Morrow Aviation Assets

[ArmySGT.]

So far outlined in the 3rd edition and modules the Project has available.


Autogyro
OH-6 Cayuse
CH-47 Chinook
C-130 Hercules


Any of these can be armed and perform a ground attack role. The Project doesn't appear to offer anything fixed wing with an air superiority role.

That is why I recommend the "light" and properly described defensive fighter for this role, the F-5 Freedom Fighter (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-5.htm).

The role of protecting Morrow assets from Soviet air assets, and rogue units of the U.S., Canadian, and Mexican air forces. At the same time without appearing to challenge the legitimate air force of the U.S. government.

[ArmySGT.]

http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_LTA_PTDS_Aerostat_lg.jpg


The next asset I would propose........

Aerostats.

These are lighter than air lift vehicles without a crew that remain tethered to a location.

Uses include

high altitude antennas for greater broadcast and reception range.
Radio relay for two ground stations over great or elevated terrain, such as mountainous terrain.
Radar coverage for military and civil aircraft tracking.
mobile radar coverage by changing the fixed location on a regular basis.
Radar coverage during unusual weather or storm seasons such as hurricanes or tornadoes. (placed around the perimeter of a storm area or raised in the aftermath).
long range and ultra long range video surveillance with multiple, all weather, pan/tilt/zoom cameras.
Navigation beacons similar to the Loran system to guide emergency and relief aircraft.
long duration air sampling platform for ionizing radiation and chemical warfare agents.

[stormlion1]

I see the Morrow Project having Cargo Planes and other aircraft like that, but I don't see them having any fighter aircraft. Too noticeable to go missing and the Project could depend on USAF or National Guard Aircraft to do any defending as there expected to wake up five years after a Nuclear Strike. There job is to help rebuild, not fight a war. So Cargo Planes and Helicopters. Lots of Helicopters, probably old Huey's as there were plenty made and were pretty rugged. They could serve as a gunship in a pinch but better for moving assets around to aid in the rebuilding project. Plus they don't need a runway like cargo planes.

[RandyT0001]

Maybe Spain's supplemental order of eight AV-8S Matadors in the 1980's were re-routed to the MP. This provide a flight of four at PB and the backup base.

[ArmySGT.]

I see the Morrow Project having Cargo Planes and other aircraft like that, but I don't see them having any fighter aircraft. Too noticeable to go missing and the Project could depend on USAF or National Guard Aircraft to do any defending as there expected to wake up five years after a Nuclear Strike. There job is to help rebuild, not fight a war. So Cargo Planes and Helicopters. Lots of Helicopters, probably old Huey's as there were plenty made and were pretty rugged. They could serve as a gunship in a pinch but better for moving assets around to aid in the rebuilding project. Plus they don't need a runway like cargo planes.

I am not envisioning the F-5s as seeking out to engage Soviet units but, as on hand to protect Morrow Assets solely. On flight of four that covers Prime Base for example. An asset that can be maintained on standby status indefinitely with several pilots qualified for that plane. In this way a round the clock alert could be maintained without exhausted pilots.

[stormlion1]

I am not envisioning the F-5s as seeking out to engage Soviet units but, as on hand to protect Morrow Assets solely. On flight of four that covers Prime Base for example. An asset that can be maintained on standby status indefinitely with several pilots qualified for that plane. In this way a round the clock alert could be maintained without exhausted pilots.

But isn't Prime Base's true defense its being a hidden asset? Something a flight of fighters that will have to launch, if only for training give its location away? At most I could see a flight of fighters (or maybe just two) hidden at a nearby airfield but I really doubt it. The Project would probably depend on other assets to protect Prime Base. Hidden SAM sites or MAR's Teams.

[ArmySGT.]

But isn't Prime Base's true defense its being a hidden asset? Something a flight of fighters that will have to launch, if only for training give its location away? At most I could see a flight of fighters (or maybe just two) hidden at a nearby airfield but I really doubt it. The Project would probably depend on other assets to protect Prime Base. Hidden SAM sites or MAR's Teams.

Prime is (was) hidden until activation. In P08 (Prime Base) the Base Commander built the village right at the mouth of the Canyon.

This precipitated the events that takes out the base staff and sets up for the faulty random numbers generator to wake Teams.

So I think, given that, The Project facilities are meant to be hidden until needed. Then at D+ 5 years the Project begins and a huge glowing "open for business" sign goes up over Prime, Regional Bases, and Depots.

That means the defensive nature of the Projects weapon systems (Anti tank but, no Tanks) means local defense of assets and refugees. This then means the need is to be active out to a minimum range, or plan on no assistance from a .mil asset actively engaged in the Soviet attack and invasion.

F-5s are short ranged and rely on a ground station to vector them to a target. Their armament is light and fuel capacity isn't great. The U.S. is fully aware of the capabilities (unless this is a fusion powered F-5!) and the radar profile is stored in the DoD computers for comparison.

Thus, a short ranged F-5 that launches only on command of a ground station and orbits an area no greater than 100 mile radius in a desolate area is going to make the DoD scratch their heads. The .gov remaining certainly would like to take control of or at minimum integrate those F-5s into an overall air defense plan if the project had happened at D + 5 years.

There isn't a .gov or .mil asset until one of the "New Presidencies" can be determined to be legitimate, if that ever happens.

[kato13]

FWIIW I also have a flight of 4 fighter aircraft at my prime. With maybe another 4 at backup prime.

I usually think about having a COIN capable aircraft like the OV-37. As it is developed from a trainer it would attract less attention.

The project built 4 as part of a testing program, but the project was abandoned and as far as the US govt is concerned they are sitting in a warehouse somewhere or were stripped for parts.

[ArmySGT.]

FWIIW I also have a flight of 4 fighter aircraft at my prime. With maybe another 4 at backup prime.

I usually think about having a COIN capable aircraft like the OV-37. As it is developed from a trainer it would attract less attention.

The project built 4 as part of a testing program, but the project was abandoned and as far as the US govt is concerned they are sitting in a warehouse somewhere or were stripped for parts.

I think of the AH-6 as the gunship platform for the Project providing ground support. The F-5 provides Air Superiority (not the best) but, can if necessary deliver air dropped bombs.

The AH-6 little bird or AH-6 Defender are cost effective and capable each with mast mounted sights. The Little bird can sport rockets or gun pods and the Defender two paired pods for up to four TOW II missiles.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/oh-6-pics.htm

[ArmySGT.]

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?itemid=42716

[welsh]

I have to admit, I find the entire idea of air assets to be kind of odd. To have any technologically sophisticated aircraft would suggest a long supply chain and production chain necessary to sustain that aircraft.

That would necessitate fairly simple, rudimentary technologies at play. How long would it take until the parts broke down? How much of service team do you need to keep the planes in the air?

A ultra-light? Ok. A very simple gyro-copter, fine. Ballooners, ok.

A Harrier Jumpjet? An Apache gunship?

More, I fear it breaks the entire post-apocalyptic vibe of the game. When I think of the post-apocalypse, I am thinking Fallout New Vegas, a Boy and his Dog, Mad Max and the diminishing fuel that exists. I can see Twilight 2000 with the problem of stills and items beginning to fall apart. But we are 150 years from nuclear war and most of the buildings that once existed have crumbled into ruin.

A simple World War 1 era, steampunkish type of air travel, I can see that, but sophisticated helicopter gunships don't seem to fit. I get that it might be cool, but is it logical in a world in which 20th century civilization is gone?

[ArmySGT.]

I have to admit, I find the entire idea of air assets to be kind of odd. To have any technologically sophisticated aircraft would suggest a long supply chain and production chain necessary to sustain that aircraft.

That would necessitate fairly simple, rudimentary technologies at play. How long would it take until the parts broke down? How much of service team do you need to keep the planes in the air?

A ultra-light? Ok. A very simple gyro-copter, fine. Ballooners, ok.

A Harrier Jumpjet? An Apache gunship?

More, I fear it breaks the entire post-apocalyptic vibe of the game. When I think of the post-apocalypse, I am thinking Fallout New Vegas, a Boy and his Dog, Mad Max and the diminishing fuel that exists. I can see Twilight 2000 with the problem of stills and items beginning to fall apart. But we are 150 years from nuclear war and most of the buildings that once existed have crumbled into ruin.

A simple World War 1 era, steampunkish type of air travel, I can see that, but sophisticated helicopter gunships don't seem to fit. I get that it might be cool, but is it logical in a world in which 20th century civilization is gone?

The Morrow Project is teams of trained individuals cryogenically frozen and cached with vehicles and equipment. They expect to awaken 3-5 years after the war not 150. The Project would have come online with hundreds of personnel and many secret bases with prepositioned supplies and the industrial equipment to produce more. It is a quirk of fate necessary for the story line that makes it all unravel.

So, essentially for the 5th generation survivors your statement would be true for nearly all encounter groups but possibly two.

[ArmySGT.]

So, it would be just like the Scenarios in other modules to have a Team awaken with a vehicle that isn't quite up to the mission. Such as a helicopter gun ship when they need a five ton truck, or the V-150 APC when the threat is an M-60 main battle tank.

[mmartin798]

The other thing to consider is the rebuilding mission of the Project. We have to assume that vast amounts of infrastructure, thinking mainly bridges here, are gone. This makes moving reconstruction materials difficult by land, but not by air. CH-47 or even CH-53 for moving material, personnel and the like would make a lot of sense to the planners that expect to be doing this 5 to 10 years after the bombs fall.

[stormlion1]

If the Project had aircraft at Prime Base its a pretty good bet they would stockpile plenty of spare parts for them. Up to and including a few spare aircraft in storage and a Hanger Queen for spare parts. But to me I would believe UH-1 Iroquois Helicopters would be the main way for the Project to both defend itself and to move assets about. No need for landing fields, can carry troops or supplies and there would be plenty of helicopters available after Vietnam that could be bought, reconditioned, and stored with no one noticing. They were everywhere after the war. News Helicopters, transports, etc things like that. They would even be hidden as Morrow Industries helicopters until they get stored away. Maybe a few MH-6 Little Birds as well for transporting personnel and for fire support. The main thing is there small and can be easily cached away and don't really require a ton of space for a landing field and are probably better (I'm not sure really) on fuel than some fighters.

[Project_Sardonicus]

helicopters reflect for me what I think would be a real worry for the project, technology addiction. Where technology by it's very usefulness undermines them as how will they cope when they lose them.

Aircraft need super skilled crews, spare parts and however many they horde they will run out. And if there is a second nuclear strike, the EMP will wipe them out.

So I suspect the Project would use a small number of helicopters as a in case of dire emergencies. Probably a mixture of hueys and some Russian stuff, as their military stuck with low tech soldier proof for a lot longer.

A Morrow project Hind would seem more realistic than an Apache.

I suspect simpler aircraft like Helium blimps and drones would be a hit. Blimps don't crash if their engines fail and if a drone crashes the crew survive.

A small put upon a recon team evading Krell could well find a control unit for a half dozen hellfire armed drones as a welcome game changer.

[stormlion1]

The number of Helicopters would be very limited. There not something you see stored in a Bolt Hole after all! But for Prime and the Regional Bases and maybe some of the supply depots I do see them put to use. And as the time period was supposed to be only a five year sleep and then wake up parts shouldn't have been a huge issue. Plenty of spares sitting around in warehouses and airfields across the countrys and I could see teams emplaced near factorys having orders to check them out for spare parts after they wake up. But for the entire 150 years after the nukes and a wake up each and every helicopter will be worth its weight in gold. And would make good fodder for scenario's looking for parts and pieces to keep any they did have working.

[Project_Sardonicus]

I also wonder if there'd be a goodly number of bush planes, stuff like DC10s.

Easier to fly, easier to fix and if one engine goes out it doesn't nose dive instantly.

Some fearless pilot may even be able to glide in.

I always had an idea for a scenario, where in Texas some lucky survivors got a working oil well. Produce av gas and have the last working 747, that they fly too a few ultra succesful communities to trade with.

