I was just looking at the VT-40 Boxcar, and the VT-51 Super Boxcar
VTOLs. I figure these are either respectively a class 2 & 3 or class 3 & 4
(depends
on how they scale next to tanks, etc) interface-capable landers.
Now, I know DS2 suggests that interface landing capability is only a% added to
the cost of forces. That seems unsatisfying though. If all the landers were
doing was "in, drop the troops, out", then I'd buy that. But some landers
could be armed. And the even with strictly landing models, ECM levels, etc.
could vary. So costing them as a flat percentage seems odd.
But, OTOH, if you go to buy them as vehicles, how do you purchase them?
Interface landers like these boxcars appear to perhaps be (cross between
VTOL and rocket lander - kind of like an aliens dropship?) - would you
buy them as Aerospace craft mobility or VTOL? If bought as VTOL, do you then
tack on the interface capable percentage? If they are used as "transport" but
have no weapons, you can end up with some pretty expensive taxis that don't
give you a lot of battlefield oomph for the number of points involved.
Yet buying them as vehicles feels right, because then you have the choice of
buying cheap landers (eggshell armour, no ECM or PDS) designed to get lots of
troops down quickly but to take brutal casualties in a contested LZ, or
you buy better high-ECM, high-PDS, high (as you can) armour models
designed
to offer your forces maximum survivability - you want your expensive
troops to arrive on the battlefield. <I suppose strategy depends on force
composition - elites need better protection than hordes of rabble for
whose leaders some fair casualties are "acceptable losses">.
I'm just curious how other people have handled this - presumably orbital
assault landings have been run by others. What did you do? How did it work
out?
> I was just looking at the VT-40 Boxcar, and the VT-51 Super Boxcar
The options you describe make perfect sense to me. Here's a scaling exercise I
went through using the US space shuttle as a reference point. This does not
use DSII factors; instead, I wanted to do a basic sanity check to see what
made sense. Your numbers may vary, but it's an interesting exercise.
Take a space shuttle. Assume this is a size-3 vehicle.
(Personally, I think it would be size-4, but if I start
with that, I end up with no personnel space left over!). Assume personnel
capacity drops to 60% with basic combat kit (no camp gear; it's on a different
vehicle) or to 40% with full kit, including camp gear (doesn't mean the
soldiers are actually carrying the camp gear, of course). For a commercial
shuttle, think commercial aircraft packing levels! Capacity numbers below are
shown for basic combat kit (60%). Replace the shuttle cargo bay with personnel
space. Capacity might be 20 commercial or 12 with basic combat kit.
The vehicle has no ECM, no weapons, and no return-to-orbit
capability.
Factors:
Scale the shuttle up to size-5. Capacity increases 5/3
(i.e., by ratio of size ratings).
Add return-to-orbit capability (i.e., turn it into a DSII
aerospace vehicle); assume modest fuel requirements/advanced
engine technology. Drop capacity by 50%.
Add dual APSW (external turret) for low-mode LZ suppression.
Reduce capacity by 2 for ammo space. Capacity = 7.
Add dual class-2 laser, turretted (external) for high-mode
LZ suppression; reduce capacity by 2 to allow for (*very* efficient!)
additional power requirments and mount volume. Add armor; reduce capacity by 1
for each level of armor. (I.e., assume advanced armor is *very light* for its
effectiveness compared to modern armor.)
Add ECM/ECCM; reduce capacity by 2.
Add stealth. Assume this does not impinge in a major way on internal space
(instead, it increases the vehicle envelope while reducing its sensor return.
Drop capacity by 1 per stealth level (I'm being optimistic!).
So, for a class-5 dropship for hot LZ drops, a rough sanity
check yields:
Element Capacity (basic combat kit)
-------------------- ---------------------------
(size-3 shuttle) 12
Scale to size-5 * 5/3
Dual APSW - 2
Dual class-2 laser - 2
Armor (2 levels) - 2
ECM/ECCM - 2
Stealth (2 levels) - 2
--------------------------------------------------
Net capacity = 10.
So a size-5 combat dropship as shown could hold about
one squad. Ugh. Okay, assume we use separate "cover" vehicles on the way down,
and go for an eggshell with ECM protection only. Remove armor (2), stealth
(2), and laser (2), keep the APSWs, and add ECM (2 becomes 4). Now we can drop
14 troopers with combat kit. Looks like 2 fire teams and a command team
(assuming command team is a fire team plus commander and commo officer or some
such).
