Re: Maritime Strike Bombers

At 7:46 PM +0100 5/31/01, Charles Taylor wrote:
[snip]

>In general, they can be faster, longer ranged, harder to kill, and/or
>carry a heavier weapons load than normal fighters, however, they tend
to
>fare badly against fighters in combat.

As they should...

>I don't have any hard and fast numbers just yet but I'd say something
like:
>
>Basic Small Craft
>Primary Move = 12mu
>Secondary Move = 12mu
>Has 3 CEF
>Vs. fighters as Attack Fighter
>Attacked as fighter, attackers get +1 to rolls
>No attacks vs. ships
>Cargo capacity: 1 (MASS 2 hull) or 2 (MASS 3 hull)
>This is a basic shuttlecraft-type design - with minimal defensive
>armament
>Worth next to nothing NPV-wise (if it can be used as a BJ, then the
cost
>would rise).

Oh, wow, that's exactly what my Coast Guard Cutters need to have. I 
just made these size 1 as they really only went to pick up people ala 
the CG Sea Kings, Sea Hawks, Sea Sprites and Lynx's.  I didn't figure 
on actually haveing a game effect, but the larger High Endurance 
Cutters have bay space for these kind of craft specifically.

I took 4 Arapahos and cut one down to make an extended hull model 
making 2 normal, and 1 larger type. I also took some other vessel, B5 
small scale I think, and used the bow section from the 4th Arapaho 
and built another similar med sized high endurance cutter (24 mass 
iirc). All were painted white with a blaze orange portion on the very 
tip of the 'NAC spade'. They all received a nice Red and Blue 
diagonal stripe, US Coast Guard insignia on the sides. The largest of 
the 4 received a smallish triangular shaped craft attached to a pin 
off of its base post. The little Shuttle looks like a tiny, FT 
scaled, version of the Microtac resin Shuttle/Courier. The 'SAR 
pinnance' was painted blaze orange.

I figured the USCG would survive the amalgamation with the Canuks and 
Brits, as it has a bloody long history and  at the time a good sized 
force structure. The mission would have just been extended into
space, just like the navys' were, in effect. Tradition is nice. An 
additional extension is Space Air Rescue Service, ie PJs or 
Pararescue Jumpers.

A nice dovetail to this is that I can extend a Star Grunt scale to it 
and run an NAC Pararescuemen scenario.

>Ok, not a lot if use - but various systems could be added - faster
>engines, more fuel capacity, bigger weapons, etc.

[snip]

>Also, if we launch the missiles during the launch ordnance phase, the
>bombers already have had their movement phase to make a 'bombing run' -
>effective total range is 42 mu (30 mu move + 12 mu missile).
>
>Full group of 3 strike bombers will launch a strike equal to 1 salvo -
>depleted groups reduce the maximum number of missiles that lock on by 2
>per bomber lost.
>
>Alternatively, each bomber carries 1 longer ranged missile, off the cuf
>I'd say treat as an MT missile with reduced warhead strength (1d6
damage
>as opposed to 2d6).

Then why carry these compared to the torpedos with a 4-6 damage, 
aside from the Standoff range?

Also the general idea is the allow the same mix of EMP or Needle 
missiles as well in these "Air launched" MT Missiles.

Still all of the variant ideas has me thinking. I'm going to have to 
sit down and compare the ideas and try to figure out the better 
balance here.

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill		 ----------	      SW1025 H -
-   Internet Technologies  --  Data Center Manager (3N &10S)   -
- ryan.gill@turner.com			 rmgill@mindspring.com -
-		   www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
- C&R-FFL -	  The gunshow loophole isn't		 - NRA -
-	     keep federal laws out of private lives	       -