[stormlion1]

I wonder what the possibility might be for the Morrow Project to have gotten there hands on a few old K-Class Blimps or even L-Class Blimps. Not very large but they could be used to transport supplies to out of reach teams or retrofitted with comm gear to extend comms range.

Might even make a good encounter for a Morrow Team to find someone using them as well. There essentially Goodyear Blimps after all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-class_blimp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-Class_Blimps

[ArmySGT.]

If the Project had aircraft at Prime Base...............
Prime Base has operational and reading to fly one OH-6 Cayuse.

In the support module, awaiting trained personnel to install systems and make flight worthy (after digging out the doors, and building an airfield) are two C-130s, and two CH-47s each completely disassembled to save space. There is three more OH-6 also disassembled.

[ArmySGT.]

helicopters reflect for me what I think would be a real worry for the project, technology addiction. Where technology by it's very usefulness undermines them as how will they cope when they lose them.

Aircraft need super skilled crews, spare parts and however many they horde they will run out. And if there is a second nuclear strike, the EMP will wipe them out.

So I suspect the Project would use a small number of helicopters as a in case of dire emergencies. Probably a mixture of hueys and some Russian stuff, as their military stuck with low tech soldier proof for a lot longer.

A Morrow project Hind would seem more realistic than an Apache.

I suspect simpler aircraft like Helium blimps and drones would be a hit. Blimps don't crash if their engines fail and if a drone crashes the crew survive.

A small put upon a recon team evading Krell could well find a control unit for a half dozen hellfire armed drones as a welcome game changer.

I don't think the Morrow Project would be using Soviet anything in the aftermath of a nuclear war and ground invasion by the Soviet Union.

[Project_Sardonicus]

I wonder what the possibility might be for the Morrow Project to have gotten there hands on a few old K-Class Blimps or even L-Class Blimps. Not very large but they could be used to transport supplies to out of reach teams or retrofitted with comm gear to extend comms range.

Might even make a good encounter for a Morrow Team to find someone using them as well. There essentially Goodyear Blimps after all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-class_blimp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-Class_Blimps

Absolutely blimps are remarkably durable probably the least crashed aircraft in WW2, once you switch from hydrogen to helium. Have endurance measured in days not hours and if there's no clear roads for vehicles 70mph seems pretty fast.

A Blimp would provide a remarkably stable platform for launching and guiding a wide range of missiles. Indeed it wouldn't take much work to make it flying aircraft carrier for light drones.

[stormlion1]

Absolutely blimps are remarkably durable probably the least crashed aircraft in WW2, once you switch from hydrogen to helium. Have endurance measured in days not hours and if there's no clear roads for vehicles 70mph seems pretty fast.

A Blimp would provide a remarkably stable platform for launching and guiding a wide range of missiles. Indeed it wouldn't take much work to make it flying aircraft carrier for light drones.

More of a 4th Edition take on the use of Blimps by the Project I would say. Not really sure how many Drones were available in the late 80's.

[kato13]

Since the canon project does has at least a few cargo planes, has there been any thought to Seaplanes? Given that they have zero need for a runway, I could see them being very valuable in the great lakes and for coastal project assets.

With fusion engines and the ability to land where there is water their mobility would be amazing.

[stormlion1]

Storage for Seaplanes becomes an issue but for places like the Great Lakes, Coastlines, Alaska and Hawaii I can see them getting a few stocked away. Maybe build a coastal cache and store a plane like the Grumman Goose in pieces for eventual reclamation by a team to be designated by Prime Base later.

[kato13]

I am thinking that maybe the project could make the US licencesed version of this Dornier Seastar.

The 1985 development is a tight fit for a canon project, but maybe advances the project makes in composites move it a bit forward.

[Project_Sardonicus]

More of a 4th Edition take on the use of Blimps by the Project I would say. Not really sure how many Drones were available in the late 80's.

I always thought of the project having a key to the patent office for certain key technologies.

Also I believe Israel was using them through out the 1980s in the Lebabnon, to prick Syrian radars into action.

nb why doesn't the project fit night sights to any of it's heavy weapons.

[ArmySGT.]

I always thought of the project having a key to the patent office for certain key technologies.

Also I believe Israel was using them through out the 1980s in the Lebabnon, to prick Syrian radars into action.

nb why doesn't the project fit night sights to any of it's heavy weapons.

When the 3rd edition was written the PVS-2 was in use, the PVS-4 and TVS-5 were yet to be issued.

Tanks and APCs had at best active infrared systems like the M60A1.

[ArmySGT.]

I am thinking that maybe the project could make the US licencesed version of this Dornier Seastar.

The 1985 development is a tight fit for a canon project, but maybe advances the project makes in composites move it a bit forward.

Why not previous designs made with modern materials? The PBY Catalina and the Grumman Goose are both Amphibians.

Imagine either with composite wing structures and electric motors powered by a fusion reactor.

[kato13]

Why not previous designs made with modern materials? The PBY Catalina and the Grumman Goose are both Amphibians.

Imagine either with composite wing structures and electric motors powered by a fusion reactor.

They would be excellent examples. For some reason though I think that a new development would attract less attention that re-engineering something that has been out of production for decades.

You could attribute it to a project member being a historical aviation fanatic and wanting to have a classic seaplane at each of his homes. Oddly the first 6 fuselages that they build had flaws and needed to be scrapped (wink ;) )

[stormlion1]

Big question would be how heavy is the Fusion Reactor and what kind of airframe would be needed to lift one. What needs to come out to fit it. A Grumman Goose may be too small without taking up critical cabin space. Fuel for the engines for most aircraft is stored in the wings. Would the Reactor fit in the wings? Without overbalancing? For some assets, fusion reactors would be less than ideal and just keeping a stock of Avgas on hand would be a better idea.

[Gamer]

The project does not need anything for air superiority, the Morrow group is about reconstruction not making warlords.
They don't have a need for F-5s nor the ability to maintain F-5s, they like every other jet aircraft are maintenance pigs, not to mention parts and fuel are coming from where? they would become hanger queens within a month at most IF they even had fuel to begin with.

Light coin aircraft are what the Morrow group would have at most, I'm going with either Airtractors AT-802U http://www.802u.com/
or Iomax's Archangel https://www.iomax.net/archangel/
both raise absolutely no suspicion as they are made from agriculture aircraft, have very low maintenance requirements and flight endurance way beyond any helicopter or jet.

As for ww2 era aircraft made from modern materials I would go with Something similar that happened not too long ago.
There was a company called FlugWerk GmBH it was a company that had started building the FW-190 from modern materials, who recently sold off it's production capabilities to somebody else.

There is also Titan aircraft and it's T-51D http://www.titanaircraft.com/t-51d.php

There is also the replica spitfires for those of you who prefer them:
http://www.campbellaeroclassics.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/spittybrochure.pdf

There are the people of War aircraft replicas international http://www.waraircraftreplicas.com/
These aircraft are at 1/2 to 3/4 scale but people are buying and flying these things and it's not like you couldn't scale them up to full size.
There are even replica sopwith camels and the like along with F-86 replicas running around now.

So it is far from the realm of impossibility for the PBY, Goose or any of your favorite ww2 era aircraft to be rebuilt for MP (or anyone elses) use

Lighter than air aircraft have one weakness with helium and that is helium itself, unless you make it so that MP made a few of their fusion plants to create helium that gas is going to be as super finite as avgas would be for jets -assuming you even had any avgas.

You can't just keep avgas or any refined gas and call it good, it only keeps for a few years then is unuseable for it's intent and after 150 years there is not going to be ANY useable refined gas from before the war.
You will have to have MP design an alcohol or some easy to refine fuel to use in it's motor's if they aren't going to be fusion powered.

[stormlion1]

The US has natural Gas reserves of Helium, the project could buy up a field and then sit on it giving them a five year after supply of the stuff. They could also go and do the stupid thing and use Hydrogen, which is riskier but is something they can make with the right equipment.

[Gamer]

Storm, there is a law for the reserve to be sold off by 2015.
MP could buy up a lot but then are stuck with having to find a place to store it so it doesn't leak and yet still able to access it.
There are only so many caverns that you can store it in and able to get to.

It is still a finite resource unless you make it so that the fusion reactors can make more of it and you have a place to store that, what is the point of it in the first place?
The balloons leech the stuff like crazy, it's not like you can just get some and keep it forever in the balloon due to helium permutation you have to regularly fill the balloons or it's gone forever.

The military itself has been having problems logistically for some time with it's fleet.

Logistics is going to be everything, if it isn't practical it isn't worth it.

[ArmySGT.]

The project does not need anything for air superiority, the Morrow group is about reconstruction not making warlords.
They don't have a need for F-5s nor the ability to maintain F-5s, they like every other jet aircraft are maintenance pigs, not to mention parts and fuel are coming from where? they would become hanger queens within a month at most IF they even had fuel to begin with.

Light coin aircraft are what the Morrow group would have at most, I'm going with either Airtractors AT-802U http://www.802u.com/
or Iomax's Archangel https://www.iomax.net/archangel/
both raise absolutely no suspicion as they are made from agriculture aircraft, have very low maintenance requirements and flight endurance way beyond any helicopter or jet.

I disagree.

I am sure that the Project would purchase and use light COIN aircraft.

COIN aircraft do not operate unless your side owns air superiority. Look at A-1 Skyraiders
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-1_Skyraider) operating in the COIN and air support mission in Viet Nam. These were regularly in danger from Mig -17s and Mig-19s operated by the North.

The Project doesn't need a large fleet. Flights of four (2x2) operating from Prime and the largest regional bases is enough. These to cover the air over those large important assets and protect them from Soviet bombers, rogue military forces, and act in the air to ground mission on extreme cases.

Air Superiority is the key to freedom of movement on the ground.

As for fuel......... Turbines eat anything that can be sprayed as a mist ahead of the compressor. AvGas is just kerosene. Kerosene is 1880s technology and not something that is difficult to refine.

This assumes that Project F-5s need fuel....... An electric motor that turns a turbine could conceivably draw in and compress air until the air itself ignited and made thrust.

[ArmySGT.]

Big question would be how heavy is the Fusion Reactor and what kind of airframe would be needed to lift one. What needs to come out to fit it. A Grumman Goose may be too small without taking up critical cabin space. Fuel for the engines for most aircraft is stored in the wings. Would the Reactor fit in the wings? Without overbalancing? For some assets, fusion reactors would be less than ideal and just keeping a stock of Avgas on hand would be a better idea.

Depends...... The one sized for a V-150 would fit in the current nacelles with space left over for the high torque electric motor.

[Gamer]

That is going to highly depend on the power output of that reactor, but
I highly doubt you'll need reactors in each nacelle.
The size and weight of the electric motor will help offset the weight of reactor if that is an issue.
The biggest boon you'll get out of it is the plane will be deathly quiet, so quiet you won't even hear it during taxiing much less in the air
Aerial recon is going to be very easy with the only way people finding out your around is they happen to spot you, but not ever seeing such things before they may not understand what they see.

The Green 172 -Cessna 172 with electric motor- has been around for a few years.
The motor life is estimated at 30,000 hours and has only 2 moving parts.
That would be an unholy massive advantage to the MP.
There are many types of ultra-lites running on electric motors for those that don't want full sized aircraft.

The thing that people might have an issue with is if you have a reactor powered aircraft, especially with autonav your range will be crew dependent only.

[Gamer]

I disagree.

I am sure that the Project would purchase and use light COIN aircraft.

COIN aircraft do not operate unless your side owns air superiority. Look at A-1 Skyraiders
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A-1_Skyraider) operating in the COIN and air support mission in Viet Nam. These were regularly in danger from Mig -17s and Mig-19s operated by the North.

The Project doesn't need a large fleet. Flights of four (2x2) operating from Prime and the largest regional bases is enough. These to cover the air over those large important assets and protect them from Soviet bombers, rogue military forces, and act in the air to ground mission on extreme cases.

