RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Morrow Project/ Project Phoenix Forum
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-04-2017, 07:31 AM
cosmicfish cosmicfish is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
One of the other issues is that recon will generally be scouting with one or two vehicles up close. And literally everytime a military has tried to do that with heavy armour it's failed.
I think the mission and parameters of Recon is going to be a bit different than conventional military reconnaissance. I always envisioned most of the Recon mission being performed dismounted or at least unbuttoned, with the vehicles serving primarily as (a) mobile bases of operations and (b) escape vehicles. It is on the latter that I look for decent armor - TMP expects to largely face irregular forces willing to sacrifice some portion of their force in order to capture/destroy the team, and those forces are likely to be highly mobile, lightly armored, and moderately armed. Put simply, the team isn't going to outrun an enemy using jeeps and F-150's, and they aren't going to survive if they can't handle a ton of people shooting at them with deer rifles and AR-15's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
So something like a Peacekeeper or even an unarmoured Humvee would enable a team to drive away fast over most surfaces and with plain old windows that everyone can look out of, would have far superior situational awareness.
I think the situational awareness problems can be substantially mitigated while still protecting the crew, and "drive away fast" isn't a realistic option unless the operational plan for the Project involves waiting until vehicles aren't running any more, and that will likely take more than 5 years. A Peacekeeper tops out at 70mph, more than enough to outrun a person but not really enough to keep anyone with cars away. And an unarmored Humvee is going to have a problem running away when the fist definitive indication of a need to run is the incoming gunfire that can easily immobilize an unarmored vehicle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
If the project is considering a heavy APC for MARS etc. A popular solution is to get an obsolete tank; rip the turret out and ammo storage and put some seats in there.

Voila instant heavy APC. In fact with the weight saved from losing the turret you can give it better all around armour then it would have had as a tank.

Ok so you've got an APC that weighs 40 tonnes+ with all the inherent problems but it'll do the job without getting wiped out like a lighter dedicated APC.
What you now have is a vehicle never designed to haul people that is hard to get into and out of and that can no longer fight effectively. If I was concerned about creating a heavy APC that doesn't exist, I would probably go back to plan 1 from the original post and see if I could design one from scratch.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-04-2017, 07:21 PM
Matt W Matt W is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 313
Default

I hate to seem like I'm stating the obvious, but equipment choice depends on a number of things: mission, opposition, terrain, available personnel, and so on.

For example. My own version of the Atlantis Project doesn't have "Recon Teams". It has "Network Teams" which are tasked with initial contact, survey and assessment (which usually involves interaction with survivor communities). These teams also have a responsibility to 'connect' these communities with the Atlantis Project - and other survivors. Opposition is expected to be very lightly armed. Terrain would be mostly "on-road" and teams would be about 6 people (who have to transport light weaponry and LOTS of communications gear).

Tanks would not be appropriate - but something like an armoured Unimog would be useful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyssen_Henschel_UR-416 (check out the "home-made" PLO version)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_Dingo

Last edited by Matt W; 04-04-2017 at 07:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-05-2017, 02:32 AM
Project_Sardonicus Project_Sardonicus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt W View Post
I hate to seem like I'm stating the obvious, but equipment choice depends on a number of things: mission, opposition, terrain, available personnel, and so on.

For example. My own version of the Atlantis Project doesn't have "Recon Teams". It has "Network Teams" which are tasked with initial contact, survey and assessment (which usually involves interaction with survivor communities). These teams also have a responsibility to 'connect' these communities with the Atlantis Project - and other survivors. Opposition is expected to be very lightly armed. Terrain would be mostly "on-road" and teams would be about 6 people (who have to transport light weaponry and LOTS of communications gear).

Tanks would not be appropriate - but something like an armoured Unimog would be useful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyssen_Henschel_UR-416 (check out the "home-made" PLO version)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_Dingo
That would look very workable, but something with excellent off road performance. It can be surprising how often light weight and lightly armoured vehicles beat much heavier opponents by simply being in the right place at the right time in the right numbers.

