapon the size
of the guns depected will be easily able to contain the huge ammounts of
ammo that the troopers seem to fire in a burst.
BTW, I read on a web page that "Starship Troopers" holds the current
record for rounds fired in making a movie, 250,000! Glad I didn't have
to load their blanks on my 550B! ;-)
Good Shooting, hopefully on into the 24th century...
Jim Girardeau
David G. Bell
In article <648ics$3...@xring.cs.umd.edu>
jh...@Ra.MsState.Edu "James H Galt-brown" writes:
# Sir:
# They were ruger mini-14's in Hollywoodized muzzelite bullpup
# stocks.
Having read the book, even though I have heard that the film has some
big changes in the technology used, I just have to ask.
What gun did they use to fake the personal nuclear missiles?
:)
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Daniel
On 11 Nov 1997 15:07:34 -0500, sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) wrote:
##Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
##Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#
#Looked like Mini-14's to me. Looked like there was a slide with cocking handle.
#
Yeah, and there's also the fact that the Mobile Infantry was missing
those bugs a lot of the time.....:-)
Paul Stevens
gre...@sting.phx.mcd.mot.org wrote:
#
# # Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
# # Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#
# It looked like a combination Mini-14 and short barrelled shotgun hidden
# under a lot of futuristic plastic. I found the following items interesting:
#
# 1) The alien bugs were largely impervious to the rifle rounds. But the
# troopers continued to use them anyway even though they had the more
# effective shotgun at the ready.
#
#
# 3) The magazine wouldn't work where it was mounted.
#
# 4) No one ever tried aiming. They were all shooting from the hip.
#
# It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
# waste your money or time to see it.
#
# Regards,
#
# Greg G.
#
# (for email replies, replace org with com in my address)
I heard, several months ago, that whoever made the film decided that
they had to go all out in making the aliens believable. When the
money had been spent on the alien effects, there was very little money
left for the rest of the movie.
I read the original book by Heinlein many years ago and remember it as
being a good book, if you don't mind the pre-vietnam era attitude
toward war and patriotism. From the movie previews I have seen, the
movie story is based very slightly on the book.
A more realistic view of war, in a setting similar to Starship Troopers,
is Armor by John Steakley. If I remember correctly, Steakley spent some
time in Vietnam, this would explain the different view of war he
presents in his book. I met Steakley in the early 80s and he seemed to
be a nice guy, even if he was writing on an Apple.
I guess where I was going with all this was: if you want to see
expensive alien effects, go see Starship Troopers. If you want to see
guns, there are lots of other movies at the video store. If you want
a good story, pick up a copy of Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein or
Armor by John Steakley. The book costs about as much as a movie ticket.
Just my two dollars worth (ain't inflation a pain).
P.S.
Anistra
What was the name ( in the movie)of the guns? sounded something like
Berretti's?
"Never trust a man who has only one way to spell a word."
Minda
Jeff Chock
Robert Schommer <glow...@systems-interface.com> wrote:
#Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
#Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#-Rob
#
I believe they looked like M-14's (the web site said it was 7.62mm),
with what appeared to be an Ithaca model 37 strapped to it. Similar
to Aliens which used a Thompson 1928 and a SPAS 12 combo.
--Jeff
Glenn E. Meyer
Ruger Minis in 223. Rather a light round for a 10 foot tall
exoskeleton bug.
On the other hand - they seemed to have that good old 500 round
magazine. That's good future technology.
They could have used some those attached grenade launchers from
Aliens II or even the current ones on the M-4s.
They were lightly armed for their opposition.
bye
Robert M Normile
Actually I believe it was an highly energized glob of plasma not a lazer
blast but hey still cool,can't wait for mine,huh???
Larry D. Curtis
Jasona91 wrote:
#
# I sort of thought that they were mini-14's in some sort of fiberglass stock.
# When you look in the ejection port you can see a reciever, rear sight and bolt
# that I thought at first was an M-14, but changed my mind after I got a look at
# the magazines, I thought that they were too small and curved shaped to be an
# M-14 so I thought Mini-14.
It was most definitely a Stainless Mini-14 Bolt Carrier I saw. As for
the mags that was just a plastic prop.
Dra...@zippo.com
Starship troopers guns were interesting, and thus far through almost a century,
about 80 years, there havent been any RADICAL advancements in firearms
efficiency. Therefore I guess the author didn't anticipate any to THAT point.
Even though a war of that nature would eventually turn out some heavier
firepower. It's fun to speculate and debate about how things might be, but HEY,
the POINT wasn't the guns, ENJOY THE MOVIE!! Never listen to critics, it was a
lot of fun and had cutting edge gore! Don't expect a Godfather masterpiece, or
a base anchored in total reality, even though it had some very realistic aspects
to it. It was a rocket-ride fun movie and it kicked a$$! Better than "I.D."
Dramius
BJamesjr
#Starships, space travel, future, brave new world, etc, etc, etc
#and they are still using plain old smokeless gunpowder
Check out the movie "Outland" with Sean Connery. He's a
district sheriff on a mining colony somewhere, and for weapons
they use cut off pump shotguns. And these are not cosmetically
modified in any way. Looks like you took an 870 or whatever
off the shelf and cut off the barrel and stock. in reviews at the
time they said that the weapons gave a very businesslike aura
to that part of the plot.
Josh Tiscareno
On 10 Nov 1997 22:11:24 -0500, James H Galt-brown
<jh...@Ra.MsState.Edu> wrote:
# Sir:
# They were ruger mini-14's in Hollywoodized muzzelite bullpup
#stocks.
#
#
i dont think so... they had m-60 flash suppressors and lots of muzzle
flash more common to a 7.62 than a .223. ive had experience with both
in the army and it seems to me to be some sort of impossible hollywood
combination of an m-60 crossed with a shotgun and a muzzlite bullpup
stock.
rang...@gte.net
A number of Sci-Fi
# authors of good repute have argued that some kind of chemically powered
# projectile throwing weapon is likely to remain the small arm of choice
# for many years to come. There are two reasons for this:
# "Large doses of kenetic energy" as one author put it is still the best
# means of disabling an opponent. This is opposed to a laser or plasma
# beam that will burn and cauterize a wound while requiring a clear,
# on-target, non-reflected shot for the duration of the beam or blast.
This is a fallacy. A pulsed laser or a bolt of plasma powerful enough
to be used as a weapon hitting a human body would NOT burn a nice,
cauterized hole. The extreme heat would instantly turn all the water
contained in the human tissue into superheated vapor, causing an
explosive wound very similar to a bullet wound.
David Basiji
ltl919 <ltl...@super.zippo.com> writes:
#Unfortunately, from a purely technological point of view, we're
#kind of in a slump as far as radical changes in small arms goes unless
#battery technology takes a major leap in energy density.
#Surprisingly, our 'primitive' smokeless propellant/metallic cartridges
#are a fairly efficient way to store energy for future
#delivery to a target. Several texts mention that
#firearms (specifically .308 Win rifles) are about 30-40% efficient in
#converting chemical energy to projectile kinetic energy.
Forget the rail-gun mumbo jumbo, they were using brass cases fercrissakes!
To my knowledge, there have been at least three well-engineered caseless
rifles put in production prior to 1997: Daisy's, Voere's, and HK's.
Regards,
Dave
Ron & Janet Padgett
On 12 Nov 1997 10:37:06 -0500, grs...@aol.com (Grsjax) wrote:
##It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
##waste your money or time to see it.
##
##
#
#I agree with your assesment of the guns in the movie but do not agree with the
# above statement. Heinlein's orginal story is one of the best SF stories ever.
# Read the book before you blast it.
#
#grsjax
Sounds like you read the book and saw the movie. How close to the
book is the movie?
If the movie has only a vage resemblence (sp?) to the book Imay save
my money and reread my old old copy instead.