Air Superiority is the key to freedom of movement on the ground.

As for fuel......... Turbines eat anything that can be sprayed as a mist ahead of the compressor. AvGas is just kerosene. Kerosene is 1880s technology and not something that is difficult to refine.

This assumes that Project F-5s need fuel....... An electric motor that turns a turbine could conceivably draw in and compress air until the air itself ignited and made thrust.

running on compressed air alone? you can't really be serious.
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.

COIN aircraft do not operate unless your side owns air superiority.

Yes they do, and will continue to do so, COIN has changed dramatically since Vietnam as has air to air capabilities.
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).

Air Superiority is the key to freedom of movement on the ground.
The Morrow Project is NOT and NEVER has been set up you own local warlord.
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.

[kato13]

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.

[stormlion1]

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.

[kato13]

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.)

A modified A-10 flew on cellulose processed into alcohol a few years ago.
This could be another Project development. If the agricultural teams do their job, there should be MUCH surpluss cellulose.

http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Biofuels/US-Air-Force-Completes-First-Test-Flight-Run-on-New-Alcohol-Based-Jet-Fuel.html

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.

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.

[Jeff9650]

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.

[nuke11]

Gamer,

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.



Actually I like the idea of the State of Texas controlling the CAF resources better, along with whatever was left of the US military air assets in Texas.

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.

[nuke11]

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.

[ArmySGT.]

running on compressed air alone? you can't really be serious.
you might as well forget any jet you're fawning over, it isn't gong to happen.
Quite serious. Compression makes combustion.
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.
Chapparal (Sidewinder AA missile) starts on pages 18-19 in the 3rd edition. Found on the MARS One, Science One, and Prime Base. A large Medium category Air Defense missile system.
Yes they do, and will continue to do so, COIN has changed dramatically since Vietnam as has air to air capabilities.
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).
COIN aircraft rely on Air Superiority fighters to keep the skies clear. Iraq or Afghanistan isn’t a good example as the Iraqi air force wasn’t very credible to start with and the Mujahideen didn’t have pilots. (helos, yes; fighters, no)

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”.
The Morrow Project is NOT and NEVER has been set up you own local warlord.
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. Yet, there is the MARS One vehicle. Which has no rescue equipment other than a med unit.


WHO after WW3 and all those nukes is going to have any desire to continue the war? Apparently both sides…….. In the “Fringeworthy: Complete” CD collection from Tri Tac Games (owned by Richard Tucholka) is some supporting material for the Morrow Project. The War begins 19 November, 1989 and lasts several months. Denver is the last place known nuked and that is for atleast the third time.
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- I am a graduate of the NBC NCO course 1999. EMP has been highly overrated.
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? Bear bomber have exceptional range for their class, some models with ranges greater than 9,000 miles. Enough to strike targets in the upper continental US and return without refueling with an over the Pole course.
You expect them to sacrifice Ilyushin tankers just to bomb a nuked US? Nope, the tankers will be in their race track orbits over the Soviet arctic shoreline as the NATO ones will be over the Canadian shoreline with interceptor aircraft nearby to protect them.
They will need all the aircraft for themselves after all they are surrounded by far more people against them than we are. Possibly, depends upon the State of things. If it is 1989…….. Not so much. China is their friends, South Korea and Japan can’t do much beyond their territorial waters. Europe is going to catch some nukes, then Russian will dominate their air space and sea lanes. Europe will fall.
The collapse of governments will bring a cease to hostilities to the degree you insist is going to happen. Governments will but the military in each is going to carry on as long as they can. Russia has the “Dead Hand” system for example.
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. Retaining the initiative, denying the enemy maneuver, and disrupting war or domestic production are typical reasons for strategic bombing missions.
You seem to be missing the theme of the game yourself. 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.

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.
Production of aviation fuel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_fuel
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]

[ArmySGT.]

Actually I like the idea of the State of Texas controlling the CAF resources better, along with whatever was left of the US military air assets in Texas.

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.

Read PF-06 Operation Lone Star for the state of U.S. forces in and around Ft. Hood, Texas. Incursion by Cuban/Central American Soviet allies, and the state of oil production......

Own and get a Morrow Project communications satellite too while you are at it as an added bonus! :)

[nuke11]

Read PF-06 Operation Lone Star for the state of U.S. forces in and around Ft. Hood, Texas. Incursion by Cuban/Central American Soviet allies, and the state of oil production......

Own and get a Morrow Project communications satellite too while you are at it as an added bonus! :)
Yes I have 6 or 7 of it.

[ArmySGT.]

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.

I really think the air assets are going to operate solely out of Prime Base and Regional bases. Simply because that is where the most Morrow Project support structure.

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.

[ArmySGT.]

, I still find ArmySgt's posts interesting and potentially useful.

http://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Facebook-thumbs-up.jpg

[ArmySGT.]

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?

[kato13]

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?

I would think the newer missiles which are all-aspect would have a chance. If they can target heated guard towers (ala "Cardinal and the Kremlin") and smaller helicopters I think the heat output from a P-47 would be sufficient.

Also don't newer missiles look look for both heat and an absence or UV. This keeps them from targeting the sun IIRC.

[Jeff9650]

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?

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.

[stormlion1]

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.

Which means it was armed and sitting on a grounded planes launch rack. Which is kind of scary when you think about it.

[ArmySGT.]

Yes I have 6 or 7 of it.

Morrow sats? Wow...... :)

[welsh]

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.

[ArmySGT.]

My point is

There what the Project was supposed to be on start, not what it is with Prime Base off line and faulty computer code sending random wake up codes 150 years to late.

The Project is of course about reconstruction. The reality is that it is a WAR that caused all the chaos that needs to be repaired and rebuilt from. There is no guarantee that the war is over five years after 19 November 1989. There isn't a guarantee that hostile forces are not occupying American soil at year five (there is and in more than one location). Further there isn't any indication that the Soviets are completely done with and cannot retaliate further.

That is why I continue to believe that the Project would have acquired F-5s for air superiority mission over Prime Base and critical Project assets like the (censored) in OP Desert Search.

Now, Are those going to be operable in year 150+ ? Well, I am not handing Prime Base or a Regional base over to the players, so I am not giving them F-5s. That is an asset for the PD to bring into play if the players have really messed up the B&B or Lonestar campaigns. Are they going to fly? Well, V-150s do, all the ordnance in the bolt holes and caches does. F-5s cannot be more complex than HAAM suits, Science One, or a MARS one....... Hell that can't be more complex than a cryosleep chamber. If hand waving works for those I am going to allow it for F-5s and spare parts.

[stormlion1]

Getting the aircraft might not be a problem either. If one of the members of the CoT happens to have ties to the Aviation industry or the Arms Market The Project would be able to get a few aircraft and the munitions for them. I doubt they could get many, but they could get a few listed as scrapped or tested to destruction.

[dragoon500ly]

We have Autogyros, but only in TM1-1, no module uses them. so assign a half dozen or so to the regional bases for local air reconnaissance.

We have OH-6/CH-47 helos and C-130s only at Prime Base....an argument could be made that Prime Two would have the same air group so we are looking at 12 OH-6s, 4 CH-47s and 4 C-130s for the entire Project.

The only other planes that I would even consider would be a CV-2 Caribou for STOL and light cargo/passenger use, maybe one per Regional Command Base. Perhaps a U-1 Otter to assist the Caribou for team support, maybe 2 per RCB. The only other aircraft I would consider is a OV-10 Bronco, not only is it an armed COIN aircraft, it also has limited cargo/passenger capability as well as STOL capability.

SOoooo

for a Project we might have 60 Autogyros, 12 OH6s, 4 CH-47s, 4 C-130s, 10 Caribou, 20 Otters and 10 Broncos

Thoughts?

[stormlion1]

What about resupply bases or regional bases? Surely they would have some way of moving equipment/personnel if they had to. They wouldn't make Teams cross several hundred miles just to replace personnel or damaged gear. It would make more sense to have the capability to resupply them from a distance. I personally would use old Huey Helicopters for it. They have proven to be up to the task.

[welsh]

My point is

There what the Project was supposed to be on start, not what it is with Prime Base off line and faulty computer code sending random wake up codes 150 years to late.

The Project is of course about reconstruction. The reality is that it is a WAR that caused all the chaos that needs to be repaired and rebuilt from. There is no guarantee that the war is over five years after 19 November 1989. There isn't a guarantee that hostile forces are not occupying American soil at year five (there is and in more than one location). Further there isn't any indication that the Soviets are completely done with and cannot retaliate further.

To be honest, I agree with that thinking. There is no certainty that the war is over and that modern threats don't exist. I would also question how far the project anticipated the industrial-tech and the economic infrastructure that existed to maintain that capacity.

But at the end of the day, there is still a challenge. Having a significant air wing can be hugely expensive and the problem of secrecy remains. I can understand utilizing something like a commercial or private jet and make it duel use- a weaponized Leer jet perhaps, but buying and maintaining advanced fighter aircraft or attack aircraft would seem to be a huge challenge for what is essentially a private company.

While it is fair to say that there have been multinational corporations with military assets- such as Heritage Oil owning Executive Outcomes, even EO was limited in its use of a military arm- buying mostly old Russian Hind Helicopters for its operations in Africa. And EO was an unusual case and drew a lot of criticism. It is simply hard to purchase advanced military tech if you are a private company. IF you are going to have a company Morrow Industries acquiring advanced weapons like F5 aircraft, you need a story to justify or explain how that could happen? Was Morrow working as a private military contractor, training militaries in South America in drug interdiction, and thus had reason to buy COIN aircraft for the war on drugs? And yes, I think it fair to ask- well how did Morrow get its other military gear? There is no easy answer.

I would also think that there is a leap between having a Morrow Project with an combat air wing, a transportation air-wing, and then the need for some organic air defense. Having air-defense is different from having an air force.

That is why I continue to believe that the Project would have acquired F-5s for air superiority mission over Prime Base and critical Project assets like the (censored) in OP Desert Search.

F5S aircraft are used by a number of foreign countries. But its an airplane that is getting pretty old too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5

If Morrow Project follows the original timeline and the war happens in the 1980s, ok. More modern war and I would be worried that the F5s would get shot out of the air. Investing in an expensive plane that is unlikely to be competitive for its mission could be risky. Will you update it with a more advance fighter?

Then there is the question of capacity again- if only countries fly the F5 and we compare them, is Morrow more like Singapore or like Kenya? Probably more like Kenya in terms of spending capacity. An airforce like a small African country- ok, I can see that.

Now, Are those going to be operable in year 150+ ? Well, I am not handing Prime Base or a Regional base over to the players, so I am not giving them F-5s. That is an asset for the PD to bring into play if the players have really messed up the B&B or Lonestar campaigns. Are they going to fly? Well, V-150s do, all the ordnance in the bolt holes and caches does. F-5s cannot be more complex than HAAM suits, Science One, or a MARS one....... Hell that can't be more complex than a cryosleep chamber. If hand waving works for those I am going to allow it for F-5s and spare parts.

I have to admit, I also find some of this high tech to be dicey, but you make a good point. In the end however, I have to go with the idea raised by stormlion- keep it simple and small. Tech in Morrow is problematic across the board as you need to develop your story so that the tech makes sense and adds to the story rather than deflects it or confuses it. The more you use, the more tenuous your story becomes.

[ArmySGT.]

We have Autogyros, but only in TM1-1, no module uses them. so assign a half dozen or so to the regional bases for local air reconnaissance.

We have OH-6/CH-47 helos and C-130s only at Prime Base....an argument could be made that Prime Two would have the same air group so we are looking at 12 OH-6s, 4 CH-47s and 4 C-130s for the entire Project.

