Re: How big is a troopship? [DS/FT/SG2] (and what it all means)

At 8:04 PM -0400 9/23/99, Ryan M Gill wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Michael Llaneza wrote:
>
>> My last Striker II scenario had power armored troops in concealed
>> positions with semi-portable AA weapons (rockets and one-shot plasma
>> weapons) ambushing grav tanks. That yahoo may be packing some serious
>> heat.
>
>And that position wasn't softend up by Ortillery for what reason?

It takes an awful lot of softening to get all the power armor out of 
biphase carbide bunkers. And the environment that creates in't real 
friendly to sensors (heat, possibly radiation, dust, the odd 
firestorm...)  The Japanese in WWII endured hours of bombardment 
sitting behind a couple of meters of coral, concrete and steel; and 
so did plenty of other nations. The island war analogy does force me 
to concede that a BB could hit a machine gun nest with a 14" shell, 5 
feet was the estimated accuracy from one example I recall. Ortillery 
is likely to be much more accurate, and significantly more powerful 
than 2000 lbs of HE.

And a good justification of using historical analogies is that 
offense will eventually catch up with the defence, or vice versa 
depending on your initial conditions. Mobility, detection and 
communications are not in any form of dynamic balance as offense and 
defense are and so their relative capabilities increase as we project 
into the future. [draft idea, comments welcome]

I've also found concealed PA troopers somewhat useful against grav 
armor on the march. A coordinated SAM launch from a platoon of PA can 
seriously mess with even heavy armor. It's very possible to create 
vehicles in DSII that are almost immune to missile fire. This is one 
of the reasons that paying for them  makes sense.  Even if you only 
get a few hits the tanks will have their formation busted up; the PA 
might even have been able to single out command or support vehicles. 
And rooting them out of dense terrain could take a while. This is a 
candidate for a con game if I ever run one.

>
>> woohoo ! I put a 4" hole in an engine ! or the cockpit, or a rocket
>> pod, or into the cargo bay (or troop compartment for an assault
>> shuttle); say, what kind of fuel do these things use ? .... There's a
>
>The cockpit would be a problem, but if it was to an engine, then I'd
>think there'd be sufficient power to affect a safe landing. This thing
>has enough juice to get to orbit. Coming down is a whole lot easier.

okay, so it might not get back up then. And while I'm as happy about 
designing redundant capacity into systems, sometimes you can't 
squeeze it into your constraints. Maybe a morale check for any 
trooper who sees an engine streaming smoke and flame and a skill 
check for the pilot ?

> > wide range of damage results possible, lets be suitably paranoid
>> about ground fire. How many assault transports in your initial wave
>> will seriously hose you if you lose them. My list includes all of
>> your C3 assets, fire support units, your aid station (if landing
>> one), etc.
>
>I'm not saying any ground fire would be a non stopper, just that only
the
>heavy ground fire would.

Light ground fire sucks, heavy ground fire Very Bad ?

>Why are C3 assets coming in on the first wave? Same goes for hospitals.

They're in there as an er, ah, uh, well, assume you've missed one 
yahoo during the initial phases and he pops a SAM into something in a 
follow-on wave. I'll mutate my point into an adminition to be 
generally paranoid about your most critical assets. I was just 
listing useful and important units off the top of my head, which 
isn't how I plan my own assaults :-)

> > I can agree with some dedicated fire support zooming about, but your
>> transports should have something to add to the suppressive fire. I'd
>> say heavy rocket pods and a dual purpose point defense gun (combining
>> PDS and APSW roles in DSII) at a minimum.
>
>Probably not a bad ide. The big lander that I have is a 25 mass lander.
A
>Class 1 beam isn't something to shrug at.

>
>> The door mounted .50s were great for suppressive fire in hot LZs. I
>
>Thought they used Door mounted M60s or the occasional 7.62 mini gun. An
>M2HB would be a bear to fire in a door mount.

on reflection, I think the M2HB is from elsewhere; I swear I've heard 
of 'em used as door mounts, it'd be worth wrestling a bear in an 
urban LZ. Of course, there's precious little in your average 
(terrestrial) jungle to slow down even a 7.62.

> > seriously doubt too many direct hits resulted, but not much short of
>> a tank or bunker can slow a .50 round down. And in the fun with
>> physics dept: how does a .50 cal round compare in energy to an NVA
>> regular. Hmmm, e=mv^2... the .50 is relatively light, and moving very
>> fast, whereas the NVA grunt is about 50kg counting the AK47 and isn't
>> moving very fast...	 anyway :-)
>
>heh, thats why the VC hated the M2HB.

some armies use that caliber as a sniper round. The sights are 
calibrated out farther even than my old Enfield (2km, it's actually 
doing indirect fire, you could shoot over a hill at the angle need 
for 2km)

>
>> I fully agree that anything that goes anywhere near any sort of
>> ground defenses should be adding at least some firepower to the
>
>Or a heavy escort. I don't see any kind of mass drop going in with out
>some aerospace there for cover/supression.

Not with me planning it ! Or in it ! The big lesson from WWII for 
opposed landings: more firepower delivered with greater precision, 
closer coordination and better timing.

>I'm still trying to figure out how VTOLs are going to get down to the
>surface. Truck them down in a big lander and assemble them or have some
>sort of disposable system that chucks it out on the way to the
ground...?

Drop them in robot landers (chutes with retros and a small brain 
maybe) along with the semi-essential supplies. Food, water, ammo and 
medical supplies land behind armor. I've just gotten through a novel 
set in the Stalingrad Pocket, don't EVER run out of those.
Michael Carter Llaneza
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1991-1950
Devolution is very real to me.
Whenever I hear the "Odd Couple" theme, I get this image of Dennis 
Rodman borrowing Marge Schott's toothbrush.
Overkill: A Sufficient Preponderance of Firepower
http://www.flash.net/~maserati/
Security and Privacy Alert:
http://www.cryptonym.com/hottopics/msft-nsa.html