Ron
Will Hartung
sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) writes:
##Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
##Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#Looked like Mini-14's to me. Looked like there was a slide with cocking handle.
Whatever they were, they were big, ungainly, underpowered, and seem to
have problems with firing in general.
Oh, and they seemed completely unsuitable to the task at hand as well.
We all know the rules: Bring enough gun.
--
Will Hartung - Rancho Santa Margarita. It's a dry heat. vfr...@netcom.com
1990 VFR750 - VFR=Very Red "Ho, HaHa, Dodge, Parry, Spin, HA! THRUST!"
1993 Explorer - Cage? Hell, it's a prison. -D. Duck
S35Tac
In article <648ics$3...@xring.cs.umd.edu> James H Galt-brown,
jh...@Ra.MsState.Edu writes:
#hey were ruger mini-14's in Hollywoodized muzzelite bullpup
#stocks.
#
This just goes to prove that the Mini-14's *are* accurate; at least being
able to hit a 15 foot roach.
BTW...where can I get one of those thousand round mags? Since this is in
the future, it looks as if the ban on hicap mags will be repealed!!
Wooohoooo!!!
potshot
Robert Henderson wrote:
#
# On 10 Nov 1997 18:50:12 GMT, Scout <S...@My.Sig> wrote:
# #
# #
# #Robert Schommer <glow...@systems-interface.com> wrote in article
# #<647dsu$s...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
# #> Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
# #> Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
# #
# #I heard they were modified M-16's. (Cosmetic, Blank, and rate of fire most
# #likely).
# #
# #The ejected brass seemed to be in the .223 family.
# #
# #
# #> -Rob
# #>
# #>
#
# Starships, space travel, future, brave new world, etc, etc, etc
# and they are still using plain old smokeless gunpowder and a .223
# at that?
Guess that they forgot to read the book!
No hand flamers.
#True, Han Solo's blaster was a tricked out Broomhandle
Grsjax
#It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
#waste your money or time to see it.
#
#
I agree with your assesment of the guns in the movie but do not agree with the
above statement. Heinlein's orginal story is one of the best SF stories ever.
Read the book before you blast it.
grsjax
JayStr
Will Hartung wrote:
#
# sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) writes:
#
# ##Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
# ##Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
#
# #Looked like Mini-14's to me. Looked like there was a slide with cocking handle.
#
# Whatever they were, they were big, ungainly, underpowered, and seem to
# have problems with firing in general.
#
# Oh, and they seemed completely unsuitable to the task at hand as well.
# We all know the rules: Bring enough gun.
#
Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
buggers out).
Jasona91
Yeah, when the trooper was showing the children in the park the ammo, they
appeared to be bigger than .223, but the mags in the guns looked like mini-14
thirty rounders with all kinds of extra stuff glued onto them for effect.
There is no way those mags were for .308.
TNickMS70
#> BTW...where can I get one of those thousand round mags? Since this is in
the future, it looks as if the ban on hicap mags will be repealed!!
Wooohoooo!!! <<
Sorry; LEO's and military use only. Want one? Join up now and wait for 'em.
Wer liebt nich Wein, Weib und Gesang,
Ist er ein Narr sein Leben lang.
(Martin Luther)
Shawn Terjeson
Ron & Janet Padgett wrote:
#
# ##It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
# ##waste your money or time to see it.
# ##
# ##
# #
# #I agree with your assesment of the guns in the movie but do not agree with the
# # above statement. Heinlein's orginal story is one of the best SF stories ever.
# # Read the book before you blast it.
# #
They made the wrong movie. Heinlein's "Starship Trooper" was a fun
little mindless romp, read Joe Haldaman’s "The Forever War" for some
real gut wrenching and thought provoking space opera.
# #grsjax
#
# Sounds like you read the book and saw the movie. How close to the
# book is the movie?
#
# If the movie has only a vage resemblence (sp?) to the book Imay save
# my money and reread my old old copy instead.
#
# Ron
DaveMcS
# authors of good repute have argued that some kind of chemically powered
## for many years to come.
Remember in the film adaptation of Dune. Paul Etraides and company all personal
energy shield which protected them from
energy and blunt force attacks but the simple knife was able to penetrate the
force field. Mebbe the venerable bullet falls into this category too. . .?
D
"The Cap'n"
Sovereign King of all Transportation
telecon
In article <648hhh$2...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
<gre...@sting.phx.mcd.mot.org> wrote:
:1) The alien bugs were largely impervious to the rifle rounds. But the
: troopers continued to use them anyway even though they had the more
: effective shotgun at the ready.
If the Troopers had aimed, and hit the nerve case, it would have taken the
warrior bugs out.
The main thing about the movie that I was dissappointed in, was that there
was no mention, at all, of the cap trooper armored and powered suit.
Oh, and in the book Dizzy Flores was male, all MI was male, for that
matter.
James H Galt-brown
Sir:
They call it a flamethrower!!!
David G. Bell
In article <64fb7s$k...@xring.cs.umd.edu>
jwi...@sk.sympatico.ca "Joseph Widdup" writes:
# Anybody who has ever read any of the literature from that era can
# appreciate this movie and the novel it was based upon. (I have yet to
# read the novel, and think I will after seeing the movie). I cannot even
# attack their choice of guns because that was common at the time. Hand
# held machine guns, and the anti-aircraft guns quite similar in style to
# WWII weapons. The was also back when the belief existed that nuclear
# weapons would become portable enough to become high powered grenades.
# The information now commonly available about nuclear physics suggests a
# minimum amount of material is needed to start nuclear fission or
# fusion. Basic physics prevent us from putting a nuclear warhead in a
# hand held device.
Yes, read the novel. There are some quite significant tech differences
between the novel and the film (partly because, even today, representing
the weapons used in the novel would be way too expensive.
# But these problem are what gives the movie an aged flavor...a distinct
# character. Naturally today we would say: Where is the heavy artillery?
# What about the GE 20 mm and 30 mm Gatlings that throw all that lead?
# Wouldn't one of those be more appropriate? Why not land in armored
# personal carriers escorted by futuristic M741's? Guaranteed the 7000
# rpm from that Vulcan cannon would really mash some bugs. But the author
# decided to go with a typical (Dieppe style) mass landing - for the first
# attack at least. But that landing style would kill a lot of people,
# just like Dieppe in WWII. Later they use more bombing, what a good
# idea!
#
# Even look at the starships that they use. Great _big_ battleships. A
# common site in the WWs and even later into the '80s was the battleship.
# Battleships and carriers of the waters have fallen by the wayside. This
# is not how an author today would write about war.
Good questions, but the novel is different enough to make many of them
irrelevant.
# As most sci-fi is, this is a human condition story. Appreciate the
# authors message. Appreciated the way he chose to go about doing this.
# Look at the propaganda! My god, you can see the propaganda and
# appreciate the cynicism behind this story! Your government had _you_
# hating the communists, just like the govt. in the story had them hating
# the bugs; all propaganda!
I would also recommend that anyone interested in what the film _might_
have been should read "The Forever War" by Joe Haldeman. As with
"Starship Troopers" itself, it deserves careful reading.
jk...@starfleet.mil
On 13 Nov 1997 11:52:12 -0500, Joseph Widdup <jwi...@sk.sympatico.ca>
wrote:
#WWII weapons. The was also back when the belief existed that nuclear
#weapons would become portable enough to become high powered grenades.
The book was far more realistic in its portrayal of space infantry
than the movie was. They had real armor (powered armor "battlesuits"
instead of the cheezy lazer tag stuff in the movie) and weaponry in
the book. The movie ignored this because the director and producer
could save money by getting Ruger mini-14s and Muzzlelite stocks.