The only other planes that I would even consider would be a CV-2 Caribou for STOL and light cargo/passenger use, maybe one per Regional Command Base. Perhaps a U-1 Otter to assist the Caribou for team support, maybe 2 per RCB. The only other aircraft I would consider is a OV-10 Bronco, not only is it an armed COIN aircraft, it also has limited cargo/passenger capability as well as STOL capability.

SOoooo

for a Project we might have 60 Autogyros, 12 OH6s, 4 CH-47s, 4 C-130s, 10 Caribou, 20 Otters and 10 Broncos

Thoughts?

Technically, the Science One in module (censored) has one broken down. You just need to capture it back from the (censored) force before the send it back to (censored). Oh and a HAAM suit too.

I am going with Morrow Project intended to use a host of far less rugged but immediately available aircraft in the form of civil aircraft. Such as Boeing 707s or 747s in air freight configuration. The ones operating outside the U.S. or parked in a convenient desert and listed as non-flightworthy kept far and away from primary and secondary targets.

These would have been intended for use right away with crews not in cryosleep at all.

Such as a 747 reconfigured for mid air refueling (air force model) maybe acquired through a foreign power (we'll buy you two if you buy this one off the books for us).

A cargo frame can be reconfigured internally for other missions like mid air refueling, passengers, ELINT, airborne command post, etc.

Then there is a large range of turbo prop and business class civilian jets that could all be spread out throughout the dozens of corporations that fall under Morrow Industries.

Hidden in plain sight. Now 150+ the crews died, and the craft are junk. Though stock piles of parts, and the maintenance equipment may still be waiting in a supply bunker. There might even be pilots in the Frozen Watch.

[Capt Gideon]

With the lack of well maintained air fields it is most likely the MP would stick to aircraft with ruff field capability if not VTOL capability. The AV-8B Plus could carry out both the Air-to-Air as well as the Air-to-Surface missions, making use of LGB, Maverick, 2.75 inch rocket along with a wide variety of free fall bombs, with AMRAAM and Sidewinder capable with a 25mm Gatling Gun. The other is the V-22 Osprey, it is the replacement for the older CH-46, being faster and having a heavier lift capability. Being fusion powered they would have greater range and would be able to carry out any missions that the project might require. The one craft not mentioned are RPVs. A fusion powered Global Hawk that could fly high and carry out continental recon for 18 month periods before requiring a fusion pack change out would be a great asset. A modified version of the Global Hawk could be used as a communications relay platform if satellite communications aren't available. Teams, especially Recon, should have small aerial RPV for their use and heavier armed versions Like the MQ-9 Reaper (Predator-B) with 4 Hellfire II missiles and 2 GBU-12 Paveway II 500lbs bombs. Even the MQ-1 Predator can carry 2 Hellfire II missiles. Fusion powered RPV with intelligent autopilots would make great force multipliers and could carry out most of the air strike missions that the project would most likely ever need. Want something bigger, pick up a couple X-47B Stealth Attack Drones with 2000 kg (4500lbs) payload, enough for a pair of GBU-16 Paveway II Mk83 1000 lbs laser guided bombs or a pair of B61 (340 Kt) nukes. Wouldn't Damocles love some RPVs to play with?

[stormlion1]

Look to the aircraft used by Bush Pilots for small aircraft that could be stored in a Bolt Hole. Many are small, can be reconfigured for landing on water, airfield, or even snow and require the one thing the Project needs. The need a single pilot and are easily acquired and most importantly won't be missed! Not really all that good for cargo but for small scale troop transport or scouting they would do the job quite well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_plane

[welsh]

This topic reminds me of that old mercenary flick, the Wild Geese, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wild_Geese in which a group of mercenaries try to rescue an African politician and get betrayed by their corporate sponsors. Air assets factor in three different times, and it works fairly well for an adventure story.

(1) the tech of the company?
Initially the mercenaries parachute in to conduct their mission. The plane later lands to pick them up, turns around and flies off, leaving the mercenaries stranded. The airplane is a military type cargo plane that can land on a rough airfield, designed for developing countries, and a rear ramp that allows for significant cargo haulage. This strikes me as a practical choice for Morrow. The plane is also a prop aircraft, thus reducing the need for complex jet engine repair, it strikes me as a rough plane capable of simple repairs, dependent on generally available fuel sources. One could arm this aircraft with a mini gun or other weapons, turning into something like an AC-130.

(2) Coercive capacity-
The second time is when the mercenaries get napalmed on a bridge, splitting the group up, wiping out a bunch of the small team, and causing lots of problems. The plane a duel use aircraft armed with machine guns and bombing capacity, I recall duel prop and something you'd see on private airfields all over the US. The bomb strikes me as a fairly simple device. Again, this is a good model for the Morrow project and also reflects the damage that can be done to both members and adversaries by fairly non-advanced technologies that "fit" the story. It also reflects an issue of figuring air assets into the balance of the game. Even if Morrow has pretty good aircraft, there needs to be reasonable constraints on the types of planes it uses- duel use makes sense.

But it also means that adversary air groups need to utilize a tech that reflects, realistically, their capacity. In a world of ballooners seeking to escape the chaos of ground, the indigenous air assets need to have some kind of organic fuel capacity, and the aircraft have to reflect local level of tech. Even if VTOL planes make sense, the technology might be out of reach for maintenance. But this makes airfields an important element of the story as well.

(3) Indigenous capacity and infrastructure-
The third point in the film involves the mercenaries escape- where they find a local priest who is also a bush pilot, knows where there is an old Douglas Dakota cargo plane and offers to spirit them out of the country. The Dakota is an old mid 20th century relic, is in bad shape, and gets shot up and barely makes it out of the country. This too, represents to me a decent example of a reasonable local plane. If we are going to find local air assets that work, it will look something like that Dakota, essentially an airplane running on worn out toothpicks and rubber bands.

If these planes lasted 150s, not only do they have to rely on maintained parts, but also serious training of technical support and personnel to keep the planes airborne. This might mean a small group of dedicated pilots and aircrews who maintain planes either as a collective effort or in isolated groups. Remember, there isn't much population and most people are worried about subsistence- the US has become 1980s Africa in terms of development and infrastructure.

Of course, its your game so do what you want. My only advice here is to be careful with the integration of technology. "Cool" tech can cause more problems than it is worth, while desperation (through material and technical scarcity) might be the mother of innovation. As director of your story, you need to maintain the vitality of your story going forward. If your idea is a modern air war between say the Kentucky Free State and Morrow, ok. Then you have to think about the balance or if it becomes a chain of swatting KFS pilots out of the sky, the game will get boring. But if the problem is, say, acquiring a vaccine (hidden in an ancient lab in Canada) to an outbreak of a lethal form of small pox that is breaking out in an Indian community in New Mexico, than figuring out how to use scarce air assets might be fun.

[ArmySGT.]

This topic reminds me of that old mercenary flick, the Wild Geese, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wild_Geese in which a group of mercenaries try to rescue an African politician and get betrayed by their corporate sponsors. Air assets factor in three different times, and it works fairly well for an adventure story. A whole campaign can be written around a Team with a DC-3 or a V-22. As can a campaign if you wanted to make you Team nothing but, F-5 pilots. The PD puts the Team up against encounters they can beat and encounters they should run from. A PD also has plans to separate the Team from their high tech gear too.

(1) the tech of the company?
Initially the mercenaries parachute in to conduct their mission. The plane later lands to pick them up, turns around and flies off, leaving the mercenaries stranded. The airplane is a military type cargo plane that can land on a rough airfield, designed for developing countries, and a rear ramp that allows for significant cargo haulage. This strikes me as a practical choice for Morrow. The plane is also a prop aircraft, thus reducing the need for complex jet engine repair, it strikes me as a rough plane capable of simple repairs, dependent on generally available fuel sources. One could arm this aircraft with a mini gun or other weapons, turning into something like an AC-130. I agree that something that is prop driven and a short take off and landing (STOL) rated would be a logical choice. The Project though has the resources and the time to buy exactly what they need, then to store it away until it is needed. The Project doesn’t have to improvise.

(2) Coercive capacity-
The second time is when the mercenaries get napalmed on a bridge, splitting the group up, wiping out a bunch of the small team, and causing lots of problems. The plane a duel use aircraft armed with machine guns and bombing capacity, I recall duel prop and something you'd see on private airfields all over the US. The bomb strikes me as a fairly simple device. Again, this is a good model for the Morrow project and also reflects the damage that can be done to both members and adversaries by fairly non-advanced technologies that "fit" the story. It also reflects an issue of figuring air assets into the balance of the game. Even if Morrow has pretty good aircraft, there needs to be reasonable constraints on the types of planes it uses- duel use makes sense. Any Close Air Support aircraft is a reconnaissance plane with a recon pod attached, and ELINT or Jammer with the right pod attached. Any hardpoints by default make any aircraft multi mission. The F-5 already has a purpose built RF-5 version.

The project could have a few Skyraiders bought up from foreign powers or like the KFS has their own production facility capable of a low rate (1 per month). The Project could also have as a subsidiary company the manufacturers of the Super Tocano. http://www.embraerdefensesystems.com/english/content/combat/tucano_light_attack.asp There is a thousand niches for specialized and general aviation in a reconstruction effort in hostile airspace. The nice part about gunships like a AC-47 or AC-130 is the ability to linger over a target for a long time. The gunship can then remain on station protecting the friendlies on the ground and do a lot of damage to hostile forces. Strike craft and even close air support burn a lot of fuel and can’t stay long. These have the advantage of getting there fast versus a gunship which is comparatively much slower.

But it also means that adversary air groups need to utilize a tech that reflects, realistically, their capacity. In a world of ballooners seeking to escape the chaos of ground, the indigenous air assets need to have some kind of organic fuel capacity, and the aircraft have to reflect local level of tech. Even if VTOL planes make sense, the technology might be out of reach for maintenance. But this makes airfields an important element of the story as well.
Well, the KFS is flying P-47Ds. There are other groups that are the same tech level as the Project. That doesn’t include groups that may have anti air assets that haven’t had someone to use them on. Soviets with a ZPU-4 for example.
(3) Indigenous capacity and infrastructure-
The third point in the film involves the mercenaries escape- where they find a local priest who is also a bush pilot, knows where there is an old Douglas Dakota cargo plane and offers to spirit them out of the country. The Dakota is an old mid 20th century relic, is in bad shape, and gets shot up and barely makes it out of the country. This too, represents to me a decent example of a reasonable local plane. If we are going to find local air assets that work, it will look something like that Dakota, essentially an airplane running on worn out toothpicks and rubber bands.

If these planes lasted 150s, not only do they have to rely on maintained parts, but also serious training of technical support and personnel to keep the planes airborne. This might mean a small group of dedicated pilots and aircrews who maintain planes either as a collective effort or in isolated groups. Remember, there isn't much population and most people are worried about subsistence- the US has become 1980s Africa in terms of development and infrastructure.
There is more than one group in the Project encounters that could change priorities and muster the right resources to do this. The KFS. The Lonestar. Even the Warriors of Krell. Not to mention Universities, New Presidencies, and an enclave of Soviets in Mexico, Florida, or the Pacific Northwest.
Of course, its your game so do what you want. My only advice here is to be careful with the integration of technology. "Cool" tech can cause more problems than it is worth, while desperation (through material and technical scarcity) might be the mother of innovation. As director of your story, you need to maintain the vitality of your story going forward. If your idea is a modern air war between say the Kentucky Free State and Morrow, ok. Then you have to think about the balance or if it becomes a chain of swatting KFS pilots out of the sky, the game will get boring. But if the problem is, say, acquiring a vaccine (hidden in an ancient lab in Canada) to an outbreak of a lethal form of small pox that is breaking out in an Indian community in New Mexico, than figuring out how to use scarce air assets might be fun. The PD giveth, and the PD taketh away.



