|
|
|
|
|
| SFReader Forums > SFReader > Ask The Expert > To those that use guns - wording question | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
crystalwizard
Forum Moderator
      
Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 5194
| Posted 8/6/2007 9:08 AM (GMT -5) |   | I'm told that ammo or ammunition is correctly used ONLY for objects ready to be fired.
Is that the case and if so, what sort of terms are correct for it once it's in flight or hitting targets? | | Back to Top | | |
 |
erazmus
Master
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 4557
| Posted 8/6/2007 9:36 AM (GMT -5) | | | | |
|
Hermit
Diavhrati Luminary
Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 1785
| Posted 8/6/2007 9:39 AM (GMT -5) | | What kind of gun? Recoiless rifle? Sniper rifle? anti-aircraft?
Ordinance is one of my favorite cover terms for firearms and the killing devices they use. Covers everything from guns to explosives to rounds. "round" is also a term used for both the ammuntion packet and the projectile(s) fired therefrom. Context is really important here. If the rounds miss, then 'rounds' works as well as projectile, bullet, sabbot, etc. It's always good to have specific types of round for the sake of precise terms and realism building. You can coin a round if you can imagine one as good or better than those in use. Are you dealing with Earth spec-reality? Sabbots are a class of round. Hollow-points and explosive rounds are classifications. Within those, you have species such as Yellow Jacket, Shredder, Black Talon, etc. If you're using explosive rounds with multiple explosives within them (this would be a seriously large round, but likely for a mounted, stationary gun), you might call it a Cluster round. I'm not as up on new rounds as I was a year ago, but it's pretty easy to sell the idea of a new round if you describe its behavior - or give it a cool name and let the reader imagine his own theory for it - the new Colt Dragonbite! Military and law enforcement only! Authenticated identification mandatory.
Incredibly prolific penster | | Back to Top | | |
|
H.P. Lovesauce
Necronomicondiment
Date Joined Jul 2007
Total Posts : 585
| Posted 8/6/2007 10:46 AM (GMT -5) | | To an artillerist, a "gun" is not the same as a firearm. A firearm is a bang-bang gun, like a pistol or a rifle. I get the feeling your gun is a firearm--you can call it a gun.
Ammo is what firearms eat. They take the cartridges, shoot out the rounds, and spit out the casings. They can do this repeatedly without anyone having to manually reload it, using up all the cartridges in a magazine.
I'd say the gun you're describing is what's sometimes called an autocannon. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hermit
Diavhrati Luminary
Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 1785
| Posted 8/6/2007 12:10 PM (GMT -5) | | Thanks, HP. I decided not to push this issue as it seemed less important. But that is also why I was asking about the weapon in question. "Shell" is a good choice. As long as you're using the same type of rounds. If it'll shred a tree, it can't be too small. If it lights them on fire, it must have incendiary components with explosive rounds. Have to be pretty big-bore to fire a shell that powerful. How big is the round? Existing weapon, or invented? Any suggestions for a specific weapon, HP? "Weapon" fits guns and firearms, small arms, etc.
H.P. Lovesauce said...
To an artillerist, a "gun" is not the same as a firearm. A firearm is a bang-bang gun, like a pistol or a rifle. I get the feeling your gun is a firearm--you can call it a gun.
Ammo is what firearms eat. They take the cartridges, shoot out the rounds, and spit out the casings. They can do this repeatedly without anyone having to manually reload it, using up all the cartridges in a magazine.
I'd say the gun you're describing is what's sometimes called an autocannon.
Incredibly prolific penster | | Back to Top | | |
|
H.P. Lovesauce
Necronomicondiment
Date Joined Jul 2007
Total Posts : 585
| Posted 8/6/2007 1:09 PM (GMT -5) | | That looks more than good enough to hold off the zombie hordes, BH. Maybe a 30mm weapon? I've no expertise beyond a youth misspent partly on weapons porn. 