#The information now commonly available about nuclear physics suggests a
#minimum amount of material is needed to start nuclear fission or
#fusion. Basic physics prevent us from putting a nuclear warhead in a
#hand held device.
Actually, it would be trivial to build such a device in theory if
you're willing to define "nuclear" loosely. You could either use a
bit of antimatter (perhaps ionically contained within the lattice
structure of some exotic crystal so it remains stable until deployed),
or simply bypass the fission stage and use a pure fusion solution. A
small mass of lithium-6 deuteride, surrounded by a mechanism to
initiate fusion would suffice, and there are a few simple tricks that
can allow you to generate a sufficient number of positrons (antimatter
electrons) whose annihilation would start the reaction. Truly clever
manufacture (simultaneous fusion of all reaction mass) would eliminate
the containment problem as well.
There are also other theoretical mechanisms (quark compression energy)
which could make a pin-head sized grenade make our largest nuclear
weapons look like firecrackers. The technology to build such devices
doesn't exist now, but would probably be only about 50 years away if
we were really interested in developing it. Since it too is based on
manipulation of "strong force" interactions, it would probably be
referred to as a "nuclear" device as well.
An obvious advantage of such systems is that they could easily be
adapted to a "rifle grenade" role, since there would be no real
minimum warhead yield and they would be remarkably "clean" weapons.
#But these problem are what gives the movie an aged flavor...a distinct
#character. Naturally today we would say: Where is the heavy artillery?
#What about the GE 20 mm and 30 mm Gatlings that throw all that lead?
#Wouldn't one of those be more appropriate? Why not land in armored
#personal carriers escorted by futuristic M741's? Guaranteed the 7000
#rpm from that Vulcan cannon would really mash some bugs. But the author
#decided to go with a typical (Dieppe style) mass landing
Well, the scriptwriter and director did anyway. Most of the roles of
heavy weaponry were built into the powered armor in the book. The
movie was, sadly, a poor representation of the book.
#As most sci-fi is, this is a human condition story. Appreciate the
#authors message. Appreciated the way he chose to go about doing this.
#Look at the propaganda!
This is something the director added, and wasn't in the book. The
world community of the book was a strong democratic republic (you had
to join federal service to vote, but you didn't get the franchise
until you left federal service). The movie tried to portray the
culture of the book as fascist, when it was something very far
removed. For example, the "murderer was caught this morning and he'll
be executed tonight" was totally different than in the book. There
was a similar scene in the book, but it was an AWOL soldier, and the
book made a clear distinction that this was harsh military justice,
which was vastly different than the judicial system of "civilians".
This movie wasn't an accurate representation of the book, it was an
attempt to ridicule the book by somebody who didn't understand it.
#My god, you can see the propaganda and
#appreciate the cynicism behind this story! Your government had _you_
#hating the communists, just like the govt. in the story had them hating
#the bugs; all propaganda!
I hated communism all on my own (the real kind, not just the poor
excuse the USSR tried to export). And in the book, the bugs were the
bad guys. There wasn't the underlying "we invaded their otherwise
peaceful world"; they were an infestation that would have spread to
Earth and destroyed all other competing life in the galaxy and there
was no way to stop their spread except extermination.
Sadly, now that this movie is out, there isn't much chance of somebody
doing a movie really based on Heinlein's book.
Dave HD
#They were lightly armed for their opposition.
And just exactly where was the artillery or the armored division?? Ever see
infantry not supported by either artillery or armor? And who would use a .223
against a Cape buffalo let alone that "tanker" bug or any of those smaller
versions?
Oh well, I guess if you want reality, go watch the news - oh wait, that's
mostly fiction too!
Will Hartung
JayStr <jay...@best.com> writes:
#Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
#to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
#than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
#cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
#about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
#buggers out).
I dunno, anything that would work well with a 500 Yard Prairie Dog
should be more than adequate.
Rich Pierson
Joe Ladislaw wrote:
# But in boot camp the Troopers had lasers that stunned the enemy in war
# games.
# How come they didn't upgrade the laser technology from stun to kill?
# Perhaps the cost of putting all those laser beam shots in the movie was
# just too much.
How about they were just using MILES gear that bites :-)
Would be really simple to add a stunner to the existing
miles gear that is used in current army training to make
hits "hurt" instead of just setting off an alarm.
--
*************************************************
Richard J. Pierson
Lucent Technologies -LCCC
Liberty Corners NJ
Voice 908.580.8901
Fax 908.580.6289
*************************************************
Glenn E. Meyer
In the book, the MI wore powered armor with significant energy
weapons. Heinlein did not describe them. The Rico character
(narrator) mentions that he forget to tell the reader about
them. The MI also carried guided tactical nukes in a very small
KT range in a Y rack on the back of the powered suits.
There was no organic Air, artillery or armor as Heinlein
clearly states that the armored suits made them obsolete.
When the director abandoned the suits for dramatic and cost
reasons - they became the undergunned infantry. However, someone
of them also looked better nekkid (sorry - couldn't resist <g>).
bye
Glenn E. Meyer
Do you think standard 00 shot would penetrate those things?
Slugs perhaps and could you shoulder a full automatic
12 gauge - Ow!
You need one of those hypothetical 21st Century Army PDW
with clips of 20 to 30 mm minigrenades. There have been
mockups of such.
Put the energy in the round - not into your shoulder.
Probably shaped charges would be effective.
I await the Strasbourg Big French Bug test.
Mark Horning
In article <64g948$o...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, <jk...@starfleet.mil> wrote:
#
#Sadly, now that this movie is out, there isn't much chance of somebody
#doing a movie really based on Heinlein's book.
#
One good thing the movie has done, many people are buying copys of
_Starship Troopers_ in book stores. Heh heh, are they in for a surprize.
Mark E. Horning mhor...@netcom.com
Teacher Teacher, how can you teach, when all the grownups just want you to
preach, how can you teach the kids to think for themselves, with all the
censors stealing books from your shelves -- Leslie Fish
bherrera
Shawn Terjeson wrote:
# They made the wrong movie. Heinlein's "Starship Trooper" was a fun
# little mindless romp, read Joe Haldaman=92s "The Forever War" for some
# real gut wrenching and thought provoking space opera.
#
Check out "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress" by Heinlein or "Gallagher's Glac=
ier" by
Walk&Leigh Richmond too!
Morgan Hart
I would want a DAEWOO 12gauge clip fed shotgun. Saw one in the pilot
for STARGATE SG-1.
Sigstroker
#i dont think so... they had m-60 flash suppressors and lots of muzzle
#flash more common to a 7.62 than a .223. ive had experience with both
#in the army and it seems to me to be some sort of impossible hollywood
#combination of an m-60 crossed with a shotgun and a muzzlite bullpup
#stock.
Can you say "blank firing adapter"?
Don Baldwin
##As most sci-fi is, this is a human condition story. Appreciate the
##authors message. Appreciated the way he chose to go about doing this.
##Look at the propaganda!
#
#This is something the director added, and wasn't in the book. The
#world community of the book was a strong democratic republic (you had
#to join federal service to vote, but you didn't get the franchise
#until you left federal service). The movie tried to portray the
#culture of the book as fascist, when it was something very far
#removed. For example, the "murderer was caught this morning and he'll
#be executed tonight" was totally different than in the book. There
#was a similar scene in the book, but it was an AWOL soldier, and the
#book made a clear distinction that this was harsh military justice,
#which was vastly different than the judicial system of "civilians".
#This movie wasn't an accurate representation of the book, it was an
#attempt to ridicule the book by somebody who didn't understand it.
In the book, the guy who was executed didn't just go AWOL: he went
AWOL, kidnapped and killed a kid. A very different scenario.
Don
John Roberts
dark...@bellsouth.net (Darklove) wrote:
#In article <64ga62$o...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, rake...@juno.com says...