*crackle crackle* “ANY STATION This net! Any Station this NET! This is Mike Oscar Zero Two!
ANY STATION This is Mike OSCAR Zero Two! Immediate support! OVER! “ The voice was high pitched, the speech rushed, and the crackle of gunfire could be heard in the background. “Any Station this net! Any Station this net this is Mike Oscar Zero Two! Immediate support, OVER!” The gun fire had increased, and some sounded as though the operator was at full cyclic rate. “My God! Anyone! This is Mike Oscar Zero Two! Immediate *boom* support! OVER! “ A momentary pause as any explosion sounded off near the radio operator.

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, This is Diamond Zero One, I copy yours, Over.” A calm voice came up on TacNet one. “Diamond Zero One, This is Mike Oscar Zero Two, Oh my God! Can you help us? (pause) Over. “ The voice seemed dazed and unbelieving that anyone could pull him out of this situation. “Mike Oscar o Zero Two, This is Diamond Zero One, Authenticate Alpha, Victor, Young man and I’ll see what I have.” The voice was abundant and calm, probably what a radio operator under determined attack needed to hear. “Diamond Zero One, this is Mike Oscar Zero Two, I authenticate Bravo, Over”… The voice was tremulous, unsure, even disbelieving” .
“Mike Oscar Zero Two, This is Diamond One, that’s the magic word. Squawk your Autonav, and give me a sitrep, Over.”
“Diamond Zero One, This is Mike Zero Two, transmitting now. We’re pinned! Can you help?”
“Mike Oscar Zero Two, This is Diamond Zero One, I have your ident and grid. Enroute your position, with an Eeee TEeee AY, of two mikes, Over”.

“Diamond Zero One, This is Mike Zero Two, thank you! Which road you coming on? West is blocked, our hostiles are West of my position, over”.
“Mike Zero Two, this is Diamond Zero One. No roads today, Diamond FLIGHT is inbound on your position. Mark your targets. Bad guys are bananas, say again, bad guys are bananas, over”

Diamond Zero One, This is Mike Zero Two, Targets will be marked, Bananas. Did you just say, flight, Over?”

Mike Zero Two, This is Diamond Zero One. Affirmative, this is Diamond Flight. Enroute to assist, EEE TEE Ayyyy to assist is 60 seconds, over”

“Diamond Two, Diamond One, on me. Diamond Three, Four, High Guard”.
“Two”
“Three”
“Four” more calm voices came over the Morrow Project Tactical Net.
“All Diamonds, Diamond One, Weapons Hot! Targets are bananas, confirm”

“Two, hot.”
“Three, hot.”
“Four, hot.”

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, This is Diamond One, gonna need a target description, over”

“Oh my god! Diamond Zero One, This is Mike Oscar Zero Two! Hostiles are two trucks with heavy machineguns supported by platoon strength dismounts. They have formed a firing line 300 meters west of mine on a ditch embankment. Our V is in the open and I have casualties, Over”.

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, This is Diamond One, beginning my run. Find cover, Over”

“Diamond Three, One. Immediate retrans this sitch for Regional.” “Let’s get some Evac assets on the way, Over”

“Diamond One, Three. Retrans now, Over”.

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, this is Diamond One. I see you. Breaking branches your East. Targets are bananas, confirm, Over”.

“Diamond One, you’re an airplane? We have airplanes? Oh my god! Targets marked Yellow smoke, Over!”

“Confirmed, Diamond One, Engaging, Over”

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, Diamond One, confirm strike, trucks down? Over”

“Diamond One, Mike Oscar Zero Two, Their burning! The trucks are burning! Thank you! Over”

“Diamand Two, start your run, over”

“Two”

“Diamond One, Diamond One! Their running!, the hostiles are running! Over!”

“One, Two, Clear”

“Two, One, Affirm”

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, this is Diamond One. We’ll be making a second run, South to North. Remark targets as necessary.”

“Diamond One, Three”
“Three, One”
“One, Three. Regional says remain on station. Angel Four is inbound for EEEE Vack. Two Zero mikes at best speed, over”
“Three, One, copy, remain on high guard, over”
“Three”

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, this is Diamond One, How are things down there now? Over”

“Diamond One, Mike Oscar Zero Two! Oh god, thanks, thanks! Most of them ran. Still taking some fire from the embankment maybe five to ten, can’t tell. Over”

“Three, One, got that?”
“One, Three, Affirm”
“Diamond One, beginning my run.”
“Diamond One, Mike Oscar Zero Two, I see you! Their running! Running West!”

“Mike Oscar Zero Two, Diamond One. Let’s see if they can run faster than that.”

“Two, One. Abort your run. Target neutralized”

“One, Two, copy, Abort Run, Over”
“Two, One copies”

“Diamond One, This is Mike Oscar Zero Two! You did it! Their gone! You saved us! Over!”
“Mike Oscar Zero Two, This is Diamond One. Glad to help. Your EEE Vack is inbound and Diamond Flight is going to hang around until your wounded are safe and you are moving, Over”

“Diamond One, Mike Oscar Zero Two, Thank you! Oh my god, Thank you! Over.

“Diamond One, Out”

“All Diamonds, Diamond One. Climb to Angels two thousand and standby to assist Eeee Vack as necessary.”
“Two”
“Three”
“Four”

[Capt Gideon]

The more sophisticated the aerial equipment, the sophisticated the support facilities that are required. CV-22, F-5, AV-8B Plus, X-47B Stealth Drone would only be at Prime Base. They require a lot of maintenance to keep them flying. This means trained and experience ground crews. Even the MQ-1 and MQ-9 require established bases to operate from. Really anything more then an ultralight can't be maintained in the field. Pulling the primary drive motor of a vehicle requires the assistance of a recovery or engineering vehicle with the proper tools. Recon teams should have small drones to assist in their work. A neat idea is to have a supply catch to have a trailer mounted drone system for a team, rather then giving it to them to start with. Be imaginative, a small drone that looks like an Eagle or Condor when seen from a distance.

[stormlion1]

Drone wise I would figure the project wouldn't have the most up to date designs if they had them at all. But how about the AAI RQ-2 Pioneer? They used those during the 80's and the 90's and were landed by crashing them into a net! Plus they have the distinction of having Iraqi troops try to surrender to one flying overhead.

[welsh]

ArmySgt- nice little dramatic story telling. But it also raises a point. Given the awesome air-to-air combat and air-to-ground repressive capacity of a technically efficient air wing, there comes back the problem of balance and gaming.

My worry is that giving Morrow too much of an air wing against a technologically relatively unsophisticated population would seem to a game of strawmen. Your Morrow F-5s vs KFS P-47Ds seems unbalance. Given a choice of challenge, better to let the bad guys have the edge and put the onus on your team to figure a way to respond.

I think a better story might be of your Morrow team trying to evade getting hit by KFS P-47Ds- a better challenge. Or even your Morrow team trying to figure out how its recon helicopters could engaged the P-47Ds. Or maybe your Morrow Team needs to figure a way to hit the P-47Ds so that they are not a threat, because the KFS is using its military edge to coerce local communities to its bidding. If you give your team F-5s to deal with the KFS, or any real threat, than the challenge of your story begins to diminish.

With regard to energy- I am a bit worried that the fusion reactor/power plant is a tech that is easily abused and potentially lost. If every aircraft or vehicle is running with a long life fusion power plant under the hood- what happens when that plant blows up in combat, or is captured by a technologically superior or equivalent entity.

Why not minimize the use of fusion powered plants as energy generators, and allow your vehicles to run on long-life batteries. To regenerate, the team to find a viable power source capable of recharge. But I admit, this breaks from canon.

[ArmySGT.]

ArmySgt- nice little dramatic story telling. But it also raises a point. Given the awesome air-to-air combat and air-to-ground repressive capacity of a technically efficient air wing, there comes back the problem of balance and gaming.

My worry is that giving Morrow too much of an air wing against a technologically relatively unsophisticated population would seem to a game of strawmen. Your Morrow F-5s vs KFS P-47Ds seems unbalance. Given a choice of challenge, better to let the bad guys have the edge and put the onus on your team to figure a way to respond.

I think a better story might be of your Morrow team trying to evade getting hit by KFS P-47Ds- a better challenge. Or even your Morrow team trying to figure out how its recon helicopters could engaged the P-47Ds. Or maybe your Morrow Team needs to figure a way to hit the P-47Ds so that they are not a threat, because the KFS is using its military edge to coerce local communities to its bidding. If you give your team F-5s to deal with the KFS, or any real threat, than the challenge of your story begins to diminish.

With regard to energy- I am a bit worried that the fusion reactor/power plant is a tech that is easily abused and potentially lost. If every aircraft or vehicle is running with a long life fusion power plant under the hood- what happens when that plant blows up in combat, or is captured by a technologically superior or equivalent entity.

Why not minimize the use of fusion powered plants as energy generators, and allow your vehicles to run on long-life batteries. To regenerate, the team to find a viable power source capable of recharge. But I admit, this breaks from canon.


The KFS either has in storage or can produce quickly AAA to meet a new airborne threat. Currently their adversaries don't field anything and the KFS air arm has complete air dominance. It will be a shock to the KFS pilots if the are engaged by a Project stinger missile.

The Commando Scout may have the elevation to engage slow moving aircraft like a helo.

The Warriors of Krell certainly have stingers in their possession acquired from captured bases, caches, and teams.

The Lonestar State could produce gun type AAA but currently cannot produce sophisticated electronics.

The Deseret Republic is steam / 1880s

The Brotherhood (or what is left) could conceivably have ZPU-2, ZPU-4, and ZSU-23-4 that are operational without electronics. Any missiles would probably have been expended or lost due to time and exposure.

The Soviets in Washington State and Florida probably don't have any missiles either for the same reasons. However, they would have all the gun type AAA with severely depleted stocks of ammunition.

[stormlion1]

Dumb question, in front of many VA buildings there generally is some piece of military hardware. A Artillery Piece, Cannonballs, Bofor AA guns from WW-II. Could survivors use the Bofor AA Guns as a template and produce there own AA guns for themselves? Sure they have been demil'd but it shouldn't be hard to figure out what has been removed and replace it and then just making the ammo is just a matter of small scale industry. I could see KFS doing so after they lose air supremacy or even before to use as ground weapons.

[ArmySGT.]

Dumb question, in front of many VA buildings there generally is some piece of military hardware. A Artillery Piece, Cannonballs, Bofor AA guns from WW-II. Could survivors use the Bofor AA Guns as a template and produce there own AA guns for themselves? Sure they have been demil'd but it shouldn't be hard to figure out what has been removed and replace it and then just making the ammo is just a matter of small scale industry. I could see KFS doing so after they lose air supremacy or even before to use as ground weapons.

Certain groups mentioned above could feasibly do so. The guns are not that hard to make for some. The quality of steel, the machine tooling, and the educated machinist being the highest limiting factors to make AAA.

It is the electronics that stops it all cold. The AAA round relies on the proximity fuse (a mini radar) to detonate the HE shell near an aircraft. This was a huge innovation on the U.S. side in WW2 to counter the Japanese naval pilots. This relies on the manufacturers ability to produce transistors and miniature circuitry.

[LBraden]

I think honestly, if, to use a term used by my science teacher, the fecal matter is hitting the rotary air impeller.

The idea of Proximity fuses will be thrown out of the window for just getting enough copper jacketed lead and anything ELSE that can be shoved down the barrels into the air, yes it does mean you need a hit, but I think even the heavy-duty and versatile Hind would have trouble flying after taking a 20mm round though part of the engine block, or a few large holes in the tail boom.

[ArmySGT.]

I think honestly, if, to use a term used by my science teacher, the fecal matter is hitting the rotary air impeller.

The idea of Proximity fuses will be thrown out of the window for just getting enough copper jacketed lead and anything ELSE that can be shoved down the barrels into the air, yes it does mean you need a hit, but I think even the heavy-duty and versatile Hind would have trouble flying after taking a 20mm round though part of the engine block, or a few large holes in the tail boom.

Hey! Nice to see you back!

I hope the Morrow Project muse has ignited your digital palette.

Actually the Hind could shrug off a 20mm as it is armored but, I can see where your going. Yes, a quad .50 either on a trailer or on a truck would be bad mojo. A 20mm vulcan would be bad news for most stuff.

The trouble with gun AAA is it is very local and there is the danger of stuff coming right back down on your head.

Currently the KFS is the only faction that appears capable of producing fuzed AAA ammunition. Everyone else could make solid or impact fused (20mm and larger) munitions in small lots (under 1000).

The proverbial "Wall of Lead" is still effect at defending a point or structure.

Missiles though extend that defense and make it capable for one unit to defend a significant portion of airspace.

Take a Quad .50 and it is good for 2000 meters. Compare this to the Chaparral and the effective range of 17, 700 meters.

The KFS does field .50 M2 machineguns so some inherent capability for AA defense exists already and troops would just need training.

[LBraden]

I never left Sgt. just got stuck with a lack of creativity and various issues that mean I am well and truly scuppered.

But in regards to the Hind, yes it is armoured, but if you have the doors open and a round goes though the open door and hits the underside of the engine, I think it will do damage, as I don't recall that part being armoured as well.

[ArmySGT.]

Dumb question, in front of many VA buildings there generally is some piece of military hardware. A Artillery Piece, Cannonballs, Bofor AA guns from WW-II. Could survivors use the Bofor AA Guns as a template and produce there own AA guns for themselves? Sure they have been demil'd but it shouldn't be hard to figure out what has been removed and replace it and then just making the ammo is just a matter of small scale industry. I could see KFS doing so after they lose air supremacy or even before to use as ground weapons.

The only problem with reverse engineering something like a Bofor 40mm AAA piece is determining if the tolerances are in specifications on each part.

That part could be large (over spec) or it could be small (under spec) and with either that can mean all kinds of performance gremlins crop up when trying to use the new manufactured bits.

[ArmySGT.]

I never left Sgt. just got stuck with a lack of creativity and various issues that mean I am well and truly scuppered.

But in regards to the Hind, yes it is armoured, but if you have the doors open and a round goes though the open door and hits the underside of the engine, I think it will do damage, as I don't recall that part being armoured as well.

Can you go back to University for Graphic Design? Those M20 skills are pretty impressive.

[LBraden]

Can't afford it, but I do bits here and there, will up my Deviant Art page in my sig, as I have done some non Morrow stuff, and my next plan is an aircraft, that Morrow could have possibly used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTV_XC-142

[stormlion1]

Nice plane, seen it when I went to Dayton a few years back. And a aircraft I could see as being used by the Project.

[ArmySGT.]

Can't afford it, but I do bits here and there, will up my Deviant Art page in my sig, as I have done some non Morrow stuff, and my next plan is an aircraft, that Morrow could have possibly used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTV_XC-142

I have your DeviantArt page marked to "watch" and have been patiently awaiting your updates for months.

Maybe you could tackle some Kentucky Free States equipment? Or let out your inner "Mad Max" on some Gypsy Truckers or Warriors of Krell?

I think I will do up some game stats for a Grumman Goose and a PBY Catalina.

Amphibious Observation and Search & Rescue planes for the MARS division.

Updated electronics, Carbon fiber skins, titanium alloy frame members, and fusion powered electric propellers.

Huge weight savings in not having to carry thousands of pounds of fuel.

[LBraden]

One of the things I am stalled on is some good images for "External Stores", such as fuel tanks, missiles, rocket pods, dumb bombs, guided bombs, ELINT pods, Gun pods, Areal Torpedoes, etc.

I don't really do "mad max" and I have been trying to knock off a few more vehicles, but as with everything, if I don't have all the pieces, I can get stalled, which is why my "Aviation projects" are stalled until I get get the external stores images.

If I get other stuff, such as field shell images for sizing and such, I may do big guns and tanks, but for now, I am trying to do air, but google search is failing me.

[ArmySGT.]

One of the things I am stalled on is some good images for "External Stores", such as fuel tanks, missiles, rocket pods, dumb bombs, guided bombs, ELINT pods, Gun pods, Areal Torpedoes, etc.

I don't really do "mad max" and I have been trying to knock off a few more vehicles, but as with everything, if I don't have all the pieces, I can get stalled, which is why my "Aviation projects" are stalled until I get get the external stores images.

If I get other stuff, such as field shell images for sizing and such, I may do big guns and tanks, but for now, I am trying to do air, but google search is failing me.

Go to Scribd.com

Hundreds of field manuals from different countries have been uploaded by various users.

To use it for free, they have a upload one to download one policy. A year membership is pretty low though.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/213392736/Worldwide-Equipment-Guide-WEG-Update-2011-Vol-1-Ground-Systems

[LBraden]

Just for the people who want a possible "heavy fighter"

http://braden1986.deviantart.com/art/A-20-Havoc-451833313

[Capt Gideon]

Chaparral MIM-72 is based on a Sidewinder AIM-9 missile, but was modified to operate from a ground launch platform. It used a different rocket motor and reduced control surfaces. MIM-72A only had a range of 6000 meters and a speed of Mach 1.5 (1838 kph)(510.6 m/s) or 1.8 km per Combat Turn. the later MIM-72C&G version are listed at having a range of 9000 meters, with the G version have a new smokeless motor and the same IR seeker as FIM-92 Stinger. Where someone came up with the idea of 17,700m range for Chaparral is by treating it as the air launched version which it isn't. Chaparral being launched from the ground does not have Sidewinders advantage of being air launched where it is already at near Mach speeds. It has to provide all its own energy to gain speed and altitude, requiring a different type of rocket motor. This is why there were projections for improvements to the ADATS, giving it a IR seeker in addition to laser homing and a secondary version that would use a AIM-120 AMRAAM seeker in place of the original laser homing system, which would improve range. But who says the KFS doesn't have jet technology and just not shown it yet. A version of the follow on to the ME262 or other early jets, like flying wing bombers could throw a real challenge for the team.

[rcaf_777]

What about the

Piper PA-48 Enforcer - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_PA-48_Enforcer
Cavalier Mustang - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalier_Mustang
North American P-51 Mustang - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang#Post-World_War_II

[welsh]

I think those would be better choices than F5s, and certainly a better balance to the KFS, but the problem is - why develop a fighter aircraft (with all the resources necessary to maintain the plane) when there are applications that need attention? Given the Morrow mission, why purchase fighters? We can leave aside the difficulty in buying advanced military fighter aircraft- something multinational enterprises usually don't do, but which might be sidestepped if you buy duel use. Of course with a heavy dose of imagination, I guess anything is possible.

The problem of having dedicated air assets in a fighter or even attack capacity, suggests that the project would anticipate the need for it in lieu of other purposes. Given that the project was supposed to rebuild after a nuclear war, I would think that aircraft, if budgeted, would be needed for recon and transportation, be low maintenance, technologically not very sophisticated, and practical. The reasons are simple that the needs for the mission demand it- low cost/multi-purpose/low tech- requiring minimal manpower (as talented labor is in short-supply). These are planes that might be adapted for military purpose, but military purpose is of secondary importance. The project's purpose is to rebuild.

There are a couple of streams of thought that you could utilize in justifying or explaining aircraft. I think there are three- the "unlimited Morrow" approach, the "Balance against potential enemies approach" or the "Morrow is a constrained organization" approach. Each reflects different mindsets about how to play the game.

(1) The Morrow Project needs them so acquires them and feels its justified to make the expense in labor and financial capital. Unlimited financial capacity and imagination can take this idea very far. In fact, that logic can go pretty fair to justify anything. My thinking is that the project would do something practical. The bigger your game project, the more likely that it might have jets. Assume the project could spend unlimited amounts, than why not buy spacecraft too or modern satellites. After all those are pretty sophisticated Science and Mars vehicles in the book. Granted those are few in number and far apart, suggesting limits in the scope of the project.

My feeling on this is that the advanced technology is pretty limited by the game's main book. I would be reluctant to go beyond that.

(2) Balancing with adversaries. Sgt has made this argument, but the only real adversary that has air capacity seems to have KFS and they have World War 2 era Thunderbolts. I would be curious to know how many Thunderbolts still remain operational today. In that sense, your choices seem a fair balance.

The down side of this is that if the Project beats KFS (and it probably will) than Morrow Project has now acquired air dominance. Beware Ballooners and every other faction. Sure they might have sidewinders and AAA capacity that might shoot down your planes, but those are fixed and if you have a wild weasel aircraft, maybe you can knock those planes out too. A dictator takes over the Project and can become the king of America, a benevolent (or not so benevolent) dictatorship because it has the capacity of bombing just about any opposition it might face. Cool side of that is that a slave federation or a bunch of former soviet forces with technology 150 years old (and with little residual know-how to service it) may save America from the best intentions (made corrupt by power-hungry leaders) of the Morrow Project. Not sure how Morrow didn't anticipate that possibility- but it might make for a new story line.

(3) The Morrow Project operates under stiff constraints- The Morrow Project is a small group whose mission is primarily rebuilding and redevelopment of a country largely destroyed by nuclear warfare. Delayed from undertaking its mission, it has few people, few resources and significant constraints. If it meets with a powerful enemy, that means it has to find a way to rise to the challenge, perhaps against a foe that has it outmatched in terms of military technology- thus the challenge is high. The goal of this game is not necessarily to make the game cool or easy, but to make it hard and challenging for the players by giving them significant obstacles to overcome.

That doesn't mean that you couldn't incorporate your airplanes into the story, but you would have to think about how. For instance, lets say that the KFS and its aircraft are threatening neighbors with bombing- utilizing air dominance to impose its demands through the threat, and occasional display of coercive capacity. The Project knows of this and has had its team hit by these planes in the past. To put an end to this, it needs to come up with an alternative- perhaps a trap in which the project uses its limited anti-air assets to shoot down the planes. Perhaps a commando raid to destroy the planes (or steal them) from the KFS. Perhaps a quick strike by armed air scouts against the air field to hit the planes while they are still on the ground. Perhaps these planes- meant for quick communication- can be put to service.

Or perhaps there is another group that might help. Perhaps a small group of pilots, largely operating independently or in cooperation with each other, are flying across the country creating a form of postal service between communities. They have taught generations of their children how to maintain the planes (although that knowledge is a bit weak after 150 years). They operate single planes out of bumpy air fields, perhaps the utilize some form of alternative fuel or energy to keep their planes in the air. The planes themselves have seen lots of wear and tear over 150 years, and are held together by bubblegum, rubber bands and prayer as well as craftsman ship and innovation.

Some of those planes might be like those you posted- rather simple, easy to maintain, practical and low cost. Maybe there are others that fit. A hodgepodge collection of ancient airplanes of uncertain maintenance and ability, being put to the test against the KFS's dedicated fighters. That would be kind of fun.

The story might be that the Project has to find a way to enlist these pilots, organized them, and perhaps even arm them to respond to the KFS. This may require some bargaining and perhaps some subterfuge, as well as the creation of potential back-up plans if this craps out. The odds remain against them, but the choice is stark. Either the Project can fashion the alliance of the KFS seizes more towns and imposes its rules.

Honestly, as a player or a director, I would prefer a difficult challenge than resolving the problem through the easy adoption of military tech and all the problems that might come from that. But at the end of the day, its your story. You decide what goes into it. I caution against advanced technology.

Another way of thinking about it comes down to how heavy do you want the military side of the game to dominate the story. Power, or I should say socially organized power, comes in different forms. Military power as social power is fundamentally concentrated and coercive- and its power at its most brutal and blunt. But there are other forms of power- ideological, economic, and political to name of few. Those forms of power operate on different logics. As I see the Morrow Project, military power is deemed essential but secondary to the broader purposes- which are economic, social, political and ideological. The problem of military power is that the consequences of its abuse are high but its application is generally destructive. As Gamer argued a page or two earlier, the goal of the project is to rebuild the country, not to create a more powerful warlord. Again, it's your game. Are you creating a mini-warlord, or are you in the difficult business of rebuilding a society. THe later requires the capacity to rebuild communities, find some ideological purchase, mediate conflicts, build communities- the stuff of the other forms of social power.

