The idea of space suited soldiers brings up an issue or two:
How much capacity would space-suited soldiers needs? "8" like PA? "6"?
What if your foe was sea based (aquatic aliens or the Cousteauean nation on a
balkanized planet (the norm in my mind, thanks to UNSC
manipulations) goes eco-terrorist than wants the 'despoilers' off planet
(or __really__ part of the environment)?
What kit would a soldier required to fight either under water and/or in
domed sites have to have and what capacity would this require the
"Assault-sub Personnel Carriers" for a fire team? Would SEAL style
equipment be enough to subdue an armed hostile population in a sea dome
hamlet? What about body Armor? What kind of weapons do you use in the
water and/or the domed cities ("Oops! Uh, Sarge I uh, "missed" the
vehicle with the [insert GMS name]...")?
Gracias,
> What if your foe was sea based (aquatic aliens or the Cousteauean
If memory serves, Alan Brain has 'civilized' (as opposed to merely
intelligent) dolphins in his OU; unfortunately, I can't seem to connect with
his web site to see if he's written up about this.
However, in doing extrasolar battles, I should think that ecologies, even
restricted to moderately interesting ones, will pretty much require
protection. Liquid water is just another fluid like air, compared to even
slight variations in temp, chemistry, and pressure. It's when you get to
super-compressed, super cold/hot, vacuum, or highly corrosive that kits
would get really interesting.
Mind you, much of our own ocean has impressive, to current engineering,
pressures, and interesting chemistry near vents.
However, ask a vacc-head...
The_Beast
Hi,
> On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 03:45 AM, Glenn M Wilson wrote:
> The idea of space suited soldiers brings up an issue or two:
"6"?
Depends on what you mean by space suited. Space suits could mean the clunky
michelin man suits of today, full power armour or even the skin suits worn in
the Honor Harrington universe. So I would say everything from 4 to 8 DS2
capacity points. In SG2 I would use 1, 1.5 and 2 per
soldier/marine/sailor.
> What kit would a soldier required to fight either under water and/or
I would say that power armour would be the most practical. I could see the
manufacturers brochures claiming the ability to operate in a variety of
pressure, temperature, radiation and atmospheric conditions.
To get any appreciable range in water, you would need to use some sort of
torpedo, either rocket or propeller driven. Concussion would be the most
effective way to deliver damage to the target, instead of relying on
penetration or shrapnel. A rocket propelled grenade that contains all the fuel
for combustion may prove most effective for PA that is expected to operate in
space, air and water.
Domed cities underwater would be extremely vulnerable to attack. Heavy weapons
would likely be unused unless one side could care less about the dome's
integrity. If that was the case then sabotage or
stand-off weapons would be a more likely scenario. Without heavy
weapons, you are left with things like shotguns, flamethrowers, chemical
weapons and the like. Tune to suit your proposed dome safety factors.
Cheers,
G'day,
> What kit would a soldier required to fight either under water
You'd hope you're not fighting in domes for a start as then they'd be in your
areas.... sea based life being unlikely to need to live in a dome
;)
Weapons wise if you're actually in the water you want something that creates a
pressure differential, so long as you're nicely protected in something that
can stand up to such a stress itself. So GMS kitted out to be torpedoes would
be fine. Solid projectiles at short range would work too, though in
reality its likely hand-to-hand or hand-to-fin would end up being very
important to actually clear out areas... depending on the biology of your
opponents. If they lack internal gas chambers and can "roll with environmental
punches" like octopus it will be incredibly hard to get them out without going
in HTH, if they have skeletons, gas bladders, chambered shells etc though
conventional explosives should do enough to clear them out. <I've seen an
entire reef levelled by explosives, dead fish, crustaceans etc everywhere and
out walks an octopus.... a very peeved, but undoubtedly very alive octopus.>
Many of the other weapons taper off very quickly or have backwash issues when
used underwater. Though one you could use would be chemical weapons, toxins
are frequently used effectively by illegal aquarium collectors and by animals
themselves as a method of local attack.
Suit shape would also be important in the long-term. In the short term
hydrodynamics determines freedom of movement but also the noise generated,
if you want stealth attacks you don't want blocky PA. In the long-term
the more hard corners the more fouling by marine life and the more maintenance
that will be required.
Game wise if a suit is breeched I'd either treat them as a mission kill or
give them a bail option, at which point they have to surface to breath
(probably, unless they have a small respirator/"gill-set" they can use)
and have D4 (or less armour) vs any weaponry. In addition you may want to
temper what an unsuited trooper can fire... backwash a suit can shrug off the
unsuited guy may find too hard to deal with.