##
##JayStr <jay...@best.com> wrote:
###Will Hartung wrote:
####
#### sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) writes:
And a Lightsaber.
#
#
# Darklove
#
#
#
#Use the force, Luke!!
#
--
John "Rake" Roberts 1994 Shadow VLX
"I'd rather be a smart-ass, than a dumb-ass"
Remove the second "n" from rakemann to send e-mail.
MtLoweMan
I was surprised at the smallish cartridges------looks like .308s were used as
props. A .458 would have been better.
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
In article <64g78f$n...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, DaveMcS <dav...@aol.com> wrote:
## authors of good repute have argued that some kind of chemically powered
### projectile throwing weapon is likely to remain the small arm of choice
### for many years to come.
#
#Remember in the film adaptation of Dune. Paul Etraides and company all personal
# energy shield which protected them from
#energy and blunt force attacks but the simple knife was able to penetrate the
# force field. Mebbe the venerable bullet falls into this category too. . .?
Not bullets in that case, as the field would stop anything going over
something like 30meter/sec(?) or so.
But in most cases, given the poor energy on target effects of most
beamers, Kinetic weapons have many advantages, and chemical-driven
kinetics are the simplest and most reliable.
Tom McNaughton
JayStr <jay...@best.com> wrote:
#Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
#to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
#than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
#cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
#about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
#buggers out).
#
I think I would want to go with the BIG can of Raid with hi-cap
magazines <G>.
Paul Stevens
Nick Hull wrote:
#
# In article <64gabq$o...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, James H Galt-brown
# <jh...@Ra.MsState.Edu> wrote:
#
# # Sir:
# # They call it a flamethrower!!!
#
# Must be a lot of fun to use a flame thrower underground! GIs in Vietnam
# tunnels passed out when they used M16s .
#
# --
# Free men own guns - slaves don't
# Committees of Correspondence web page:
# <http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/>
# nh...@mindspring.com
In Heinlien's original book, they used flamethrowers. They didn't
have to worry about passing out because every Trooper was outfitted
with powered armor. The powered armor was essentially an armored
space suit with mechanical boost for the arms and legs. A trooper
in armor could take on a gorilla (hand to hand) with no worries
about the outcome, and he could drop onto a planet with just about
any environment.
Leaving the powered suits out of the movie was, in my opinion, a big
loss for the movie. But what can you do when you blow most of your
budget on the effects for the aliens.
P.S.
JayStr
Darklove wrote:
#
# In article <64ga62$o...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, rake...@juno.com says...
# #
# #JayStr <jay...@best.com> wrote:
# ##Will Hartung wrote:
# ###
# ### sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) writes:
# ###
# ### ##Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
# ### ##Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
# ###
# ### #Looked like Mini-14's to me. Looked like there was a slide with cocking handle.
# ###
# ### Whatever they were, they were big, ungainly, underpowered, and seem to
# ### have problems with firing in general.
# ###
# ### Oh, and they seemed completely unsuitable to the task at hand as well.
# ### We all know the rules: Bring enough gun.
# ###
# ##
# ##Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# ##to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# ##than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# ##cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# ##about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# ##buggers out).
# ##
# #
# #The Atchisson automatic shotgun. Fully auto 12 gauge, 20 round clip.
# #ARRRG!
#
# I'd like a semiautomatic 37mm grenade launcher, Clip or belt fed, so I can switch from
# explosive to buckshot quick.
#
# And a .50 AE for my sidearm. And a Lightsaber.
#
# Darklove
YEAHYEAHYEAH hehehhrm! And a CHAINSAW! and a GETAWAY CAR! and some
NACHOS! That would RULE! ;)
Lee DeRaud
Will Hartung wrote:
#
# JayStr <jay...@best.com> writes:
#
# #Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# #to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# #than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# #cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# #about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# #buggers out).
#
# I dunno, anything that would work well with a 500 Yard Prairie Dog
# should be more than adequate.
#
"And the award for 'Cross-thread Post of the Year' goes to..."
# Will Hartung - Rancho Santa Margarita. It's a dry heat. vfr...@netcom.com
# 1990 VFR750 - VFR=Very Red "Ho, HaHa, Dodge, Parry, Spin, HA! THRUST!"
# 1993 Explorer - Cage? Hell, it's a prison. -D. Duck
Jeffrey Schwartz
# JayStr <jay...@best.com> writes:
#
# #Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# #to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# #than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# #cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# #about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# #buggers out).
Call me crazy but...
If we're talking Sci-Fi , I'd kinda like one of the SPIW rifles from back in the
early '60's, with all the attachments that were planned for it.
For a sidearm? a SCAMP, with a bunch of magazines of multi-fletchette.
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
##
##Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
##to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
##than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
##cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
##about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
##buggers out).
##
#
#The Atchisson automatic shotgun. Fully auto 12 gauge, 20 round clip.
I was thinking about that after seeing the film yesterday. I'd recommend
a full-auto 308 rifle with 200gr flat-nose steel, copper, or zinc solids.
Thse would be fairly long and easily upset projectiles that wouldn't
break up, creating large smashing wounds to the bug exoskelitons. Ideally,
something even bigger, but then the problem of portablility comes in.
Carl Porter
# #Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# #to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# #than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# #cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# #about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# #buggers out).
# #
# The Atchisson automatic shotgun. Fully auto 12 gauge, 20 round clip.
# ARRRG!
You would think with all that new space technology they would have
figured out something better than rifle technology from the 1900s. No
energy weapons, mortars, artillery, phalanx cannons, rail guns or
nothing
except tactical nukes which should have killed them too.
What to use? Change the ammo, go to HEI with white phosporous or
magnesium chunks (make 'em squirm & burn) and maybe a larger
caliber/longer
bullet for more impact. For underground mass attacks grenades(bouncing
bettys), flame throwers, mini guns, laws rockets.
For above ground mass defense use whatever happen to gas attacks.
Use your motars and artillery to lay down a gas barrage along a walking
front.
A couple sets of phalanx cannons set to sweep back and forth in crossing
fire
patterns would brunt the rush damaging them enough were small arms fire
may
do some good.
Pokey The Clown
How 'bout just a big-ass Roach motel?
John A. Stovall
On 14 Nov 1997 17:36:56 -0500, Carl Porter <C-Po...@msg.ti.com>
wrote:
# For above ground mass defense use whatever happen to gas attacks.
#Use your motars and artillery to lay down a gas barrage along a walking
#front.
Heinlein, has in the book had "oily gas that killed them but not us".
There was also a nonlethal version called "Tanglefoot" .
Just two more reasons why this film wasn't worth the money.
READ the Book don't see the movie!
Your brain will thank you.
Not my provider’s views.
John Alex Stovall
XVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVO
"....Long live Freedom and damn the ideologies,"
Said the gamey old back-maned wild boar
Tusking the turf on Mal Paso Mountain.
XVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVOXVO
7.62x39
# Anybody who has ever read any of the literature from that era can
# appreciate this movie and the novel it was based upon. (I have yet to
# read the novel, and think I will after seeing the movie). I cannot even
# attack their choice of guns because that was common at the time. Hand
# held machine guns, and the anti-aircraft guns quite similar in style to
# WWII weapons. The was also back when the belief existed that nuclear
# weapons would become portable enough to become high powered grenades.
# The information now commonly available about nuclear physics suggests a
# minimum amount of material is needed to start nuclear fission or
# fusion. Basic physics prevent us from putting a nuclear warhead in a
# hand held device.
If you ever get around to reading the book you will realize that the Mobile
Infantry dropped in to combat
from orbit. Each trooper is incased in a individual drop capsule. Many of
the capsules dropped during combat where empty decoys. When they reached a
certain altitude the capsule opened up. Each trooper was fighting inside
mechanical power armor ( like the walking forklift in "Aliens" but fully
inclosed and a lot more powerful and faster ). This armor enables the
troopers to fly a certain distance, run at great speed, and have the
strength of ten men. It was armed with flamer, micro nuclear missiles
(around 1 kiloton), time delayed mines, and gun of unknown caliber. This
armor is what enabled the troopers to combat the bugs numerical
superiority. In the book when the troopers were spaced at 300 yard
intervals they considered this being bunched up. They were one man walking
tanks. They only used a dropship to be picked up after combat.