[ArmySGT.]

Using that criteria justify the Morrow Projects fielding of:

The MARS One
The Chapparal missile
The TOW Missile
The 81mm Mortar
The M9 flamethrower
40mm grenade launchers
fragmentation handgrenades
M60 machineguns
M240 machineguns
M2 .50cal machineguns
Antitank mines
claymore mines
Antipersonnel mines
Nerve agent

Because they are all in 3rd edition and fielded by the Project.

[welsh]

Using that criteria justify the Morrow Projects fielding of:

The MARS One
The Chapparal missile
The TOW Missile
The 81mm Mortar
The M9 flamethrower
40mm grenade launchers
fragmentation handgrenades
M60 machineguns
M240 machineguns
M2 .50cal machineguns
Antitank mines
claymore mines
Antipersonnel mines
Nerve agent

Because they are all in 3rd edition and fielded by the Project.

In short, they are all problematic. The weapons systems would all be difficult to get in the US by normal legal means. That's not to say that a private company couldn't buy them, but under very strict licensing rules or they could buy them abroad. But large purchases of such weapons- needed to field an army of between 10-50K people would raise serious red flags. Even private military companies will often acquire weapons through the surrogate agency of a sovereign state.

But most of the weapons above a small arms and can be purchased abroad. In certain places around the world, there is a glut on small arms. Some of these weapons however are rather unusual. Morrow One for instance. Other weapons would raise other red flags- nerve agents? We see by the administration's willingness to provide TOW missile systems to Syrian insurgents that such transfers draw attention.

But when you talk about advanced fighters you are talking some big ticket items. Those who sell such systems are under significant constraints in how they sell and where those weapons going. Advanced fighter aircraft are prestige items, the prize of a country's arsenal. They don't go to private agencies easily.

I would be concerned about costs- A lightly armored V-150 is significantly less expensive than an advance F5 fighter aircraft, and you can probably do more with the V-150.

Sgt your argument is "If the Morrow says it, than it is possible." I am not disputing that. My argument is "How?" I admit that's a question I have with regard to other weapons that the Morrow Project offers to players. To me, that becomes the basis of some rather interesting story telling about the nature of the Morrow Project itself.

A second argument point is "does it make sense for the game." That goes to the issue of game craft. If you want a game that emphasizes the use of military technology in a post-apocalyptic world- ok. But it seems from the game design that the military aspects are secondary to the overall story. This I am pulling form the 4th edition where the authors are justifying "why so many weapons-because it might be a hostile world."

I think there is a choice that needs to be made- is this a game about war making or a game about rebuilding. Arguably, aspects of war and development overlap, but every story needs to show some heirarchy of preferences.

If you argue abundance and warmaking- than anything is possible. The danger is you've set up a bunch of strawmen that are easily knocked down- like world war 2 era Thunderbolts taking on modern F5 aircraft.

If you argue constraint and development - than things are more difficult and challenging, your enemies are harder to fight and require more imagination and innovation, where your scouts are being hunted down by World War 2 era Thunderbolts. I find that a better story.

As for game design and consequence, well history suggests that in regions with little real political infrastructure, weak economies and social conflict- those with military dominance tend to rule and exploit their military power to rule through the use or threat of coercion. Dictatorship becomes the norm, even if originally motivated for benevolent purposes. I would be surprised if the Morrow Project would be able to overcome that temptation. And should it fall to that temptation, than the result is usually a coup within.

If you give your Morrow Project a decisive military edge through superior aircraft, and if you are trying to tell a realistic story, than you have to deal with those implications. Otherwise, its just more wishful thinking.

But it is your story to do with as you will.

[stormlion1]

A lot of equipment the Project has was bought from company's that were also part of the Project itself. CoT members held top jobs in those company's and fudged orders. Probably double billing the US Government or charging extra for foreign orders and then making extra gear and stocking it away. Say the 4th Edition had the Stryker as a usable vehicle. The company that makes them gets an order from the US Government for ten of them, and a bunch of foreign orders for another fifteen. The CoT influenced company that makes the Stryker charges the US Gov't for thirteen and the foreign orders for twenty with the excuse of issues in the plant and rising costs. They all pay because its the only place to get a Stryker. The extra money is put into producing Stryker's for the Project with the excuse there demonstration models or testing models that will be tested to destruction. They might even get a few more out of the plant as well in parts.

[welsh]

There are a variety of ways that Project could get weapon systems, but there are potential challenges for each. A military contract that get fudged means the project is willing to break the law to get its weapon systems. Given the nature of the project, its secrecy, and the potential risks- chances are it is not getting the weapons through illegal channels though. Even a small Morrow Project would still need to do it legally.

(For those interested- the Dogs of War - both the book and movie- talk about the challenge of private militaries getting guns. The film the Wild Geese, never really develop that issue but simply assumes away that the corporate sponsor could do it).

Is the Morrow Project or Morrow Industries a weapons supplier? Is it a private military company? Perhaps Morrow Industries is a private company whose job it was essentially oversee weapon sales to developing countries or to provision peacekeeping forces in an increasingly hostile world. Perhaps Morrow was hired to purchase military surplus from countries that are going through a process of demilitarizing. Perhaps as suggested in the 4th ed. its in the business of training peacekeepers and armed forces. Or maybe it was hired by the US government in the 1950s with a contract to develop civil defense infrastructure and capacity in the event of a nuclear war.

Do these questions matter? Kind of, if you think origins matter, or if you want your characters to deal with the consequences of that history. If so, I suspect the problem the project faces is that they are constrained in their resources and technology more than they'd like to be.

I don't want to create the wrong impression. Sgt has made a strong argument in favor of his F5 and other advanced tech. I can see others making arguments for an A-10. What flavor of advanced warplane do you like?

But I can also see a world in which someone has also made a dirigible- a maintained Goodyear Blimp. Imagine a story where, 150 years after a nuclear war, the Goodyear Blimp armed with nerve gas on a mission to bomb a city finds itself in the middle of an air battle with improvised bi-planes that, once upon a time, were crop dusters.

I have made a counter argument. Neither is right or wrong- because what matters is story telling. Does it fit the story? As directors you have to decide how much of the manual you want to follow and how much you want to create or change to fit what you think is the story. That story shapes the worldview of the game itself or "what kind of story do you want" mindful of the consequences. You can add weapons and tech or actually reduce it.

My feeling- keep it simple, practical and low-tech- it makes sense for the Project, keeps the challenge to the players high (especially if they have to acquire the assets or form an alliance with those who have the assets), and maintains balance with potential adversaries. But that's because I like a rougher and lower-tech view of a post-apocalypse. Neither position is wrong- just different.

[ArmySGT.]

You misunderstand my intention.

I don't intend to unleash a squadron of F5s into the 150+ years after the WAR timeline.

I intend to flesh out all of the Morrow Project.

To cover all the bases. To have prepared ahead of time a reasonable explanation for the existence and a plausible excuse for why the personnel and equipment is missing.

I am still going to run it with the loss of Prime, the 150+ year over sleep, teams awaken singly. No communications. No other Team. No survivors have even heard of the Project.

As the PCs play out each of the Modules I will bring more and more of the Project online. Depending on how well they do. If they fail then those assets stay dormant. It is kinda like a choose your own adventure book.

In my rendition of the Project. After the events of Lone Star, the KFS sets its eyes on the Republic. Seeing them as weakened by the fight with the Brotherhood, and the oil production vulnerable to takeover makes invasion tempting. The detection of signals from the Morrowsat makes invasion necessary in the eyes of the Rich Five.

Desperately the Republic tries to bring together an air force of their own using any WW2 plane that can be scavenged. The KFS has total superiority in training, condition of the planes, pilots, and ground crews. Republic planes are either shot down or forced to land at a KFS controlled field and seized.

So, in comes some communications, the facility leader at the Projects (censored) in the state of (censored) from Desert Search is ranking enough to know some things. He has sent the Recon unit that woke up his Team in search of Prime.

Your Recon must find the SW air defense and SAR assets.

The Republic is the only entity that is governed on the principles of the U.S. Constitution. The Republic must not fail.

[ArmySGT.]

A lot of equipment the Project has was bought from company's that were also part of the Project itself. CoT members held top jobs in those company's and fudged orders.

EXACTLY.

Morrow Industries in a large corporation. It doesn't do just one thing. You come to them for anything major and they draft a plan. You agree to the plan and pay the fee, then they assemble the experts, hire the workers, and build your project.

Like ESCO international or Halliburton. You want a small city built in a hostile country? Ok, it will cost this much, in this amount of time, with additional costs for personnel or material lost to enemy activity.

Morrow Industries needs a V-150? The "cover" to build the factory, by the materials, and hire the works comes from contracts to build V-150s for the Philippines, Mexico, or Saudi Arabia. During those builds additional models are built for demonstrations, destruction testing, and product improvement testing. After the build the production line runs what is called an "overrun". The defense industry does this all the time. The workers are paid already so keep the machines running. The company then markets the over runs at a cheaper price to law enforcement agencies and to smaller overseas nations to bring them on a customers, get them invested into the set up.

That those marked for testing to destruction or those on a freight bound for a client in Asia don't make it. .gov doesn't even notice.

This also assumes that there are production lines that are completely Project, with all Project members running the equipment, making a production run of one item or several similar items. When you can have your own fusion plant and be completely removed from the Grid, you can do alot.

This has drifted pretty far from airplanes though.

[stormlion1]

Would the Project aid the Republic? That's the real question. The Projects purpose is to rebuild after a Nuclear War, not set up a new government or support a new government. Sure the easiest thing to do would be to aid the Republic because there the closest to the Constitution but most teams will be looking at there original orders first. And I hate to say it, they will follow those orders lacking communication from Prime. And it hurts even more that there so spread out and so out of contact with each other and that there are so many teams that have never woken up. In many ways the regional bases should have taken up the slack if they awoke as well and Prime was out of contact. I can see the Project having aircraft, but limited to small scout aircraft they might attach a few guns too and the bulk of the fleet being cargo aircraft based out of Prime and Regional Bases and maybe a few Supply bases but that's about it. The Project wasn't in the job of aiding the US Government fight the Russians or Cubans or whoever, but aiding the population in rebuilding.

[ArmySGT.]

In short, they are all problematic. The weapons systems would all be difficult to get in the US by normal legal means. That's not to say that a private company couldn't buy them, but under very strict licensing rules or they could buy them abroad. But large purchases of such weapons- needed to field an army of between 10-50K people would raise serious red flags. Even private military companies will often acquire weapons through the surrogate agency of a sovereign state.
But most of the weapons above a small arms and can be purchased abroad. In certain places around the world, there is a glut on small arms. Some of these weapons however are rather unusual. Morrow One for instance. Other weapons would raise other red flags- nerve agents? We see by the administration's willingness to provide TOW missile systems to Syrian insurgents that such transfers draw attention.
But when you talk about advanced fighters you are talking some big ticket items. Those who sell such systems are under significant constraints in how they sell and where those weapons going. Advanced fighter aircraft are prestige items, the prize of a country's arsenal. They don't go to private agencies easily.
I would be concerned about costs- A lightly armored V-150 is significantly less expensive than an advance F5 fighter aircraft, and you can probably do more with the V-150.
The Project has them because Morrow Industries and their partners in the Council of Tomorrow are the manufacturers and distributors of them. The Project with exceptions like MARS One, Science One, HAAM suits, and fusion plants uses off the shelf technologies. This stuff has had the research and development paid for, the investment in the manufacturing capability, and the investment in training workers paid for by large government contracts. After the government contract is fulfilled the production line just runs for a bit longer. This or the assembly line is broken down and sold as scrap by “Manufacturing! A wholly owned subsidiary of the Coucil of Tomorrow!” over to “Recyclers! A wholly owned subsidiary of Morrow Industries. A percentage is melted down in front of government auditior then it is out on the town for drinks and lapdances. The rest of the percentage is re-installed in another plant and the process restarted to make more Browing HP-35s, or hundreds of resist weave uniforms, or thousands of pounds of RDX to make various munitions.
Government contracts paid all the initial startup costs and most of the production costs.
Sgt your argument is "If the Morrow says it, than it is possible." I am not disputing that. My argument is "How?" I admit that's a question I have with regard to other weapons that the Morrow Project offers to players. To me, that becomes the basis of some rather interesting story telling about the nature of the Morrow Project itself. The Morrow Project has been building and planning since the Cuban Missile crisis for a War that eventually happens 9 November 1989. That is a lot of time to stock pile equipment, train personnel, and hide them.
A second argument point is "does it make sense for the game." That goes to the issue of game craft. If you want a game that emphasizes the use of military technology in a post-apocalyptic world- ok. But it seems from the game design that the military aspects are secondary to the overall story. This I am pulling form the 4th edition where the authors are justifying "why so many weapons-because it might be a hostile world." It is a hostile world. In conflict there is adventure.
If you run a campaign emphasizing the rebuilding your players are going to be almighty bored and probably abandon your game for something else.

