GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

13 posts ยท Oct 30 2001 to Oct 31 2001

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:54:43 -0500

Subject: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

Posit a GEV or grav vehicle as an engineering vehicle for mobility reasons.
Then say "but how can it do what it needs to?"

Mine plow: Polarized Grav Field (Grav-Blade) (also works as standard
dozer blade and brushcutter)

Mine flail: Turbulent Bi-polar Grav Field (Grav-Flail) - alternating
waves of grav and anti-grav (jumping up then reducing the G forces) rip
up ground and detonate mines (or destroy them)

Towing: Big Grav or GEV hovercraft flatbed. Or auxilliary "gravity
effectuators" - grav modules that reduce the apparent mass of the thing
you are towing so towing it behind a GEV _is_ practical and so the
deceleration issue isn't as big. Also note that in this instance the
towing GEV wants to have "over-rated" fan systems.

Excavation: A combination of a turbulent grav field and a grav bucket. Or a
mundane bucket. Use the turbulent field to break up the ground and the grav
bucket (or conventional bucket) to move the earth.

Tamping: Grav field enhancer - makes the ground self-tamping.

As to the ubiquity of these grav modules: I believe that this would be
necessary to make non-mechanical engineering solutions for Grav and GEV
engineer or ARV vehicles. Also, with only a small number of them per force
(not every vehicle needs to be grav), then you have a much more viable
maintenance and cost issue.

Also the whole mines vs. GEV thing. If you have mines with exposed sensors (as
opposed to buried pressure switches), then various anti
minefield techniques suggest themselves - Directed EMP attacks, laser
attacks, etc. Neutralize the sensor, perhaps neutralize the mine or force it
back onto an alternate pressure fusing. Which reduces the problem to what it
was before, and perhaps the GEV can pass.

If you used some sort of an induction fuse, you'd need one mother of a system
to get enough induction feedback from a GEV a foot or three off the ground,
which should make the mines more easily detected and swept.

Obviously, John is right in that there is a whole discipline of combat
engineering tied up here. However, I find it an interesting diversion to
discuss. Additionally, if a minefield is composed of a mix of types, then
sweeping operations require a mix of techniques to deal with them
but we're into paper-scissors-rock. My point is that most minefields can
be dealt with in one fashion or another if you have the right equipment and
the time and the trained personel. Short yourself on any of the three, and
your breaching operation becomes more... "exciting!".

Perhaps two warring colonial governments only have cheap locally produced
mines with basic fusing types. One government secretly imports
a mercenary unit with higher tech (grav/GEV) and suddenly can penetrate
a bunch of minefields that would otherwise threaten normal wheeled or tracked
(locally produced) vehicles. There are a number of situations where disparate
technology could make for an interesting situation.

BTW, I do disagree with John. The ESU have a range of classic tactics that
vary from "Take that objective to become a Hero of the Soviet Union.... Or Be
Shot!" to "Defend Mother Solar Union.... Or Be Shot!". The ESU (and the IF)
can still use wave attacks to good effect. Isn't
this why the BMP-60 has strong front armour and weak rear armour to
discourage cowardice in the face of the enemy?:)

And as to the Legion Etrange not being French... yes it has Foreigners. But
the Officers are trained at St.Cyr and are clearly as French as they come.
Plus in this last few decades, I think you'll find a fair few French
Nationals, along with other nations, in the ranks. I think the
"no questions asked" policy is more PR than fact - they do check out
prospective soldiers fairly carefully.

Of course, in 2183, it would be to their advantage to allow a lot of Colonials
in and the change from Legion Etrange to Legion Etrange
Colonial clearly suggests that there might be a heavy non-French
population in the LE at that time. Although I'm still sure the officers are
mostly French. And that the regular French army despises them.

