Re: DS II Infantry vs vehicles

----Original Message Follows----
From: RWHofrich@aol.com
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: DS II Infantry vs vehicles
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 21:54:02 EST

Because the round for the new weapon would (presumably) be bigger than
an
IAVR, I would suggest that PDS/ADS be able to shoot at it (give the 
defending
vehicle an additional die or dice based upon the PDS/ADS).  Unless we're
assuming its basically a rocket-propelled hypervelocity kinetic
penetrator
and not a HEAT weapon...

You have a point there. however, since I envisioned this class of weapon

encompassing several slightly different approaches, one could argue for
a 
DIMINISHED capability to stop it with PDS/ADS, since it is moving more 
quickly than a guided weapon that would need to adjust it's flight path
on 
the way in, instead of completely disregarding the PDS/ADS, as I first 
proposed.

What about APFC systems?  Would they have any effect vs the SAVR?

As I stated in the first post, it's validities would be the same as for 
IAVR's, just with more chits, so yes, APFC systems would reduce SAVR 
validities to Yellow only.

The range is way too long in my opinion (which is, as usual, worth what
you
paid for it).  It appears that you are proposing an UNGUIDED
shoulder-launched missile system (otherwise we're talking GMS) and each
inch
is 100 meters IIRC.  So 16 inch range is pretty darn far for an unguided
man-pack weapon.

Not quite shoulder-fired, more like Tripod mounted.  Perhaps shoulder,
but 
not as easily as say a LAW or RPG, we're talking significantly larger 
launchers and rounds than IAVR's.  Thuse the specialist element
requirement.

How 'bout letting it shoot 8 inches (double IAVR range)
based upon the PSB that the fire control/targetting system is better
than 
the
IAVR's?  That's still a pretty long shot against a presumably moving
target
(the range of the SMAW is somewhere around 300 meters, right?).

Rob
(who left the Corps before the SMAW came into use)

You have a point again, gosh darn you! But let's assume that propellant 
technology has advanced, as well as the targeting package on the firing 
tube. I'll give you that 16 is probably too far, but I'm not so sure
about 
only 8.  How about another comprmise, say 10"? That's exactly 1 klick,
whick 
would make it very impressive by modern standards, but still not 
over-powerful on a DSII battlefield.

Brian
(Who was never in the corps, so his expertise is even MORE limited.)

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com