Re: DSII for the 2020s

David Brewer wrote:

> > > Whether a tank-scale railgun is likely to be
> > > able to throw a large-calibre HE-frag-type bomb is something I,
> > > as yet, don't know.
> > 
> > Depends on the calibre of the gun. Railguns [snip] should probably
be > > able to fire HE as well.
> 
> Sure, but not as big and effective as the HE bombs thrown by a
> HVC-type weapon.

No, but with considerably smaller magazine requirements for each round
so you can have more of them and can therefore afford a higher rate of
fire. The overall effect on the target wouldn't necessarily be that
different.

> So instead of having two KE guns with one clearly
> superior to the other, we can posulate two KE guns with one
> optimised for shooting tanks, the other having more effect against
> personnel, this giving us a genuine non-points-cost-based
> descision on what to fit in a tank. A more interesting choice.

Certainly. The railgun would be considerably better at throwing long
rods while the HVC would have the greater flexibility, but the HVC can
throw long rods and the railgun would probably be able to fire
reasonable HE. 

> > But the HVC can do so many more things than the low-pressure guns.
> > If
> > all you want to do is launch GMS and HE the low-pressure gun works
> > fine, but it lacks flexibility.
> 
> Sure, but for an appreciable saving in size/mass for the same
> calibre.

Of course. Almost all flexibility costs you something somewhere <g>

> > > > > >   - Flechette rounds:
[snip]
> > > Actually, this is what the fluff text for MAK describes... "a
> > > cloud of kinetic penetrators".
> > 
> > No, it isn't. A 2"-long flechette will not penetrate an armoured
> > vehicle.
> 
> ...I didn't say it was *good* fluff text...

It is, IMO - but it is a reasonably accurate description of the EFP
submunition rounds, not of the anti-infantry flechettes <g>

> > EFP warheads (such as those used in the MAK-ish rounds under
> > development today) are virtually identical to long rod penetrators
from
> > the viewpoint of the target - they inflict damage in exactly the
same
> > way. The only thing which differs is how the long rod is delivered.
> > IOW, EFP subs fit the DSII PSB description of MAK very well.
> 
> Well, I disagree... 2 rounds per shell is no "cloud", but it's of
> no great importance.

Depends on your definition of a "cloud", I suppose. Two subs per round
(the shell is the round) with approx. 3 rounds from each launch tube
per DSII salvo (ie, 3 rounds within 10 seconds, then scoot) should be
enough to provide at least one sub per vehicle target in the beaten
zone - unless of course the targets are clustered extremely closely
together. If all intended targets can be engaged, then it qualifies as
a "cloud" IMO :-/

>  It's enough that DS has anti-tank ammo and anti-personnel ammo. 

Not if you want to use today's Russian mounted infantry assault tactics
<shrug> 

Today, there are artillery munitions which  exclusively kill infantry,
munitions which are very good at killing vehicles but almost powerless
against infantry, and munitions which are good against infantry and
so-so against vehicles. DSII only has two of those options at the
moment.

> The elegance of DS1's artillery rules was one
> of the things that really attracted me to it. There was no pissing
> about trying to simulate non-submunition arty or dumb iron bombs,
> all arty/bombs were submunition-based just because it made for
> much more elegant rules. Now (ten+ years later) it's all coming
> true.

Yes. In many ways DSII is a very good system for simulating tank combat
in the 1990s (tech-wise; the DSII command structures are too advanced),
but several tech gadgets under development now are beginning to make
DSII somewhat obsolete in certain respects :-/

> I apologise for mangling my paragraph. I meant to say that,
> presumably flechettes dumped out of gun shells will fall faster
> than flechettes dumped out of mortar shells, because they go up
> faster and further. I see that I was anyway

OK. I guess I've answered what you meant already, then :-)

> (BTW It took me a while to expand CG RR to Carl Gustav Recoiless
> Rifle.)

<g> Sorry. No doubt the British armed forces used a TLA of its own for
it instead, but I don't know what it was <g>

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry