|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
With the planned wake-up date being five years after, then planning on modified civilian vehicles becomes much more likely. V-150s are classed as police vehicles, so they don't come under the same level of scrutiny as saw, a M-113. Armored SUVs make sense in this scenario, there are over 200 companies involved in modifying such vehicles for government, corporate and personnel use. An a argument can be made for such modified vehicles, due to large sections of the road network still being usable. Playing with the 150-year wakeup...then these modified vehicles will be less likely to be useable over most terrain. In the end, it boils down to what the PD is most comfortable with.
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The 150-year plan makes rebuilding much harder, but I think it is actually the safer scenario for the Project. 5 years in there are thousands of civilian 50-cal rifles and all those armored SUV's, most still operating and presumably many of them in unfriendly hands. The base APC perhaps, put a 20mm or a TOW on it and that goes out the window. Seriously, it is unlikely that any vehicle suitable for MARS, Recon, or Science (possibly) is going to pass as a police vehicle. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Team offensive/defensive requirements
I started off talking about what could be obtained, it has to be balanced against what is required. Let's start by looking at different team needs:
MARS As the "military" of the Project, MARS teams need heavy weapons and armor. Presumably they need the ability to withstand .50cal across the board, and heavier for many teams, although they will rely more on mobility than armor. They will likewise need the ability to take out typical military targets from tanks to aircraft. Recon Less engaged than MARS, but still expected to engage with hostile forces (to assist MARS and because it is their job to find them), Recon teams need the ability to withstand small arms fire up to and including 7.62 NATO (lots of those in private hands) and preferably up to .50cal across the board, but really they should run from anything bigger. Some heavy weapons would be useful so that they can take out isolated vehicles and hardened positions without needed to call in a MARS team. Science, Base staff,... ... and other "high value" assets. Supposed to run or bunker down, but they are likely to be slow and cumbersome and need to be able to protect themselves. Protection to .50cal seems appropriate as a minimum, considering the value, but weaponry does not need to match. Remember that base personnel are not likely to have much of a perimeter, and depending on the base likely lack extensive defenses, so what vehicles they DO have need to be bug-out vehicles, able to depart under fire. Specialty MARS and Recon should clear areas of "high risk" opponents before Specialty enters, but they are likely to need protection to 7.62 NATO regardless and may need more - the Project will NOT have the manpower to secure borders! As far as those protection levels go, it is worthwhile to note that it needs to be durable - many armored vehicles are considered disposable after even modest damage, the Project can't do that. One alternative is over-armoring - something that can shrug off small amounts of .50cal fire can probably shrug off small arms all day long. Last edited by cosmicfish; 03-24-2017 at 07:21 AM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Armour is heavy which makes for heavy vehicles, which are usually slow can't travel across rough terrain as easily or certainly damaged bridges and even the heftiest tank isn't necessarily going to be able to ride over a freeway full of rusted out cars. Up until the 2000s anything lighter than an actual battle tank was usually pretty thinly armoured. Resisting armour piercing 7.62 bullets through the sides and rear were a big issue. And conflicts would leave hordes of m113s or BMPs with flammable aluminium armour by the side of the road burned out. Unless the project actually wants to invest in hefty and hard to maintain tougher APCs like the Bradley. Chances are they will be relying on speed, stealth and observation most likely observing enemies and ambushing them and running away if confronted. Which often is the strategy that historically worked best. Certainly Recon I think will do most of the actual driving and fighting at night, with night vision and silent electric engines. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
MARS will be nocturnal, most of the Specialty teams will be diurnal, and Recon will split, going by day when they need to talk to people and by night when they really don't (and don't mind being mistaken for unfriendlies). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Thousands of Hueys and even Chinooks get sold as commercial helicopters and police forces across the US are taking delivery these days of Afghanistan heavy APCs and MRAAPs. Putting on a moderate sized turret isn't that much of a chore. nb even an airforce becomes an option with Hawk Jets being popular with civil jet flying experience days out. And as for the Huey Cobra, a bunch got handed over to the US forestry service for fire fighting. If the project doesn't mind being about a decade behind the times they could be surprisingly well equipped. http://wildfiretoday.com/2010/06/27/...ra-helicopter/ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
They kept almost all of them in government service, only a couple ever made it into private hands, so making more than one or two disappear would likely be difficult. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Besides, helicopters are relatively easy, since you really can buy civilian models and uprated them to military performance. The project doesn't need gunships anyway, you can mount a lot of weapons on a Blackhawk/S-70. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 4 (0 members and 4 guests) | |
|
|