Prev: RE: [DSII] Sinking hover tanks Next: RE: Hover tanks

Re: Hover tanks

From: Roger Burton West <roger@f...>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 00:09:00 +0100
Subject: Re: Hover tanks

On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 03:42:04PM -0600, B Lin wrote:
>If you didn't care about floating on water (as most MBT's don't) then
>you can have larger ground pressures and a more compact footprint.  But
>as you shrink the footprint and increase the ground pressure, you need
>more power to stay aloft until you reach something like a Harrier which
>can be held aloft on pure thrust.

Well, yes. Part of the problem with this argument is that hovertanks
really don't make sense _unless_ you regularly have to sprint at high
speed and/or cross substantial open water, and can make them light
enough to do that; for any given output from your power plant, you can
connect it to a conventional track drive mechanism and get much more
armour into a more compact chassis at the price of going rather more

(Hammers' Slammers basically ignore this by having practically infinite
power output, very lightweight armour technology, and terrain that's
peculiarly well-suited to hovercraft.)


Prev: RE: [DSII] Sinking hover tanks Next: RE: Hover tanks