|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
you might as well forget any jet you're fawning over, it isn't gong to happen. You can disagree all you want and do it in your own game, but the fact is, MP has no need for combat jets for air superiority. If it was afraid of aircraft THAT much why is there not any serious anti-aircraft weaponry anywhere in the books? Something far easier to obtain, maintain, and operate than ANY jet aircraft. Stinger systems are not a serious system, a nice tactical battlefield defense system yes. Quote:
COIN aircraft have proven they are a bitch to detect much less hit with look down shoot down capabilities. Helos are easy due to that lovely radar reflection from the rotors and I've been sent in on helo's minus escort into combat zones before any air superiority was achieved or desired several times in my career. Modern coin capabilities fly way lower than any air superiority jet pilot even dreams of going (married one). Quote:
The morrow porject does not field an army. It fields small teams spread out through the united states, NOT in Iraq or afghanistan, Russia, Crimea, Germany or Poland. WHO after WW3 and all those nukes is going to have any desire to continue the war? EMP alone is going to make and end to long range aircraft going anywhere. Hardened systems only protects against a few nukes going off not hundreds -to thousands -yes the us military does teach that fact- Just HOW are the soviets getting those aircraft to the states to the degree that requires the Morrow project to demand air superiority aircraft be stored away? You expect them to sacrifice Ilyushin tankers just to bomb a nuked US? They will need all the aircraft for themselves after all they are surrounded by far more people against them than we are. The collapse of governments will bring a cease to hostilities to the degree you insist is going to happen. Nobody with such aircraft left is going to waste them on a fools errand on sending them all the way over to bomb an already nuked to collapse United States, nothing more is to be gained. You seem to be missing the theme of the game yourself. Avgas is not kerosene, jet A, or JP-8. Unless you take every and all precautions on storing it (and it's still not a guarantee) you will have some interesting things to deal with in the fuel to preserve your aircraft. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Gamer,
While I think you are right about the canon project probably not needing anything approaching a high-powered jet, I still find ArmySgt's posts interesting and potentially useful. I have planned games using the Phoenix Project rules (A Morrow rules clone) and in those games there is military involvement in the project. That upgrades equipment at every level. Everyone's project is different. For example, I want ALL my project's teams to bristle with firepower (marauders will look at them like porcupines). "No way im going to touch that". This is often more for show than for combat, but it allows my regional teams enough freedom to reach their local rally points. So in my project plan, once a community support team reached the rally point more than half of the heaviest equipment would have been put in an armory, and they would move into areas, that have been swept by mars and recon teams, with a much less intimidating appearance. The personality of my gaming group is one that very much avoids combat, but I think they want a project to be prepared for almost anything (if it had actually worked). I also want the project planners to have a desire to have a technical edge over most 5 year post threats. It is possible some warlord has the Commemorative Air Force(formerly Confederate Air force) under his control. So to counter that I give my project 4-8 A-37s that can be fitted with AAMs. F-5s are a little heavy for my taste, but if any threat is going to have prop planes it is nice to have a jet trump card. Maybe the surviving US Military, who I believe the project is supposed to help if they get the chance, could really use 4 jets which have been sheltered from EMP and have a full logistical chain. Just food for thought. Last edited by kato13; 04-18-2014 at 05:54 AM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
While I don't see the Project needing Fighter Aircraft I can see them stocking one or four away for a rainy day. But without dedicated Pilots and a limited amount of Avgas and munitions. There job is to aid in rebuilding not arm the USAF or combat Russian Forces. At most they would be dedicated to aiding Mars Teams if they were in distress but that is about it. The resources would be better spent on cargo aircraft and small aircraft for survey work. The major issue is that while a Fighter plane might survive five years unattended (Will they be in sealed bunkers or in Bolt Holes with inert gas? That's a lot of inert gas.) One hundred and fifty years after the fact there going to be so much junk and any landing fields will be either broken up asphalt or grass covered fields. Just clearing a usable landing strip unless its a desert environment will be a major undertaking. So if there are any fighter planes they would be limited to desert regions because there just won't be enough usable landing strips to even use them without a huge landscaping project needing to be done.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This could be another Project development. If the agricultural teams do their job, there should be MUCH surpluss cellulose. http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Ener...-Jet-Fuel.html When I plan my project I try not to think about the 150 year mistake, unless it is lethal to the team. With teams waking up randomly a lot of equipment ends up being only borderline useful as it was expected to synergize with other teams. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
What about the Project using the V-22 Osprey? All the teathing problems aside, I can see the Project supply bases using an Aircraft that has the lift of a heavy aircraft, and the vertical power of a helicopter.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Idea Twist
Quote:
They have some interesting plans that can fly long ranges to say the KFS. The P-47N-5RE they have is an extreme long range bomber escort (3200 km range). It is more than capable of flying to the KFS on photo recon and back, from the center of Texas to the center of Kentucky is only 1566 Km. Interesting addition to any KFS campaign out there. Last edited by nuke11; 04-18-2014 at 08:58 AM. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I'm for the MP having air assets, but not that much of it.
