In TML nightly Volume 25 Issue 2 [email removed] states:
>I believe that you'll find that the Glock is manufactured in Austria (at
>least originally). I would not _conclude_ that the Glock is more advanced
>weapon than the others, but it does use a more advanced material for the
>majority of it's components (Slide, Reciever, Magazine, etc.).
>
>The Glock has a radiply growing number of fans, and has had a number of
>highly favorable reviews recently. It may be the wave of the future but
>all of the weapons above (and many others - Such as the Browning Hi-Power,
>Beretta M92F, Taurus PT-92 & PT-99, H&K P7 Series, etc.) have advantages
>and disadvantages when compared to one another. I would say that the Glock
>is an advanced weapon and it compares favorably to the other weapons
>mentioned.
>
>Chuck
Nowhere do I say that the Glock is the wave of the future. In fact
(but this is quite a personal opinion), I hope it will be gone as soon
as possible - I do not trust safty-less pistols.
However, the Glock __IS__ more advanced than the CZ-75, both in
materials and in action. It is more advanced (in materials) than the
Jericho 941, possibly also in action.
I did not compare the Glock to any other weapons for a simple reason -
I did not shoot the weapons in question. From my knowledge, the Beretta
92F is better off forgotten as son as possible (which, alas, it will
not).
The market (and that what it is, after all - a market) drives pistol
fashions - ammo and action. The current trend in ammo is slow, heavy
rounds of calibre close to 10mm (i.e. 9mm to 10.4mm). It was once in
favour of light, fast rounds (namely - .38 Special FBI load) but got
over that. The current trend in pistols is high capacity, light, medium
sized pistols - Glock is a wonderful example of these.
All such trends may be reversed, modified or changed at a 6-months
notice.
=======
In TML nightly Volume 25 Issue 1 [email removed] states:
> The various agreements on inhuman weapons (the first of which outlawed
>exploding bullets of less than a certain calibre, btw) doubtlessly has
>something to do with it. I assume that these are in effect in the
>Imperium too.
There are two answers to this. One - you have never encountered
players who like to say "I am loading APIDSPX now." Two - you have never
encountered people who like to say "Load phoshoru... er... soft
ordnance."
> That depends in their contruction. Sintered tungsten penetrators like
>those that were used in early (ie 50's to 70's) discarding sabot tank
>rounds have a tendency to disintegrate into a cloud of tungsten shrapnel
>just after penetrating the armour. And if the rounds are done as old
>'Mercenary' described them, with a 1mm tungsten core coated with a HP
>lead jacket, they might work on lightly armored targets too (the word
>for this should be TSS - Target Shredding Sabot, as gun data in the 2300
>'Backdoor' adventure)
I think that is a good idea. Maybe, softnose penetrators (oxymoron?)
too.
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Marc A. Volovic - Procrastinator and do-no-gooder|
| [email removed] Snail: P.O.B. 23114, 91230 Jerusalem, Israel|
| Dept. of Linguistics, Hebrew University, Mt. Scopus |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Fencers do it with rapid thrusts |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+