Re: Los thoughts on breaching

> Ok, a few thoughts on the discussion - breaching and future
construction...
>
> Construction:
>
> I think this discussion is *seriously* underestimating the likelihood
of
> 200 years of technological development producing methods of building
> construction that are a) a whole lot stronger and safer than the ones
we
> use, and b) really inexpensive and simple to use, in their own
context.

Thatw as my point exactly in an earlier post

> Breaching:
>

I snipped a lot of good stuff adrian wrote, and I think at this point
this
conversation is on two lists so I don't know what I said here or over
there,
but while some things change, such as devices, the basic principles of
breaching and how explosives and explosions work don't change. The
device
you explained is similar to one we alredy use as an attachment to an
M4/M16
like a very wierd looking rifle grenade.

>
> The real issue is that we should just decide on the game effect we
want,
> and then make up some PSB to cover it.
>
> Game effects I think are reasonable:
>
> 1.  Breaching charges come in 2 types, 1 that the engineers carry that
can
> cut through *anything* (except the wonder material that the person who
> writes the scenario says you can't get through, because for scenario
> reasons you have to get the key or find the guy with the code or
whatever).
>   The second type is the general issued type that fires out of a
grenade
> launcher, and can get through most common doors and walls.
> 2.  The charges are clever, and can be used by someone in the same
room as
> the explosion, with NO danger of injuring the user, except sitting on
the
> thing as it goes off (in rules terms, you have to be 2" away from the
> explosion or something bad happens - what I haven't really thought
about -
> someone else can suggest an appropriate effect - maybe a d8 impact hit
on
> any figure within 2" when the explosion goes off).
> 3.  Being on the other side of the explosion should be bad, but not
for
> more than 3" or 4" in game terms.  Perhaps if a figure is within 4",
they
> take a d10 impact hit.  The charges are designed to cut/shatter a
roughly
> 1.5m x 2m hole (or bigger if you're using the special PA size versions
-
> remember you can dial-in a different spray pattern on the grenades),
so
> people can go through.

Remember one of the key effects you want out of a breach is to kill or
at
least stun for a few seconds anyone in the room of the other side so you
can
go through the breach safely.

> 4.  It takes 1 action to prepare the charge (you have to set the
pattern
> and prepare the timer), and 1 action to use.	It fires, and *wham*,
there's
> a breach.
> 5.  Firing one doesn't make a lot of noise, but the explosion sure
does.
> 6.  Firing one doesn't produce enough smoke to cause smoke effects in
game.
>
> Ok, now write PSB to fit...

The two operant things you said here, which is pretty much what I've
said,
is that it takes an action to prepare (After all if you want to have
your GL
full of breaching charges don't turn around in the next actino and
expect to
fire off an HE unless you've specified whats in a dual capacity magazine
ahead of time.) and don't stand around the thing.

And your foam device is something similar we already have in a caulking
gun
form, I don't know if it's practical as spitting out of a ballistic GL,
perhaps a dedicated launcher/applicator that hangs from your belt and
you
use once and toss (or reload).

Now as far as minimun safe distance to be from something when it goes
off,
that we already have defined in various tables. (I have a whole chart
with
weights as low as .01 lbs out to 5 lbs that we sue to calculate safe
distances for breach training and operations. I'll just give an example,
a
breaching charge with an equivallent of 1 lb of TNT has a minimum safe
arming distance of  9 meters if you ahve no protection and 2+ meters if
you
have some cover. Stuff does come flying back at you, and it doesn't take
much of a glance at any non-PA figure to see that there's enough
potential
exposure to make any sane person leery of being within one range band
(FMA
what's that 4 meters?) in the open.

And my take on all this is that breaching devices increase dramtically
in
easye of employment and effectiveness but building materials 
(espeically in
the kinds of the facilities most all FMA battles occur in) also increase
dramatiocally in durability so that you remain more or less where you
always
(in terms of danger/effectiveness)  are but with new toys.

My motto, for every invention/device and equal and opposite
invention/device
to keep things in check. It's the way of the world. I mean hey with all
the
technological advances, it's just as dangerous to be an infantryman
nowadays
as it was 1860. I'm sure the same will be true in 2260 with brief
ascendency
of one side or the other in between.