Hiding stuff around the country at the smaller airfields is easy to do, currently working on an MP Airbase for release later, but there are dozens and dozens of small air fields around the country that MPI can purchase and use to store air assets. I'm leaning myself to 1 / 2 engine prop and small helicopters . Since we have the CH-47 and C-130 from Prime Base, we have to include them as well, but in limited numbers and very limited locations. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Conceivably, Select Teams of MARS could be in Bolt Holes and equipped with Air Ambulance and Rescue versions of common helos. They would need to immediately link with their Combined Group for atleast maintenance support. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Own and get a Morrow Project communications satellite too while you are at it as an added bonus! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Sorry, I am with Gamer on this. Sophisticated air assets on a large scale don't make a lot of sense in the Morrow world. Even an organization of a 10,000 people are not going to be able to field the capacity necessary to maintain that level of technology. If anything, the technology that you deal with might be superior to what you got frozen with, but its 150 years old and age wears stuff down.
Look, even rubber has a limited shelf life. The Morrow plan was to revive the project shortly after a nuclear war. On something as simple as tires, that would have significant damage. Even if you could make a rubber that could remain essentially inert for a few years or lift the weight off, the weight of the vehicle will likely cause the rubber to settle. 150 years and tires are flat. Even if you could "freeze" the tires in time, gravity will cause damage. You rely on a technologically advanced system to sustain the project, it becomes illogical. It would consume too much resources when those resources need to go elsewhere. As mentioned by Gamer above- Morrow Project is not about local warlordism but about responding to a disaster and rebuilding society. The priorities or reconstruction would out weigh war fighting. In fact, the war fighting aspects are meant to serve only to protect the rebuilding effort- which is front and center. I am not saying I don't see the "coolness" of it, but that's always been a problem with the Morrow project and, in a way, with the trend in doomsday prep in real life- a desire to "have stuff in an apocalyptic world." If that's your thing, go for it. It is your game. But I would caution that the more the game bends realism for "coolness" it risks blundering away from good story telling and into some pretty significant silliness. All I am saying is that you have to keep it real. What kind of aircraft? Balloons, ok, A World War 1 tech bi-plane that flies one ethanol "moonshine" fuel, ok (that's what twilight 2000 engines ran on). I would add that budgets matter here, especially in what goes into the bolt holes- how much does an F-5 cost? I can understand putting the fusion reactor in the F-5, but then can you keep the supply chain for an F-5 as well as other types of vehicles that are more necessary to the mission? Its interesting that the only real air asset is a 2 man scout helicopter. The temptation to include stuff because its cool needs to be avoided. One might consider, if one were so predisposed, either older and simpler designs that are dual-use (and which might be armed). Put a mini-gun on that aging Dakota cargo plane? One would also need simply aircraft that are sustainable under conditions of high scarcity. Think of the before and after- Before- Morrow is operating in secrecy- so a company buys advanced fighter aircraft would draw attention. Billions spent on buying advanced warfare systems- would draw attention. Attention is not a good thing. Post-war- military scarcity and the break down of civilization- national industrial capacity was destroyed, neglected, irradiated or has simply rusted away. Things we take for granted are just not there. Most of your technological capacity ranges from stone age to mid 20th century at best. Higher levels require organization of social, technical and economic power that would be hard to imagine. Remember, this is a world that has broken down. That material scarcity is not a bad thing for story telling. It means that game directors have to keep it real. Consider the plot possibilities- Who has those air assets. The Ballooners, a small group of dare devil pilots flying alcohol fueled airplanes across the country- a form of air pirates? What kind of network and resources do they use? Are they owned by a government or independent? If there is high tech in the world, where did it come from? And 150 years later, that tech is likely to be nothing like we have today. If a Kentucky Free State has more advanced aircraft- where did it get that tech from? Did high technology survive in other parts of the world and are selling it American warlords, perhaps to put the Americans against each other so they can exploit or weaken the Americans for their own purposes? Who are these outsiders? Brazil, Singapore, a Japan that survived the war better than the Americans, a Mormon colony? Did all parts of the world suffer the cataclysm the same? Have some recovered faster than we have? All I am saying is the fetish for "cool stuff" risks undermining the stories you tell, and the strength of Morrow isn't the stuff but the story. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Another thought........