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:11:57 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> --- Tomb <kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca> wrote:

> Towing: Big Grav or GEV hovercraft flatbed. Or

Here's how Traveller solved the issue of a grav recovery vehicle. They build a
vehicle big enough to carry a tank in it's rear bed. And the bottom of the bed
is a pair of doors, which drop down. The tank is now in the grav envelope and
can be easily manipulated up, then the doors shut and it sits in the bed.

> If you used some sort of an induction fuse, you'd

What mean you "induction"? Are you speaking of magnetic? Magnetic fuzes are
pretty sensitive
today--enough so that moving a mag fuzed mine 3 feet
is sufficient to detonate.

> but we're into paper-scissors-rock. My point is that

The term is "Polish".

> Perhaps two warring colonial governments only have

Yeah--although potentially pretty lopsided.  However,
my suggestion for the lower-tech force would be
side-attack mines--essentially IAVRs in a little cheap
plastic frame holding it up and with a $10 IR sensor package to shoot it.

And that the regular French army > despises them.

And they are still the only ones that can actually fight their way out of a
wet paper bag.

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 19:17:03 -0500

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> The term is "Polish".

I'd say "Pay attention, John, we have a Polish lister here" but John casts
aspersions at pretty much everyone except the Scots (probably because he
hasn't gotten to us in the queue) and the Byzantines (who haven't been around
for going on 600 years).

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:57:05 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:

Don't take 'em seriously enough to pick on. They've had less time as an
independant country than Poland, and don't have the excuse of having between 3
and 5 militaristic, expansionistic empires on their borders (Russians,
Germans, Austrians, Turks, Swedes, all of whom invaded Poland since the Scots
were conquered), nor do they have the excuse that their geography
sucks--given a choice between the Highlands and a
large flat country with no natural boundries, I know which I'd like to
overrun. And unlike Poland, they were never a dominant world power. Nor did
they
single-handedly save Europe in the space of an
afternoon.

I actually respect the Poles, but realistically if I have to make a snide
remark about nations who try to fight with utterly inadequate equipment, they
just jump to mind. I could say "Finnish" or "Ethiopian" but far fewer people
are familiar with those examples.

Of course, the fact that they held out 50% longer than the French does come to
mind, but everyone's sick of hearing me slag on the French.

From: Edward Lipsett <translation@i...>

Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 10:04:00 +0900

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

John, can I rent you for a party someday? This is priceless!

> John Atkinson wrote:

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:07:50 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

--- Edward Lipsett <translation@intercomltd.com>
wrote:

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:11:24 -0800

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> John Atkinson wrote:

Far fewer, but not none. The Finns always earned my respect too, they
definitely made the Sovs stop and think.

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 21:37:22 -0500

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> I actually respect the Poles, but realistically if I

If you're going to be making snide remarks (and we all know you are),
then pick on Libya.  They tackled Chad--whose tribesmen were less

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 08:25:44 -0800

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> Laserlight wrote:

> If you're going to be making snide remarks (and we all know you are),

Don't forget that Chad was saddled with the additional handicap of being

supported by France, IIRC.

From: Brian Burger <yh728@v...>

Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:21:38 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, John Atkinson wrote:

> --- Edward Lipsett <translation@intercomltd.com>

God - you mean you're *sober* when you write all your emails?

Booze making you 'really get going' - horrifying thought... :>

From: Don M <dmaddox1@h...>

Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:44:11 -0600

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

Brian, Well actually he just gets clumsier and falls asleep on the floor while
trying to read a book lol........I know saw him do it here!

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 15:10:32 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

> --- Brian Burger <yh728@victoria.tc.ca> wrote:

> > I'm cheap--just promise to buy me booze and I'll

I really don't drink much anymore--in Germany, I was
pushing alcoholism, but it's just not as convenient around here.

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>

Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 18:19:05 EST

Subject: Re: GEVs: Engineering and Recovery

On Tue, 30 Oct 2001 21:37:22 -0500 "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
writes:
> I actually respect the Poles, but realistically if I

If you have have one skill, develop it.

Gracias,