Cheers
EXTREMELY STIFF HANDS TODAY, PLUS FORGOT TO SHIFT DOWN TO LOWER CASE!
SUBMARINE COMBAT!
ROCKET PROPELLED PROJECTILES, WITH SOLID OR VARIOUS TYPES EXPLOSIVE WARHEADS
WOULD WORK QUITE WELL UNDER WATER.
THUS THE LONG TIME SCI-FI GYROJET, CONE OR BOLT FIRING SMALL ARMS AND
SQUAD SUPPORT WEAPONS WOULD BE USABLE.
THE SOVIETS ACTUALLY DEVELOPED A REPEATING, MAGAZINE FED UNDER WATER SMALL ARM
THAT SHOT HV "BOLTS", IMR, ABOUT 6" LONG.
BULLET, SOLID SHOT, OR FLECHETTE FIRING WEAPONS WOULD WORK AT SHORT RANGES.
LASERS COULD BE "TUNED", I AM TOLD, TO WORK VERY WELL UNDER WATER.
LAUNCHED EXPLOSIVES (RPGS, MISSILES, OR THROWN GRENADES OR COMMAND DETONATED
CHARGES WOULD BE A DOUBLE EDGED THREAT AT CERTAIN RANGES UNDER WATER.
USE IN A DOMED OR EVEN A SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX WOULD BE RISKY.
FLAME THROWING WEAPONS MIGHT BE USEFUL, UNLESS THE OXYGEN CONTENT IS 100% OR
EXTREMELY HIGH (OR OTHER EXPLOSIVE GAS FOR THAT MATTER)
FOR CLOSE COMBAT ASSORTED EDGED AND ROTARY EDGED WEAPONS ABLE TO SLICE THROUGH
UNARMORED FLESH OR POWERED ARMORS WOULD BE USEFUL, TOO.
I REMEMBER SOME ONE, YEARS AGO, CAME UP WITH A POWERFUL SPRING LOADED BLADE
FOR PUNCHING THROUGH HEAVY DIVING GEAR.
MAYBE A SHORT, BOWIE KNIFE SIZED REVOLVING CYLINDER BANGSTICK? WHERE THE
CYLINDER IS ACTUALLY A RAPIDLY REPLACABLE AND DISCARDABLE MAGAZINE.
OR A COMBO BLADE AND REVOLVING BANGSTICK, SIMILIAR TO THE OLD ONE SHOT ELGIN
CUTLASS PISTOL OF THE 19TH CENTURY USN.
THE BEST ARMOR WOULD BE A MARINE VERSION OF THE NORMAL POWERED ARMOR, WITH ITS
OWN JET PROPULSION SYSTEM.
HMMM. POSSIBLY WITH ITS OWN BUILT IN OBSCURATION DEVICE AND RESERVOIR, TOO.
AND PROPER CAMOU FOR THOSE MARK I EYEBALL OCCASIONS.
MARK EYEBALL VISION WOULD BE EXTREMELY LIMITED IN A FIGHT AFTER IT BEGINS, OR
DO TO LOW OR NO LIGHT CONDITIONS (THE BLOOD, DEBRIS, ETC), SO SOME SORT OF
ASSISTED VISION, DETECTION AND RANGING WOULD BE NEEDED. DITTO FOR COMMS GEAR.
WOW! A NEED FOR THOSE JAR-JAR BENKS MINIATURES THAT ARE SCREAMING TO BE
MADE!
OOOOH! OOOOOOH! OOOOOOH!
LOOK OUT KLACKONS, MERTONS, NAUTILOIDS, AND GILLMEN!
THE HUMANS ARE COMING! THE HUMANS ARE COMING!
DAWGIE
So would the super-cavitating rounds work if their initial environment
was water?
super-cavitating rounds should be in the archives, there was a
discussion of them after an article appeared in one of the science magazines.
> On Thu, 1 May 2003 11:01:53 -0400 (EDT), Roger Books writes:
I'd think the first step of firing a super-cavitating round woul dbe
flooding the launch tube with air (or just not flooding it with water). So the
round would start in an air enviroment, and then continue to maintain that
environment during its run down range.
Probably a two stage round that fires into the water boosted by a rocket, then
generates a gas envelope while accelerating. Once the envelope is formed the
rocket falls off to reduce drag and the "normal" propulsion kicks in.
This has the advantage that shorter range targets could be engaged, before the
envelope formed since it would be rocket driven and have a pretty good
velocity coming out of the tube.
--Binhan
> -----Original Message-----