Looks good, crystalwizard! | | Back to Top | | |
|
Rob Mancebo
Adept
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 987
| Posted 8/9/2007 2:49 AM (GMT -5) | |
Anthony G Williams said...
Generally speaking, the term "round" of ammunition as used nowadays is synonymous with "cartridge" - i.e. it includes the case, the propellant and the primer as well as the projectile.
Projectile is a general term for anything fired from a gun of any size. In rifles and pistols, the projectile is called the bullet. In larger calibre cannon (20+mm), one filled with HE (High Explosive) is known as a shell, as already stated.
- Yep, it's pretty simple actually.
- Another problem is that, what the audience-at-large may say is often incorrect. To a professional a 'gun' is either a piece of artillery or a machinegun. Any other firearm will have a more specific designation (Rifle, shot-gun, hand-gun, etc. etc.). Also the generic use of 'clip' is incorrect'. A 'clip' is only a metal piece that holds rounds together. It can either be locked into the weapon so that ammunition can be pushed into a firearm, like the SKS or old C-96, or it can be placed into the weapon's 'magazine' like the M-1 Garand from WWII. Modern Hollywood uses the word 'clip' to represent a 'Detatchable Box Magazine'. And, of course, any word used repeatedly by Hollywood, becomes a generic standard (Even though Hollywood is fantasy and doesn't like guns.)
Adventure-History-Fantasy-Folklore
www.geocities.com/robmancebo/ | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hermit
Diavhrati Luminary
Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 1785
| Posted 8/9/2007 11:51 AM (GMT -5) | | It's so great being a Yank!
If not for small firearms, my youth would have been empty and completely wasted.
So, basically, it looks like it comes down to the same thing any choice in writing and editing should come down to: who's your audience?
Hobbiests I've known don't get uptight about the mag/clip issue. A few grunts I know, but not many combat veterans give a hang about terms.
As my cousin puts it: "With proper training, you put that there and point and shoot - your reflexes should be in charge, not your stupidass conscious mind."
Anthony G Williams said...Ah yes, one of my favourite posters for a Hollywood film (one of the Naked Gun series) showed a revolver being fired - and out of the muzzle came not a bullet but a complete cartridge, rimmed case and all. 
This might have been intended as a joke, of course, but if so it would have passed clean by 90% of Brits, who wouldn't know any different.
Incredibly prolific penster | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hermit
Diavhrati Luminary
Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 1785
| Posted 8/9/2007 3:42 PM (GMT -5) | |
Rob Mancebo said...
As my cousin puts it: "With proper training, you put that there and point and shoot - your reflexes should be in charge, not your stupidass conscious mind."
- Ah yes, but the reason professionals argue terms is because the newbies come from various backgrounds. They have to be trained to speaking in Military specifics (and slang). Point in case- M-16 ammo comes in bandoliers loaded on 'clips' of 10 rounds. (commonly called 'strip-clips' because they're never loaded into a weapon.) The clips load into M-16 magazines by a little 'clip loader' that comes with each bandolier. The PVT who gets terms mixed up and brings a range officer a magazine when asked for a clip, is going to feel pretty miserable marching back from the rifle range with a Drill Sergeant's boot up his a$$. Yes. True. Still, we're discussing fiction writing. And it comes down to audience. And, in truth, any PVT so pathetic as to make such a mistake is likely to be far away from the opportunity to make such a mistake - likely in civilian dress. 
- It's important to speak the same language in combat. When a squad leader calls to his squad to 'Bring up the gun', no one ever thinks he's calling for a rifle or pistol, everyone knows he wants the squad machinegun moved forward. Yes. Very true. But this is instinctive for properly trained troops, and only important in fiction if you're writing to an audience with this knowledge. In a longer work, you can illustrate it more, but in short fiction such quibbling is likely to castrate your action sequences.
- It doesn't have the same impact in the civilian world--hence there can be lots of arguements or wiggle-room in terms.
Incredibly prolific penster | | Back to Top | | |
| | |