# But these problem are what gives the movie an aged flavor...a distinct
# character. Naturally today we would say: Where is the heavy artillery?
# What about the GE 20 mm and 30 mm Gatlings that throw all that lead?
# Wouldn't one of those be more appropriate? Why not land in armored
# personal carriers escorted by futuristic M741's? Guaranteed the 7000
# rpm from that Vulcan cannon would really mash some bugs. But the author
# decided to go with a typical (Dieppe style) mass landing - for the first
# attack at least. But that landing style would kill a lot of people,
# just like Dieppe in WWII. Later they use more bombing, what a good
# idea!
In the book ST the Mobile Infantry didn't need tanks, artillery, air
support, because the power armor was so heavily armed and so mobile, hence
the term Mobile Infantry since the infantry could fly around and run miles
in a few minutes . Most of the Bugs in the book were workers and only a few
were warriors. The workers attacked to MI hopping to bog down the troopers
with numbers so the warriors could close in for the kill. The stupid
director decided to use these tactics not Robert A. Heinlein. I could have
made a better movie for $100 million even without troopers in power armor.
# Even look at the starships that they use. Great _big_ battleships. A
# common site in the WWs and even later into the '80s was the battleship.
# Battleships and carriers of the waters have fallen by the wayside. This
# is not how an author today would write about war.
This is again different from the book. Instead of bashing what you think
Robert A. Heinlein tactics
are from the movie named after his book, try reading the book. You will
clearly see that for 1959 Robert A. Heinlein was greatly ahead of his time.
About 300 years ahead of his time. Starship Troopers was one of the finest
books I have ever read. I also recommend "The Forever War" by Joe Haldeman.
--
Louis
Lost Angeles, Kalifronia
Lo...@spotcom.com
Eric Pinnell
JayStr wrote:
# Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# buggers out).
Easy. 30mm IGLS with 50 round box.
Eric Pinnell
JayStr
James P. Girardeau wrote:
#
# Joe Ladislaw wrote:
# #
# # OK, they used catridges in an age of speed-of-light space travel
# # (cartidges being as efficient as they are).
# # But in boot camp the Troopers had lasers that stunned the enemy in war
# # games.
# # How come they didn't upgrade the laser technology from stun to kill?
#
# The Troopers were wearing a type of MILES gear in those sceens. It was
# the MILES gear that was shocking them when the lasers hit. I think that
# sceen would have been more effective if the laser beams had not been
# visable.
#
# # Perhaps the cost of putting all those laser beam shots in the movie was
# # just too much.
#
# I'm sure that had a lot to do with it....and for all the shooting that
# is done in some of those sceens you wouldn't have seen anything but
# laser beams cris-crossing the screen.
You know not how true you speak. Starship Troopers used up more
ammunition than ANY OTHER MOVIE IN CINEMATIC HISTORY -- some 250,000
blanks. This is far & away a new record, according to the Hollywood gun
wranglers whose hobby it is to keep track of such things. It also has
the longest single rolling explosion in movie history. They rigged up an
entire valley floor with time-delay pyrotechnic charges, blew it up,
then overlaid the footage of Fleet fighters dropping napalm and several
hundred (computer-generated) running, screaming, burning Bugs.
Helluva movie, by the way -- and not just for the eye candy. There is so
much to see that I went back to watch it again yesterday. (Yes, I am one
of the faithful who is an old fan of the book too). Claw fu. Machine-gun
fu. Plasma bug-fart fu. Twenty breasts. 300 dead bodies. Grim-Jawed
Award Of The Decade to Michael Ironsides for saying "They sucked his
brains out." Four and a half stars. Jay Bob says check it out. ;)
Darklove
##Will Hartung wrote:
###
### sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) writes:
###
###
###
###
###
##
##to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
##than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
##cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
##about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
##buggers out).
##
#
#ARRRG!
I'd like a semiautomatic 37mm grenade launcher, Clip or belt fed, so I can switch from
explosive to buckshot quick.
And a .50 AE for my sidearm. And a Lightsaber.
Darklove
Georgia & DEE
On 13 Nov 1997 11:50:20 -0500, you wrote:
#Will Hartung wrote:
##
## sigst...@aol.com (Sigstroker) writes:
##
## ##Anyone know what they built the rifles onto that were used in Starship
## ##Troopers? It looked like some sort of large bull-pup AR-15.
##
## #Looked like Mini-14's to me. Looked like there was a slide with cocking handle.
##
## Whatever they were, they were big, ungainly, underpowered, and seem to
## have problems with firing in general.
##
## Oh, and they seemed completely unsuitable to the task at hand as well.
## We all know the rules: Bring enough gun.
##
#Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
#to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
#than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
#cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
#about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
#buggers out).
Weaponry against the Bugs? Hmmmmm....how about the M19 40mm automatic
grenade launcher....or maybe a 25mm Bushmaster cannon. Of course
they're not exactly a HAND weapon....what about the FLAME guns
mentioned and used in Robert Heinlein's book? If they breathe, they'll
also burn.....
Dee Lewis
Nick Hull
# Sir:
# They call it a flamethrower!!!
Must be a lot of fun to use a flame thrower underground! GIs in Vietnam
tunnels passed out when they used M16s .
--
Free men own guns - slaves don't
Committees of Correspondence web page:
<http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/>
nh...@mindspring.com
Ken Marsh
Hi,
telecon <tel...@dimensional.com> wrote:
# <gre...@sting.phx.mcd.mot.org> wrote:
#:1) The alien bugs were largely impervious to the rifle rounds. But the
#: troopers continued to use them anyway even though they had the more
#: effective shotgun at the ready.
#If the Troopers had aimed, and hit the nerve case, it would have taken the
#warrior bugs out.
Ah, but that was just hopeful propaganda, didn't you catch that?
#The main thing about the movie that I was dissappointed in, was that there
#was no mention, at all, of the cap trooper armored and powered suit.
I agree!
Ken.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail: kmarsh at charm dot net | Edit a binary .INI file, then tell
WWW: http://www.charm.net/~kmarsh | me that UNIX is too complicated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
aaron
In article <64dtrt$h...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, rwpa...@h2net.net (Ron & Janet
Padgett) wrote:
# On 12 Nov 1997 10:37:06 -0500, grs...@aol.com (Grsjax) wrote:
#
# ##It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
# ##waste your money or time to see it.
# ##
# ##
# #
# #I agree with your assesment of the guns in the movie but do not agree
with the
# # above statement. Heinlein's orginal story is one of the best SF
stories ever.
# # Read the book before you blast it.
# #
# #grsjax
#
#
# Sounds like you read the book and saw the movie. How close to the
# book is the movie?
Similarities:
War vs. bugs.
...that's about it.
# If the movie has only a vage resemblence (sp?) to the book Imay save
# my money and reread my old old copy instead.
The Book has all *kinds* of stuff. For one, powered body armor/battlesuit
things, a wildly divergent plot, and his friend dies, his dad survives, and
there aren't any hokey science-lab or arena-football scenes.
It's a okay movie, but don't go expecting anything like the book.
Think Robocop + Aliens, and you'll be in about the fight frame of mind...
--
aaron[at]herringn.com
Mike Mays
By the way, what ever happened to the Air Force? They made one pass and
then never showed up again ! A little napalm might have made some crispy
critters out of em.
