So I heard the TR wanted an audio pass... I'll give you an audio pass

But gauss does not equal rail weaponry. I think gauss would sound more like a conventional weapon, but with the muzzle thump due to backpressure? The round crack would be similar, mind. On that note, I'd like to see a proper crack/thump like we see with real weapons

Edit: on my phone, reply formatting got screwed up. This is a reply to FrontTowardsEnemy

Technically, there's a rather significant difference between "Gauss rifle" and "gas-accelerated battleship mounted Gauss naval artillery turret"

Yes, there is. It's called "scale".

Functionally, even small caliber (5mm for example) electromagnetically accelerated weapons have massive muzzle blast from the plasma pushing the projectile down the bore. The silly youtube videos that you (and everyone else it seems) are using for reference are demonstrating home built toys, not weaponized levels of the technology. So no, EMA (ElectroMagnetically Accelerated) weapons aren't quiet by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, they're far louder than any chemically propelled munition due to the peak velocities and pressures achievable by propellants vs. EMA weapons.

This stuff drives me nuts. Do some research before debating stuff like this.

Something that you might find interesting but aren't aware of- hybrid chemical propellant solution that overcomes the limits of the thermal gas expansion rates in order to achieve muzzle velocities in excess of 10K FPS:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_gas_gun

Even with the most advanced propellants, CPA (Chemically Propelled Ammunition) is physically limited to around 6K FPS maximum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_velocity

Also, citing Wikipedia is a horrible idea from a professional standpoint, but it's easy, the information I've cited is fairly current/correct, and it's not worth the effort for me to cite professional research papers etc. Just sayin'.

And no, I'm not picking on you. Simply trying to educate. If you or anyone else is really interested in this stuff I have quite a bit of experience with it and would be happy to share.

Funny, I seem to recall it was you who posted a youtube video. One that had only a meager association with Gauss small-arms.

And if you're going to cite wikipedia, pardon me for doing the same. Except that I happen to be quoting from the actual article.

The underlined portion is almost an exact paraphrase of my original post:

This is an interesting one.

A home made Gauss Gun that fires at well below the speed of sound.

Good mock up, could be better, but mostly better than what we have now. Your chaingun sounds seem off, I've heard a chaingun live fired.

Good work. Sounds like actual weapons rather than air soft guns.

You also have to keep in mind that the guns handled by the New Conglomerate, don't depend solely on the Guess mechanism for the acceleration of their rounds. If they did, well...you'd know for one reason. The size of the magazine and the visible contents.

They use bullets too. The rounds are accelerated first with a traditional cartridge packed with reactive powder and then accelerated further with the guass mechanism, to increase efficiency with a pretty interesting technique. Twice the kinetic output in a small weapon frame. Bullets for short, are visibly held within the magazine during each reload sequence. Guns also sport ejection ports for the spent casings. Evidently, shell casings can be seen on the higher settings, so I'll need to see if those ejection ports actually see use, but that can only go so far as to determine whether or not the bullets go from traditional to caseless in the most ******** example of nanite systems design ever.

EDIT: Just checked, NS and NC weapons are caseless.

I can't tell if you're being obtuse, cherry picking info to support your point or both.

Yes, for subsonic applications, an EM weapon would be 'nearly silent'. For mortar applications, it would indeed operate as the article states.

All of that has nothing to do with what is typically thought of when the term 'rail gun' is used in reference to an EMA small arm/rifle etc., particularly in relation to video games. In video games, I've yet to see an example of a subsonic/short ranged low power weapon that has fluff/lore of EMA propulsion.

Weaponized EMA for small arms typically (as in, I've yet to see a low velocity subsonic example *ever*) use hypervelocity small caliber projectiles that are 100% dependent upon kinetic energy for their terminal effects. This is completely contrary to every aspect of what a mortar system is/does.

So again, in terms of what the OP was discussing, e.g. EMA direct fire small arms/rifles etc., a system such as this, real or otherwise would be technically correct to have a massive muzzle blast/report due to propelling a projectile at velocities exceeding 4Km/sec. And the sound signature of the gun firing would have nothing to do with any sort of "sonic boom" created via the projectile itself.

TL; DR: the sh*t you're talking about, not the same. The idea that you think that it's comparable makes me think that you have no understanding of the area of discussion what so ever.

You are incorrect. Electromagnetically accelerated projectiles do not gain increased kinetic energy by scaling down the size of the projectile. For this reason, higher caliber slow firing rounds that match the NC's weapons philosophy would theoretically be more effective. Of course, since no man-portable combat effective EMA weapons system exists, arguing about this is about as useful as feet on a fish.

P.S. All non-explosive projectile weapons are 100% dependent on kinetic energy for their terminal effects. Lines like this make it appear that you are merely trying to sound knowledgeable.

Obtuse. Got it.

Funnily enough, TR use gunpowder, and their weapons have no ejection parts

And the very first example in my video shows casings clip through the top of the weapon, and in the case of the TAR and MCG, eject at the very end of the barrel

TR/NC has inconsistent visual weapon design in this regard.

#Edit: Also just checked, NS is not caseless. You can see the casings on the AR, but they eject at the very back bottom corner of the carbine for some reason. You can't even see them on the SMG in first person, but they're there when you watch someone else shoot. The ports on NS weapons are also waaay too thin for the kind of caliber that gets ejected.

So, yeah. What separates a good artist from a bad one is detail, and so far SOE hasn't impressed me with NS/TR

Off-topic to your conversation, but I just wanted to add for people to see.