Re: [GZG] Subject: Re: What are the pitfalls of standardised forces?

>Adrian1 wrote:
>
>>I know little if anything about mechanics but aren't hovercraft/GEVs
>>less complicated than wheeled tracked vehicles.   WIth no need to
>>replace wheels/tracks or broken suspension, etc.
>
>If you're talking about hovercraft: As long as you only move across
very
>smooth terrain that doesn't tear at the plenum chamber walls, maybe.
>Hovercraft also drink far more fuel than similarly-protected wheeled or
>tracked vehicles capable of carrying the same payload.
>
>If you're talking about GEVs: While large parts of the SF community use
the
>term "GEV" to mean "hovercraft", "Ground Effect Vehicle" is actually an
>abbreviation of "Wing In Ground Effect vehicle" (WIGE) - ie. something
more
>like an aircraft than a ground vehicle. I'd be very surprised if WIGEs
>required less maintenance than wheeled or tracked vehicles :-/
>
>Eli: *Light* hovercraft are less likely to trigger pressure mines than
>other types of ground vehicles are, but they are just as vulnerable to
>mines with tilt-rod, magnetic etc fuses. However, if you put armour on
a
>hovercraft its ground pressure rises quite rapidly, so by the time
you've
>put MBT-level armour on it it'll be about as likely to trigger a
pressure
>mine as a light APC is. (And it won't be able to move over water or
other
>soft surfaces either - a heavy hovercraft will sink...)

IIRC the Slammers' Combat Cars could cross open water, but the tanks 
would sink.

Jon (GZG)

>
>Regards,
>
>Oerjan
>orjan.ariander1@comhem.se
>
>"Life is like a sewer.
>   What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
>-Hen3ry
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gzg-l mailing list
>Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
>http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l