How much heat does a target aircraft have to give off for a heat seeker like the Stinger or Chapparal to actually lock on? Would KFS P-47Ds even be targetable? |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Also don't newer missiles look look for both heat and an absence or UV. This keeps them from targeting the sun IIRC. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Oh heck yeah it would. Back when I was taking aviation maintenance at a 2 year college back in 1988, I talked with someone who had just left the navy and his last post was the USS Midway. Knowing that the Carrier was all Hornets, I asked about how sensitive the Sidewinders heat seeking warheads were. He told me that he was walking by a Hornet that was fitted out one day and he heard some strange noises coming from there. When he walked back, he heard the same noises again. On the third time back, he looked over and noticed the warhead seeker was following him, and with that, the vanes on the missile was adjusting themselves to target him. So if the sensor on a Sidewinder (which is a Chapparal, just renamed) can track a human, then it can track a P-47.
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#18
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
COIN aircraft are Air to Ground support aircraft. Calling them COIN aircraft is just obscuring they title to support the hearts and minds campaign. Much like a dropping a bomb on a bridge became “servicing a target”. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No, I plan for what the Project was supposed to be if it had functioned properly. Then, I have fun taking away all the toys, giving the Team something that almost could be useful, or having a reasonable explanation for how the “Cavalry” is what it is. Quote:
The production of aviation fuel falls into two categories: fuel suitable for turbine engines and fuel suitable for internal combustion engines. There are international specifications for each. Jet fuel is used in both turboprop and jet aircraft, and must maintain a low viscosity at low temperature, meet definite limits in terms of density and calorific value, burn cleanly, and remain chemically stable when heated to high temperature.[3] Aviation gasoline, often referred to as "avgas", is a highly refined form of gasoline for aircraft, with an emphasis on purity, anti-knock characteristics and minimization of spark plug fouling. Avgas must meet performance guidelines for both the rich mixture condition required for take-off power settings and the leaner mixtures used during cruise to reduce fuel consumption. Avgas is sold in much lower volume than jet fuel, but to many more individual aircraft operators; whereas jet fuel is sold in high volume to large aircraft operators, such as airlines and military.[4] Avgas (aviation gasoline) is used in spark-ignited internal-combustion engines in aircraft. Its formulation is distinct from mogas (motor gasoline) used in cars. Avgas is formulated for stability, safety, and predictable performance under a wide range of environments, and is typically used in aircraft that use reciprocating or Wankel engines. Jet fuel is a clear to straw-colored fuel, based on either an unleaded kerosene (Jet A-1), or a naphtha-kerosene blend (Jet B). It is similar to diesel fuel, and can be used in either compression ignition engines or turbine engines. Jet-A powers modern commercial airliners and is a mix of pure kerosene and anti-freeze and burns at temperatures at or above 49 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit). Kerosene-based fuel has a much higher flash point than gasoline-based fuel, meaning that it requires significantly higher temperature to ignite. It is a high-quality fuel; if it fails the purity and other quality tests for use on jet aircraft, it is sold to other ground-based users with less demanding requirements, like railroad engines.[5] Last edited by ArmySGT.; 04-18-2014 at 09:16 AM. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|