[All4BigGuns]

The table says "dice pool modifier", not "threshold modifier".

Okay, here.

[spoiler]
roll a dice pool equal to the chemsniffer’s
rating against a threshold 2 (3 if the explosives/ammo are hermetically
sealed).
[/spoiler]

Since the magazines are hermetically sealed, this makes the threshold 3, and since 3 dice roughly equals 1 hit on average this means the scanner needs 9 dice to reliable "sniff it out". This means Rating 8 with the +1 from the number of rounds to reliably detect.

[DamienHollow]

Okay, part of the issue here is I'm confusing the threshold modifier (Threshold 3 if hermetically sealed) listed in the text with the dice pool modifier on the table (-1 if encased in plastic.) Now the question is do they stack?
No that's solved lets do a short table for a rating 4 chem-sniffer

<10 rounds, Hermetically Sealed, not "in plastic", ~11%
>10 rounds, Hermetically Sealed, not "in plastic", ~21%
<10 rounds, Hermetically Sealed, in plastic, ~4%
>10 rounds, Hermetically Sealed, in plastic, ~11%
<10 rounds, not sealed, in plastic, ~26%
>10 rounds, not sealed, In plastic, ~41%
<10 rounds, nothing special, ~41%
>10 rounds, nothing special, ~54%

I think my math is right...

I am not trying to smuggle a gun that doesn't hit at least 11% on this chart anywhere we have Lone Star on standby. So that means the PSK-3 with ammo in a separate case, or the H&K with it's sealed magazine provided the modifiers stack. If the H&K could be obtained with <10 round magazines then it would be the superior gun, and I'm certain home manufacture would be allowable but don't; ask me the tests. As long as they don't find the gun itself the H&K is a comparable and cheaper option. What concerns me is the inability to modify the H&K, it's inability to hide in plain sight, the fact it does not have a Machine Pistol option. What the H&K does not say (and is to its advantage) is that the silencer is the same availability as the weapon, like the PSK-3.

[Mäx]

Or just buy an HK Urban Fighter and a concealable holster. Much cheaper.

And get arrested for trying to sneak a gun in to ballistic flight.
Detecting a gun is a threshold 1 test for a cyberware scanner.

[Caradoc]

Another way to get gear onto a plane is using a diversion to have security target someone else so that you may only have to avoid the sensors and can avoid the pat downs or thorough bag searches.

There are possibilities like palming a small quantity of restricted drugs onto another passenger ahead of you in the queue. You could spray a psychotropic hallucinogen (with DMSO) on a teenager/youth so that he 'freaks' out and attracts security. Just minor stuff that makes the security people happy that it wasn't another boring day and won't hold up the boarding process for long.

[Gorean]

The hardest part of getting a gun on board is getting past the chem sniffer.
You can use a SA Puzzler or WW Infiltrator (cheaper than a PPSK, is already MAD proof and disassembles into toiletries) arsenal page 21.

Assuming you then take 9 rounds of hermetically sealed plastic ammo with the plan to load them into the clip after security. You have a 79% chance of getting past a rating 6 chem sniffer.

That's the best you can do to get deadly force onto a plane without being a initiated aura masking mage.

[Xzylvador]

And get arrested for trying to sneak a gun in to ballistic flight.
Detecting a gun is a threshold 1 test for a cyberware scanner.

QFT.
Unless you break down the weapon in small and disguised pieces to be reassembled on the plane itself, the cyberware scanner doesn't care whether your gun is made of steel, ceramics or cow dung. It'll find it.

Beyond that, I have to agree with Caradoc.
The biggest weakness in all those security sensors is the fact that humans -or metahumans- are still going to be in charge.
Social engineering or some smuggler contacts with the right connections can get you a Panther XXL or a Gauss Rifle on- board and delivered to your seat by a smiling stewardess with a much higher chance of success than any of the solutions mentioned above.

How dumb it would be to fire a Gauss Rifle inside the pressurized hull of a ballistic plane during mid-flight is another matter entirely.

[UmaroVI]

Yeah, there's no point even bothering with looking at how to get past MAD scanners or chem sniffers or whatever when they have a cyberware scanner, it's much harder to get weapons past a cyberware scanner than anything else.

The answer is going to be hacking (as in, hack the scanners) or bribery as mentioned above.

[Gorean]

Yeah, there's no point even bothering with looking at how to get past MAD scanners or chem sniffers or whatever when they have a cyberware scanner, it's much harder to get weapons past a cyberware scanner than anything else.

Actually the cyberware scanner and the MAD scanner are the two easiest to defeat. There are weapon modifications that make the gun undetectable. It's just the chem sniffer that can't be automatically defeated.

[Mäx]

Actually the cyberware scanner and the MAD scanner are the two easiest to defeat. There are weapon modifications that make the gun undetectable.

To MAD scanners, nothing affects cyberware scanners.

[Gorean]

Actually the cyberware scanner and the MAD scanner are the two easiest to defeat. There are weapon modifications that make the gun undetectable.

To MAD scanners, nothing affects cyberware scanners.

Actually you're wrong, easy breakdown allows the pistol to become jewelry pieces or other commonly carried pieces.

If you want to use a stock weapon instead of modding your own, the SA Puzzler turns into 20 pieces that look like jewelry, writing implements and other commonly carried items.

[All4BigGuns]

Or just buy an HK Urban Fighter and a concealable holster. Much cheaper.

And get arrested for trying to sneak a gun in to ballistic flight.
Detecting a gun is a threshold 1 test for a cyberware scanner.

Honestly, people on these forums over use cyber-ware scanners. Those things will not be in every air port, restaurant and street corner. They'd actually be pretty darn rare.

[KarmaInferno]

The problem is that while the fluff does indicate cyberware scanners are rare, the actual game mechanics don't support this.

Cyberware scanners are so damn cheap, at least to a corporation, that there's no good reason NOT to have them every damn where.

International airports, however, are one place they WILL have them.

Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T6ANbL3SMw

-k

[All4BigGuns]

I'd more see those being in the most secure of classified government (or megacorp) facilities--think more secure than what Area 51 is thought of today.

[KarmaInferno]

And the international airports like SeaTac have always been described in Shadowrun as being among of the most secure facilities on the planet.



-k

[All4BigGuns]

And the international airports like SeaTac have always been described in Shadowrun as being among of the most secure facilities on the planet.



-k

I just seriously doubt they'd be as secure as a top secret military or corporate facility. You need to remember that 9/11 didn't occur in the SR setting, so the fallout from that never would've happened either.