[MODERATOR: Folks, I think some of this stuff oughta finally
migrate to a sci-fi or movie group ... ]
William Barwell
In article <64hpkc$r...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
Will Hartung <vfr...@netcom.com> wrote:
#JayStr <jay...@best.com> writes:
#
##Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
##to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
##than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
##cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
##about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
##buggers out).
#
#I dunno, anything that would work well with a 500 Yard Prairie Dog
#should be more than adequate.
#
Large caliber (.44 Magnum, .50A&E), pin-grabber style JHP
loaded with a fast acting nerve poison, sort of like Omega-Star
prefragged bullets.
Pope Charles
SubGenius Pope Of Houston
Slack!
TNickMS70
#> I await the Strasbourg Big French Bug test. <<
Let me be the first to proclaim:
IT WAS A FRAUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know it hasn't happened yet; that doesn't make me any less first in line. So
there.
palincss
Shawn Terjeson wrote:
# They made the wrong movie. Heinlein's "Starship Trooper" was a fun
# little mindless romp, read Joe Haldaman’s "The Forever War" for some
# real gut wrenching and thought provoking space opera.
Are you sure you read the book? Heinlein's books are always fun
but never mindless -- especially not this book. How often do you
see issues like civic responsibility and the meaning of citizenship
in a "mindless romp"?
Steve Palincsar
TNickMS70
#>From time to time, it is discovered that the best way to defeat
thousands or even millions of dollars worth of high tech equipment is a cheap
low tech solution. <<
Do you mean to suggest, sir, that those squirrels that caused power blackouts
in San Francisco last summer weren't working on their own accord....?
Darklove
In article <64lqr2$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, call...@hamilton.law.ou.edu says...
#Remember, fire is a much more effective means of mass destruction
#than projectiles (that's why the worst mass murders in US history
#usually involved fire and not firearms).
Really? Can you name some? The only ones I can pull up at all didn't
use fire, unless you count Oklahoma City, but that was a bomb. OH YEAH,
Waco. Any others?
#Beyond that, I'd be looking at 40mm grenade launchers, claymores,
#molotov cocktails, and napalm--lots of napalm. Add some punji stakes,
#and you've got the makings of a bug barbeque. Did anyone bring the
#BBQ sauce? :-)
Now when you cook a giant bug, You need to remove the exoskeleton first.
The best meat is in the claws. You dip it in a light butter sauce, on the
cultured end, and Hickory House barbque on the other. Dig a pit, roast it
for a few hours, turning it now and then, letting the bbq cook into the meat,
I mean, it blows pork all to hell.
Darklove
David G. Bell
In article <64lr4v$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu> n9...@gte.net "Greg Dean" writes:
# Pokey The Clown wrote:
# #
# # How 'bout just a big-ass Roach motel?
# # Wouldn't that be "Chemical Warfare"?
#
# BTW, I took a unit level NBC course at Ft. Knox. The instructors
# pointed out that the difference between Raid and nerve agent was
# that nerve agent (I am not sure which form) was for bigger pests.
I can believe it.
There are two common sorts of insecticide, the pyrethroids and the
organo-phosphorous compounds.
The OP compounds have the same poisoning symptoms as nerve gases, the
same mode of action, and the same medical treatment for poisoning.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
James H Galt-brown
Gentlemen:
In the words of Corporal Hicks:
"I say we dust off, go back to the ship, and nuke the sight from
orbit."
James H Galt-brown
Sir:
Prior to Mr. MacVeigh, the greatest mass murderer in U.S. history
killed 88 people in a basement nightclub in NYC with two Molotov
cocktails. He had been ejected from a party, and then procured two wine
bottles, filling them with gasoline. Upon returning to the party, he went
just inside the door, lit and threw one bottle to the far end of the
room, then ignited the other and smashed it in the doorway, trapping the
partygoers between two fires. If memory serves, this happened in 1991 or
1992.
respectfully,
Jim Galt-Brown
Rusty Eubank
# Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# buggers out).
Marlin 45-70 lever action. Not real fast, but really thumps when it hits.
Glenn E. Meyer
Browsing around in Barnes and Noble today and
looking at some sci-fi rags and the original novel,
I found out:
1. The movie gun is called a "Morita"
2. In the novel:
a. Bugs were intelligent. The soliders were controlled
by a buried brain bug but weren't totally mindless.
They carried energy weapons - a beam that could cut
an MI armore suit in half. They had ships.
b. They didn't use missiles or artillery in land battles but
preferred land mines set off in tunnels under you.
c. They had ships and ship to ship or ship to land missiles.
d. The Federation didn't want to nuke Klendathu at first
invasion time because bug command and control, cities,
factories, etc. were buried deep enough to survive
standard thermonuclear weapons.
Even after bombardment, Klendathu would survive
and maintain command and control over the bug ships
and colonies. Thus occupation was needed.
Later, nova bombs were developed to split planets.
However, by then the bugs had significant POWs from
the first invasion and they weren't to be sacrificed.
e. The MI fought in armored suits of about 2000 lbs weight
that amplified strength and allowed limited flight and leaps.
Personal weapons:
a. Described as gorilla sized
b. Hand and rifle configuration flamers. These seem
not to be our style flame throwers but energy weapons
as they can be focused into knife like beams.
c. Back mounted guided rocket racks with HE and 2 two
kilton rockets.
d. Two types of nerve gas - one incapacitating to bugs
and one fatal
e. The suits amplified strength enough that a trooper
could take on a bug hand to hand.
g. MI did significant training with gunpowder based assault
type rifles just in case.
h. Heinlein says aircraft, artillery and tanks were
useless against mobile armored suits.
f. Skinnies - bug allies and then ours - had a paralysis inducing
beam weapon.
Bye
Side issue - Rico was a Filipino but his mother died in BA as she
was visiting during the raid. His father later joined the MI.
Darklove
In article <64ngoo$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, epi...@ibm.net says...
#
#
#
#Jeffrey Schwartz wrote:
#
## So, the answer is , yes, with __VERY__ creative tamping and mass shaping, you CAN
## get a boom with what would commonly be refered to as a "sub critical mass".
##
## Its just very difficult to develop.
##
## But, figure 400 years down the road...
#
# Figure today. The suitcase sides nukes used by Russia employ sub critical masses
#and implosive shaped charges.
AND! Some MAY be missing. I think I'll get one. Take out Miami. No American there. <EG>
Darklove
JayStr
Rusty Eubank wrote:
#
# # Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# # to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
# # than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
# # cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
# # about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig the
# # buggers out).
#
# Marlin 45-70 lever action. Not real fast, but really thumps when it hits.
Yeah. My dad has one. Just remember, though; ya gotta aim for the nerve
stem.... even in SF war movies, shot placement is everything....
Glenn E. Meyer
Rusty Eubank wrote:
# Marlin 45-70 lever action. Not real fast, but really thumps when it hits.
Did you see the movie? You will end up in three pieces or
having you bean sucked emptied with a 45-70.
I think you need a magazine loaded minigrenade type shoulder
arm. FPS not important - you need a shell that will explode them.
Maybe 20 to 30 mm. Revolver types would be bad has you couldn't
reload in real time.
Any solid round that you could reasonable hold and fire is underpowered.
Interesting issue - should such a round be:
a: Explode on contact - HESH tyhpe
b: Shaped charge and shoot a 20000 FPS copper stream into
the bug
c: Penetrate and then explode
I'd go for b and c.
hig...@ix.netcom.com
Well, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the real world gun that the MI
troopers' movie rifle was based upon. Look carefully through the bolt
handle slot/ejection port at one or two scenes where there is a close up
of the weapon. Underneath the cosmetic shroud of the movie gun you'll
see the receiver of an M14.