I think when I used the DSII vehicle design rules for
a size-5 dropship similar to the above, I had a capacity
of either 8 or 12 (I can't find my notes just now), which is in the same
ballpark.
I hope this doesn't muddy the water too much.
- Sam
> ------------------------------------------
________________________________________
Samuel Reynolds
Spinward Stars: http://www.spinwardstars.com/
Reynolds Virtual Workshop: http://www.primenet.com/~reynol
reynol@primenet.com
samuel_reynolds@csgsystems.com
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:46 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA06824;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:40:02 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBAHdO299302;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 09:39:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 09:39:23 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBAHdMb99281
for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 09:39:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:rrsrfZJV4oBQtiTK7Kxb2HXLEUxEW0mm@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBAHdKP99276
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 09:39:20
-0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp05.mail.onemain.com (SMTP-OUT003.ONEMAIN.COM
[63.208.208.73])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with SMTP id
eBAHdKf75657
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 09:39:20 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from nsweer@ice.net)
Received: (qmail 939 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2000 17:39:14 -0000
Received: from maxbloom1-85.fgi.net (HELO ice.net) ([204.120.168.85])
(envelope-sender <nsweer@ice.net>)
by 10.209.20.35 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; 10 Dec 2000 17:39:14 -0000
Message-ID: <3A33BE86.6020607@ice.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:33:58 -0600
From: Noel Weer <nsweer@ice.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108
Netscape6/6.0
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Uplift FT (was Re: Am I a Republic revisionist?)
References: <20001129195105.28051.cpmta@c008.sfo.cp.net>
<3A2C222B.ABB975C8@brewer.to> <3A2D868C.1B256632@sympatico.ca>
<3.0.5.32.20001205212355.00a17a70@mail.HICom.net>
<004301c05f62$e743fc40$0100a8c0@brodm1.vic.optushome.com.au>
<001e01c06041$aafcaa40$4c468bca@avis> <3A3017AD.20202@ice.net>
<00e801c062a3$f8c7aa40$97478bca@avis>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000822
> Alan and Carmel Brain wrote:
> From: "Noel Weer" <nsweer@ice.net>
Yep, thanks. Put my request in for one yesterday.:)
BTW, anyone else in America find it scary that it is a tad cheaper to
order GZG stuff from Eureka in Aussie-land and pay the shipping then it
is to order from GeoHex with free shipping?
--
The Middle Ages were a great time to be alive, because if you weren't wiped
out by the Plague or impaled by some marauding barbarian, then yippee.
"chocolate covered musings"
(http://www.amused.com/nick.html)
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:46 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA27094;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 13:06:43 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBAJ6JX01441;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:06:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 11:06:17 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBAJ6GP01412
for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:06:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:Xeb1chjsVI4K/3HtrQD/e/ZX46y9bvw7@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBAJ6EP01403
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:06:15
-0800 (PST)
Received: from mta6-svc.virgin.net (mta6-win.server.ntli.net
[62.253.164.46])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBAJ6Ef86115
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:06:14 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from david.pullen3@virgin.net)
Received: from david.pullen3 ([62.253.36.31]) by mta6-svc.virgin.net
(InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with SMTP
id <20001210190611.WPTK292.mta6-svc.virgin.net@david.pullen3>
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 19:06:11 +0000
Message-ID: <001501c062db$54539ea0$1f24fd3e@pullen3>
From: "Dave Pullen" <david.pullen3@virgin.net>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References:
<20001129195105.28051.cpmta@c008.sfo.cp.net><3A2C222B.ABB975C8@brewer.to
> <3A2D868C.1B256632@sympatico.ca><3.0.5.32.20001205212355.00a17a70@mail.
HICom.net><004301c05f62$e743fc40$0100a8c0@brodm1.vic.optushome.com.au><0
01e01c06041$aafcaa40$4c468bca@avis><3A3017AD.20202@ice.net>
<3.0.5.32.20001210094742.009c52f0@mail.HICom.net>
Subject: Re: Uplift FT (was Re: Am I a Republic revisionist?)
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 18:59:29 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000824
[quoted original message omitted]