Prev: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts Next: Re: Re:Tin cans versus Dreadnoughts

Thinking of aspects of PA in urban fighting [FMAS] [General]

From: "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@b...>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 15:37:55 -0500
Subject: Thinking of aspects of PA in urban fighting [FMAS] [General]

Powered Armour and city fighting

What PA brings:
- armoured support for line infantry that can operate in urban areas
- in addition to survivability, you get heavy weapons
- the ability to move quickly (if fast PA)
- the ability to take point in situations lethal to normal infantry
- close combat capabilities
- the ability to rip down doors and barricades
- ability to carry sensors that allow you to detect vibrations, see in
other
spectra, detect EM emissions, doppler, sonar, radar, lidar, penetrating
infra/ultrasound, etc. 
- sealed life support capabilities (good in case of poor air quality due
to
fumes, smoke, whatever)

PAs shortcomings:
- heavy (will tend to fall through weaker floors which also leads to the
thought of punji pits to dispose of PA)
- not quiet (maybe you can build a light PA exoskeleton for commandos
that
uses silent servos etc, but it definitely won't be full normal PA) so
can be
easily detected by sound (probably by emissions and whatnot too)
- immobilized by some EMP charges
- hard to get out if you have a collapse
- not dexterous
- problems fitting through doors and into warrens or rooms with low
ceilings
- not so great at negotiating stairs, ropes or ladders (does fine on
ramps
for the handicapped, elevators, and cargo lifts)

Anyone think of anything else to add? I'm trying to fit together some
sort
of conjectural doctrine for joint infantry-PA operations in urban
terrain...
along with appropriate rules to handle various situations.

Tomb. 


Prev: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts Next: Re: Re:Tin cans versus Dreadnoughts