Looks like .308 is just not potent enough for bugs!
LS
John E.R. Jasen
Glenn E. Meyer <gme...@express-news.net> wrote:
# Rusty Eubank wrote:
#
#
# Did you see the movie? You will end up in three pieces or
# having you bean sucked emptied with a 45-70.
#
# I think you need a magazine loaded minigrenade type shoulder
# arm. FPS not important - you need a shell that will explode them.
# Maybe 20 to 30 mm. Revolver types would be bad has you couldn't
# reload in real time.
#
# Any solid round that you could reasonable hold and fire is underpowered.
#
# Interesting issue - should such a round be:
# a: Explode on contact - HESH tyhpe
# b: Shaped charge and shoot a 20000 FPS copper stream into
# the bug
# c: Penetrate and then explode
#
# I'd go for b and c.
"stingers" from David Drake's *Redliners*. 15gr projectile, moving at over
10000fps.
--
"Impossibility is a temporary problem, subject to rapid change."
-- John E. Jasen // DNRC Ambassador to Earth \\ jja...@umbc.edu --
-- My views are those of the DNRC only. Prepare to be domesticated --
David Martin Schmidt
Try reading "The Probability Broach" also, by L. Neil Smith. A neat
alternate history story, featuring, among other things, a character
whose preferred weapon is a "Walther-Zeiss" laser pistol...
DMS
In article <64fbih$k...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
tnic...@aol.com (TNickMS70) writes:
##> BTW...where can I get one of those thousand round mags? Since this is in
# the future, it looks as if the ban on hicap mags will be repealed!!
# Wooohoooo!!! <<
#
#Sorry; LEO's and military use only. Want one? Join up now and wait for 'em.
#
#
#Wer liebt nich Wein, Weib und Gesang,
#Ist er ein Narr sein Leben lang.
#(Martin Luther)
#
Michael K. McCollum
Dave HD wrote:
# #They were lightly armed for their opposition.
#
# And just exactly where was the artillery or the armored division??
# Ever see
# infantry not supported by either artillery or armor? And who would
# use a .223
# against a Cape buffalo let alone that "tanker" bug or any of those
# smaller
# versions?
#
I might have been seeing wrong but I could have swore during the first
attack against those bugs that threw astoriods, the transports were
firing some kind of a rocket barrage while the marines were disembarking
and running around the place. Now I know this isn't exactly an armor
division nor a sustained artillery attack but it was better than
nothing. Also in a battlefield like that transporting their equivalent
of an armor division might be difficult and artillery might not be
mobile enough to manever around the battlefield because the bugs weren't
using standard battle tatics. They weren't centralized to one location
they were all over the place. Artillery might have been too much of a
target to be much good. (The transports even though they appeared to
have a lot of armor didn't stay down in one place, they left and picked
up the soliders in a different location.)Just my .02 cents.
Michael McCollum
Fluid
Someone wrote:
#
# # Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you want
# # to anchor a Bug warrior?
# Marlin 45-70 lever action. Not real fast, but really thumps when it hits.
One problem with the .45-70 ( one of my favorite cartridges BTW ) - will
it penetrate the hard external armor? While the .45-70 has a lot of
momentum and "knockdown", it's velocity may be too low to penetrate the
tough 'skin'. Example: no .45-70 load will penetrate 3/8" plate steel,
just puts a big dent in it. A .220 Swift slices through like it was
butter.
Seems the real secret to dropping a bug is to destroy the major nerve
complex. This requires accuracy above all else. Holes around the edges
don't work - they can lose all legs and still be dangerous. Fire from a
flame thrower wouldn't be fast enough ( has to penetrate that armor
again ), and then there is the incidental fire danger to nearby
troopers. Short of particle beam weapons, which may never be powerful
enough in a small portable size, the best weapon for hand-to-hand use
may indeed be something like the automatic projectile weapons used in
the film. I'd recommend better fire discipline and less "spray and
pray" technique however.
Jay T
Eric Pinnell
Darklove wrote:
# I
#
# A Barrett is the way to go, Semi auto, And it don't just hit, It smashes,
# goes through, hits another, goes through...
#
# Darklove
No, no, no, no, no! I keep telling ya, IGLS. Individual Grenade Launcher
System. It's a semi auto grenade launcher that fires 30mm grenades, and has a
box magazine with 10 rounds in it. the 30mm grenades are able to punch through
2" of armor plate.
Now, if you want a simple sidearm, try the OICW (Objective Infantry Combat
Weapon), that combines .223 caliber rounds with a 20mm mini cannon, which holds
6 rounds. Nothing like a little HEI for the bugs.
Eric Pinnell
Nosy
In article <64pden$6...@xring.cs.umd.edu> cdo...@netcom.com (Chris Douty) writes:
< I enjoyed it anyways, since much more of the politics and plot of the
< book were left intact. Maybe the Hollywood types didn't understand it
< so they just let it stand. :-)
Really?
So there's a detailed series of scenes that take place in
Lt. Col. DuBois's "History and Moral Principals" class,
is that right?
DeLotto
I opt for accellerating an asteroid up to near lightspeed and dropping it into
their sun...
After that, sidearms of choice for the medal ceremony.
Eric Pinnell
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci wrote:
# "Suit case" can be fairly relative. The current technical bug isn't so
# much the size, but the weight. One could likely get a small sub-crit
# weapon about the size of a large coffe can with current tech, but it
# might wieght 20-30 lbs. and have only a few tons yeld.
A few kilotons yield, you mean.
# A problem with
# really small current tech nukes is the blast radius isn't so bad, but the
# rad radius is still pretty fierce. So you might have a RPG nuke that
# could be tossed out a hundred yards or so that simple cover could protect
# form the blast/flash, but the rad flash would still be unhappy.
For nuclear weapons, the zone of lethal radiation is less than the zone od destruction.
IOW, to be instantly killed by the radiation would require you to be close enough to be
incinerated.
# However, in the context of future tech, the "nuke" might actually be
# something better/different, radiologically. Say a tiny bit of anti-matter
# or some exotic fusion progression that reduces the rad products.
The trouble with anti-matter is that if containment ruptures, it goes off.
Eric Pinnell
JayStr
John E.R. Jasen wrote:
#
# Glenn E. Meyer <gme...@express-news.net> wrote:
# # Rusty Eubank wrote:
# #
# #
# # Did you see the movie? You will end up in three pieces or
Not if you hit the nerve stem. Shot placement is everything. ;)
# #
# # I think you need a magazine loaded minigrenade type shoulder
# # arm. FPS not important - you need a shell that will explode them.
# # Maybe 20 to 30 mm.
...explosive 12-gauge slugs, perhaps?
# Revolver types would be bad has you couldn't
# # reload in real time.
# #
# # Any solid round that you could reasonable hold and fire is underpowered.
# #
# # Interesting issue - should such a round be:
# # a: Explode on contact - HESH tyhpe
# # b: Shaped charge and shoot a 20000 FPS copper stream into
# # the bug
# # c: Penetrate and then explode
# #
# # I'd go for b and c.
#
# "stingers" from David Drake's *Redliners*. 15gr projectile, moving at over
# 10000fps.
#
Sounds groovy.... but when they come out with an affordable,
man-portable EM railgun with ammo that won't burn up in the atmosphere,
lemme know.... until, I guess the MI are stuck with their over/under
Mini-14/Berettas. (Ya didn't miss the 'improved' gun at the end of the
movie, did you? the one that blows up the top of a nearby hill? Might be
similar to the mini-GL that a lot of folks on this newsgroup have been
clamoring for.)
Going to go see it again this next weekend. A tip: Catch it in DTS if
you can. In an SF shoot-em-up like this one, digital surround-sound
makes all the difference in the world.... close your eyes and there's
ships crashing in the row behind you, people running around and shooting
and screaming in back, big giant bugs snarling on either side of you....
great stuff.