Especially if they have advanced weapons like ATGMs to further even the odds.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-05-2017, 02:24 AM
Project_Sardonicus Project_Sardonicus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish View Post
I think the mission and parameters of Recon is going to be a bit different than conventional military reconnaissance. I always envisioned most of the Recon mission being performed dismounted or at least unbuttoned, with the vehicles serving primarily as (a) mobile bases of operations and (b) escape vehicles. It is on the latter that I look for decent armor - TMP expects to largely face irregular forces willing to sacrifice some portion of their force in order to capture/destroy the team, and those forces are likely to be highly mobile, lightly armored, and moderately armed. Put simply, the team isn't going to outrun an enemy using jeeps and F-150's, and they aren't going to survive if they can't handle a ton of people shooting at them with deer rifles and AR-15's.



I think the situational awareness problems can be substantially mitigated while still protecting the crew, and "drive away fast" isn't a realistic option unless the operational plan for the Project involves waiting until vehicles aren't running any more, and that will likely take more than 5 years. A Peacekeeper tops out at 70mph, more than enough to outrun a person but not really enough to keep anyone with cars away. And an unarmored Humvee is going to have a problem running away when the fist definitive indication of a need to run is the incoming gunfire that can easily immobilize an unarmored vehicle.


What you now have is a vehicle never designed to haul people that is hard to get into and out of and that can no longer fight effectively. If I was concerned about creating a heavy APC that doesn't exist, I would probably go back to plan 1 from the original post and see if I could design one from scratch.

https://aw.my.com/gb/news/general/he...urion-variants

well no everyone from the Indian army to the Ukraneans do it, Israel more than most has made an art of repurposing old tanks. As it is buying a bunch of outdated hardware and messing around with it, is not that suspicious but building brand new multi million dollar APCs is.

As for recon I think they were always viewed as a disposable asset. If they don't respond on radio checks send another recon team, if that fails send a MARS team.

Sensible Recon teams would have worked to observe from a distance and then send foot patrols in probably in mufti.

I'm not sure this uparmoured and heavily armed vision of Recon was what the project would have been looking for.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-05-2017, 11:43 PM
cosmicfish cosmicfish is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
https://aw.my.com/gb/news/general/he...urion-variants

well no everyone from the Indian army to the Ukraneans do it, Israel more than most has made an art of repurposing old tanks.
Israel is always an interesting case, as they seem to be the only ones really committed to this idea. That having been said, the Israelis are protecting an area 1/400th that of the US, with an active roster more than 3 times what the Project could reasonably be fielding. There is some merit in that the Israelis are predominantly facing the same kinds of forces that the Project could expect to see, but the scale is so different that I am not sure a vehicle designed to operate in close conjunction with other such vehicles and within close range of support is going to be a good choice for operations where it will be out on its own and where support may be hours or even days away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
As it is buying a bunch of outdated hardware and messing around with it, is not that suspicious but building brand new multi million dollar APCs is.
The outdated hardware is already on the books. It's being tracked (ha ha). If you are building from scratch, you at least have a shot at keeping them off the books in the first place. What is the cover story for buying dozens of obsolete tanks and then making them disappear? How are the FBI and CIA not all over this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
As for recon I think they were always viewed as a disposable asset. If they don't respond on radio checks send another recon team, if that fails send a MARS team.
Wow. So much for Recon recruiting!

The Project can't just recruit or draft a replacement, losing a single team is a problem, losing 2 in one area means you don't have Recon teams in that area of a few thousand square miles any more. The fact that you are going to lose Recon teams to enemy action doesn't mean that you consider them disposable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
Sensible Recon teams would have worked to observe from a distance and then send foot patrols in probably in mufti.
Agreed!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project_Sardonicus View Post
I'm not sure this uparmoured and heavily armed vision of Recon was what the project would have been looking for.
I'm not that familiar with 4ed, but in 3ed we see the following vehicles for Recon teams:

R-001: Recon Team with V-150 w/ 20mm cannon
R-002: Recon Team with Commando Scout w/20mm cannon and XR-311
R-003: Recon Team with V-150 w/M2HB
R-004: Recon Team with Commando Ranger w/M2HB
R-005: Recon Team with V-150 x/ 81mm mortar
R-007: Recon Team with V-150 w/ TOW and FAVs
R-010: 3 Recon Teams with (1) Commando Ranger w/M2HB, (2) Commando Scout w/20mm cannon and XR-311, and (3) V-150 w/ 20mm cannon

Out of 9 Recon teams, 5 V-150's, 2 Commando Scouts, and 2 Commando Rangers. Recon teams were never envisioned as being lightly armored or armed unless you look at some optional takes on a couple of modules. And I think that is a reasonable starting point, I see no reason to say that Recon teams should be in uparmored pickups.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.