Don't let the hard-line Heinleiners rain on your parade. This is a great
movie. Go see it NOW!
-- Jay Stranahan
Abe D. Lockman
In article <64qmu1$a...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, Allan M Stewart
<aste...@shell.flinet.com> wrote:
# : I found the following items interesting:
#
# : 1) The alien bugs were largely impervious to the rifle rounds. But the
# : troopers continued to use them anyway even though they had the more
# : effective shotgun at the ready.
#
# : 2) One small magazine apparently held thousands of rounds of ammo.
#
# : 3) The magazine wouldn't work where it was mounted.
#
# : 4) No one ever tried aiming. They were all shooting from the hip.
#
# : It was a poorly written story which was badly acted and directed. Don't
# : waste your money or time to see it.
#
#
# He's absolutely right about everything, especially the last two lines.
# I should have listened.
On the other hand, do try the novel of the same name by Heinlein, which
the creators of the movie almost totally ignored or defiled.
adl
Lawrence Degala
In <64o92f$4...@xring.cs.umd.edu> Rusty Eubank <wran...@iglobal.net>
writes:
## Which begs a new question: what sort of handheld weapon would you
want
## to anchor a Bug warrior? The goddam things seem to have more stamina
## than a Cape buffalo, and they attack in waves like army ants. (Don't
## cheat and start bringing up recoilless rifles, etc. -- we're talking
## about something you can cart underground with you when you go to dig
the
## buggers out).
#
#Marlin 45-70 lever
Try Mossberg 590 9-shot with Winchester SuperX 3-inch magnum rifled
hollowpoint slugs. Great thumping with B-Square scope mount and
Simmons 3X-9X power scope. Those 70mm holes gouge lots of material out
of any hard target whether its a heavy lead acid car battery or a
grizzly. And yes, the rubber eye cup has a fierce tendency of kissing
my shooting glasses with every recoil! The best nose bleed one can
every wish for...
Lon Lentz
This was a great movie. It had that WWII buddy flick feel and it was
full of propaganda. And a lot of spoof and fun, Doogie as an SS goon
complete with leather trench, and quite a bit of the dialogue had that
50s sci-fi novel feel to it. Also add to this the politics of the time
and the fact that Heinlein was a Libertarian of sorts. Take it for how
it was intended, not what you were expecting it to be. A great movie.
Now, the gun they should have had was the 40.5mm auto cannon used by
Bruce Willis in The Jackal with which he attempts to vape the
president's wife.
From which curiosity begs the questions. Is the 40.5 a standard NATO
caliber? I do believe the gun was supposed to be Polish; east block
then? Is depleted Uranium available in this caliber? I had thought
that DP was limited to large tank calibers. What countries manufacture
depleted Uranium?
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
In article <64rvds$d...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, DeLotto <del...@aol.com> wrote:
#I opt for accellerating an asteroid up to near lightspeed and dropping it into
# their sun...
While that wouldn't actually do anything, a bunch of moderately fast
rocks would have the energy to get the bugs where they live, providing
the planet has a conventional "thin" crust and melty mantle.
Even really big nukes don't have the deep down cleaning action of really
big impact craters (say starting at 10KM diameter). And if you have the
capacity of getting things near "C" easily, you don't even need to use
all that big of impactors.
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
In article <64rved$d...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
Eric Pinnell <epi...@ibm.net> wrote:
#
#
#Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci wrote:
#
## "Suit case" can be fairly relative. The current technical bug isn't so
## much the size, but the weight. One could likely get a small sub-crit
## weapon about the size of a large coffe can with current tech, but it
## might wieght 20-30 lbs. and have only a few tons yeld.
#
# A few kilotons yield, you mean.
No, the very small nukes are in the tens of tons range, the moderately
small are in the hundreds to maybe one KT range.
#
## A problem with
## really small current tech nukes is the blast radius isn't so bad, but the
## rad radius is still pretty fierce. So you might have a RPG nuke that
## could be tossed out a hundred yards or so that simple cover could protect
## form the blast/flash, but the rad flash would still be unhappy.
#
# For nuclear weapons, the zone of lethal radiation is less than the zone od destruction.
#IOW, to be instantly killed by the radiation would require you to be close enough to be
#incinerated.
Again, for really small weapons, the rad radius acutally exceeded the
blast radius, and the flash energy is next to negligalbe.
## However, in the context of future tech, the "nuke" might actually be
## something better/different, radiologically. Say a tiny bit of anti-matter
## or some exotic fusion progression that reduces the rad products.
#
# The trouble with anti-matter is that if containment ruptures, it goes off.
That's a nitpick against a mere "for example".
Christopher Lym
Nick Hull (nh...@mindspring.com) wrote:
: # They call it a flamethrower!!!
:
: Must be a lot of fun to use a flame thrower underground! GIs in Vietnam
: tunnels passed out when they used M16s .
I'm a little curious what you mean by "passed out when the used M16s"..
Perhaps you could elaborate further? Was it the noise that made them pass
out?
Chris
Michael Edelman
Eric Pinnell wrote:
#
#
# For nuclear weapons, the zone of lethal radiation is less than the zone od destruction.
# IOW, to be instantly killed by the radiation would require you to be close enough to be
# incinerated.
Not for Enhanced Radiation weapons, aka neutron bombs. Pure fusion
devices with non-nclear triggers (which may or may not exist) would also
have a lethal radiation radius far beyond the blast radius.
-- mike
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Edelman m...@pass.wayne.edu
Wayne State University voice: (313) 577-0742
Computing & Information Technology fax: (313) 577-8787
Academic Computing & Support Services
Detroit MI 48070 http://www.pass.wayne.edu/~mje/home.html
Don Baldwin
#Yes, but which version, R.A.H.'s version or the
#movie version [The movie version if in a book should
#be required to have a new title like "Starship Trooper
#Slaughter" or maybe "Bug Bites"]. I enjoyed the movie,
#specially the "gratuitious" parts ;-) but in no way
#connect it with the book. It was a good shoot-em-up but
#I would have enjoyed seeing the MI run though the bugs
#at high speed.
As a long time RAH fan, I think the movie sucked.
They turned it into a caricature of the book. For example,
the scene where the recruit asks D.I. Zim what good a knife
is a gun fight. In the book, Zim gives him a sensible
answer; in the movie, his response was brutal and stupid.
In the book, you also don't have instructors beating on
recruits with truncheons.
And those TV/Net ads where kids do their part and squish
cockroaches...and the one where the kids play (literally)
tug-of-war with cap troopers' guns and the troopers
laughingly hand them cartridges...
Blech.
Don
Corran23
There's no way it was a mini. The rear of the receivers are different. And
the mini has no windage knob on the right side of the receiver. The M14 does.
Also, since when is it advisable to listen to hollywood about guns? (the one
in the movie had a windage knob on the right side of the receiver)
Corran23
#They were minis in muzzlelight stocks, or so a Sci-fi prop page says.
#And it doesn't matter if a part of the sights were missing, They could
#stcik your dick on it and say it's a futuristic system.
Lee DeRaud
Lon Lentz wrote:
# Now, the gun they should have had was the 40.5mm auto cannon used by
# Bruce Willis in The Jackal with which he attempts to vape the
# president's wife.
Um, that's 14.5mm not 40.5mm...remember, he turned down a 20mm (Lahti?)
because it was too big.
# From which curiosity begs the questions. Is the 40.5 a standard NATO
# caliber? I do believe the gun was supposed to be Polish; east block
# then? Is depleted Uranium available in this caliber? I had thought
# that DP was limited to large tank calibers. What countries manufacture
# depleted Uranium?
Anybody with a nuclear power reactor.
Lee