Nobody wants to make saving throws for crop rotation, or skill rolls on ox plowing 40 acres.
I think there is a choice that needs to be made- is this a game about war making or a game about rebuilding. Arguably, aspects of war and development overlap, but every story needs to show some heirarchy of preferences. The players have the obligation to make the world safe for the rebuilders. To be the Heroes (or Don Quixote!) and stand up for what is Right. They have to recruit the NPCs to do the rebuilding work. Even in my campaigns the Morrow Project Civil engineering teams are all NPCs. Making skill rolls on bridge building, and skill rolls to make a function village power grid are not going to make a great night gaming.
If you argue abundance and warmaking- than anything is possible. The danger is you've set up a bunch of strawmen that are easily knocked down- like world war 2 era Thunderbolts taking on modern F5 aircraft.
If you argue constraint and development - than things are more difficult and challenging, your enemies are harder to fight and require more imagination and innovation, where your scouts are being hunted down by World War 2 era Thunderbolts. I find that a better story.
Nope, what ever I give I can take away. The KFS uses Thunderbolts. The KFS uses their own pre-War manufacturing base and education of very loyal subjects (the 2000) to build from scratch more Thunderbolts. This doesn’t mean the KFS could not field F-16s within 12 months it would take to train the pilots. There can be a cache of F-16s mothballed by the KFS , simply because it is not a necessary expense to fly them if Thunderbolts will do the job. The KFS may also be sitting on Theater air defense systems and advanced radar systems like Patriot and phased array systems. They don’t field them because they don’t have to. To do so, without a credible threat is to tip your potential enemies off.

See even if I give the Morrow Project, ten, twenty, two hundred F-5s I can still rebalance the threat and take those F-5s away or make them useless.
As for game design and consequence, well history suggests that in regions with little real political infrastructure, weak economies and social conflict- those with military dominance tend to rule and exploit their military power to rule through the use or threat of coercion. Dictatorship becomes the norm, even if originally motivated for benevolent purposes. I would be surprised if the Morrow Project would be able to overcome that temptation. And should it fall to that temptation, than the result is usually a coup within. Nope, that is built into the game canon. Project personnel are thoroughly psychologically screened to pick out potential warlords or rogues. If that fails the PD could invoke the Phoenix Project and still remove that threat. This is if Bruce (the Wander Warlock) doesn’t deal with the matter quietly.

If you give your Morrow Project a decisive military edge through superior aircraft, and if you are trying to tell a realistic story, than you have to deal with those implications. Otherwise, its just more wishful thinking.

I am fleshing out all the missing data from what the Project was intended to be and how it intended to function had the mission launched in the planned for 3-5 years after the war. I would expect there to be significant threats to the Project from rogue elements of the Armed Force of the U. S., Canada, and Mexico, in addition to actual Soviet threats from over the North Pole, and from Central America or Cuba.
But it is your story to do with as you will.

As always everyone’s input is welcome and adds new facets for everyone to use or discard as best benefits them.

[kato13]

As always everyone’s input is welcome and adds new facets for everyone to use or discard as best benefits them.

My general philosophy in life as well as gaming follows the words of my namesake.

Absorb what is useful,
Discard what is not,
Add what is uniquely your own


Everyone needs to be exposed to it first before they can decide if it is useful for them. That is why I encourage almost all threads even if I personally don't find it particularly useful for my gaming scenarios.

[ArmySGT.]

Would the Project aid the Republic? That's the real question. I think the Project would.
The Republic is a representative government that takes care of its citizens. Everything that is lacking everywhere else in the current state of affairs 150+ years later.

Sure makes things easier when there is something to work with.
The Projects purpose is to rebuild after a Nuclear War, not set up a new government or support a new government. Well from third edition it is to rebuild civilization. The Project doesn’t state specifically that re-building the U.S. government or re-establishing the U.S. Constitution is a goal. Only to preserve and nurture civilization.
The 4th edition may well be different of course.
Sure the easiest thing to do would be to aid the Republic because there the closest to the Constitution but most teams will be looking at there original orders first. And I hate to say it, they will follow those orders lacking communication from Prime. And it hurts even more that there so spread out and so out of contact with each other and that there are so many teams that have never woken up. Depends upon Operation Damocles and Operation Lonestar.
I intend to run one meta campaign where the PCs roll up characters for each of the different modules, then play them in order! The events in each can change the ground rules in the next. There is potential to start a massive conflict between Maxwell’s Militia and the Warriors of Krell, with the KFS playing both sides in Operation Lucifer alone.
In many ways the regional bases should have taken up the slack if they awoke as well and Prime was out of contact. I agree. It remains to be seen though how much damage the Warriors of Krell have done to the Project. The have by canon captured several Project bases. Personally I think the Project is totally compromised in the canon Krell territory and any Teams that awaken there have been overlooked by chance. Someone within Krell surely can use the Base systems to pinpoint boltholes and caches subordinate to that regional base.
I can see the Project having aircraft, but limited to small scout aircraft they might attach a few guns too and the bulk of the fleet being cargo aircraft based out of Prime and Regional Bases and maybe a few Supply bases but that's about it. The Project wasn't in the job of aiding the US Government fight the Russians or Cubans or whoever, but aiding the population in rebuilding. I don’t think the Project would be flying against the Russians or the Cubans either. That is not to say that the Russians or the Cubans wouldn’t see a the Project as a legitimate military target. The Project would have the F-5s to protect Project assets and programs.

[ArmySGT.]

Now, shifting focus from Air Superiority to the need for Reconnaissance.

I am of two minds on this one. A need for a local air recon and a continent spanning recon. The Morrowsat with its 1970s technology wouldn't be capable of the resolution we have become accustomed to in 2014. Still resolution down to 100 meters is still damned useful after apocalypse to do damage assessments.

However, there is still the need for a frequent look over that can be managed be a Regional base or Combined Group leader. Some targets need to be looked over from more than one and and periodically over the span of 24 hours. Satellites make passes but, cannot loiter over one spot unless posted geosynchronous. There have been several light aircraft already mentioned that would fulfill a local role. What could the Project secretly procure and store with the intent to use at Warday + 5 years? A U-2?

[bobcat]

the way i've been seeing MP is that five years after an apocalyptic war there won't be much of an air threat to project assets. that said there will be a significant ground threat and the need to rapidly mover equipment and personnel from one location to another.(such as rotating specialized teams between sites where they are needed) thus i find the idea that a small flight of helicopters at each regional command post would be essential.

to that end i find this to be an ideal TOE for each such wing:
4x OH6 scout helicopters
8x AH6 gunships with 2.75" rockets and 7.62mm miniguns
4x UH1 transport helicopters
2x CH47 transport helicopters
2x S64 skycrane helicopters

this allows regional commanders to rabidly move equipment personnel and supplies throughout his AO without sacrificing security and allowing for close support in the event of troops in contact. additional spare parts would be kept in boltholes and supply caches for the regional command point and all helicopters would have been converted to operate with the same fusion power plant as every other project vehicle. naturally outfitting these with the fusion power plant would reduce maintenance requirements(weekly rather than daily with the usual pre-post flight PMCS) and lighten the weight taken up by fuel and a conventional engine.

i also see a need for STOL of VTOL cargo aircraft at prime base and the backup prime base to resupply these regional command bases the C130 would be ideal in this role with similar modifications as it can easily be equipped for parachute assisted unloading to minimize vulnerable ground time in a potentially hostile environment.

[welsh]

Bobcat- I am a bit worried about game balance with your close support. That seems like a lot of helicopters to me, and especially the attack helicopters. Might be a better balance if you relied on lightly armed scouts rather than dedicated attack helicopters.

I am still a bit worried about the amount of man-hours it would take to service an air-wing, but that's true of virtually any air-wing- and so I would think simpler and less sophisticated is probably better.

I am looking at 4th Ed rules and they list costs of vehicles (p246 in the hard copy). Costs are measured by human labor.

Heavy Air transport costs (50+ tons)- 75 hours per ton
Medium - (20+ tons) - 135 Hours per ton
Light (<5 tons)- 500 H per ton.

Combat aircraft are listed at about 500,000 hours of labor.

But I am still looking at the book and trying to learn how they do these calculations.
They calculated that a labor generates about 2000 hours of labor a year.

To service a combat aircraft- and I am not sure if there is much difference here between fixed or rotary wing, will probably costs you the labor of 250 laborers for a year to buy. Service of these vehicles probably costs a fair amount too- although I doubt it is the purchase price, but perhaps 1/3-2/3 the costs? This would be especially costly given the lack of an advanced infrastructure for parts and limits on human capital (as I would expect a very small proportion of the population have the skills and training).

I would also add that there seems to be some discussion these days about cutting costs of aircraft by mixing use of manned and unmanned (drones).

[kato13]

I would probably end up with a similar number of aircraft as bobcat at my regional bases (more cargo less combat), but I would expect that only 4-6 would be active at any time.

These assets would be extremely useful, but also extremely difficult to replace. Even without combat and being very careful with deployment, expecting a 25% annual attrition rate would not be unrealistic. Because of this I would want lots of spares.

[welsh]

Yes, I would guess lots of stored parts as well as a shop to recreate parts, but I would also think that the aircraft choices should be duel use- so that aircraft for combat, recon, transport or construction can be exchanged. Blackhawks or Hueys? Ideally you can mount an M60 in a doorway and perhaps mount a gun or rocket pod.

Also, this would simplify the training for crews as well as service personnel. There might be a trade-off in utility and specialization, but savings in human labor and post-war service challenges.

I would also guess it would be easier to acquire military surplus or those widely used- and thus more available potential crew members.

[LBraden]

That's why I was thinking myself of the Boston Mk I (RAF) as it's the A-20 Havoc with a large glass nose, great for Reccy, Photo Reccy, SAR and if need be, slap 6x 500lb's on it, or 4x 500lb's internally and some rocket pods and make someone have a very bad morning.

[bobcat]

for those that want a jet for the morrow project.
http://www.smart-1.us/aircraft.htm
highly agile, compact, fast, and bond even used it.:D

[kato13]

I have been reading about how future planes might have electric engines and was surpirsed by the following

Unlike the early days of jet aircraft, today’s airliners only get a fraction of their push from jet thrust. Most of the propulsion is provided by the giant fan at the front of the engine, which accelerates air just like a propeller.

These high bypass ratio fans are powered by the jets, and there’s no reason they couldn’t be powered by electricity instead.

Source
http://www.wired.com/2013/07/eads-ethrust-hybrid-airliner/

I always thought that the project would be limited to prop aircraft when using fusion power, but from this I would assume that most subsonic jets would have the potential for conversion as well.

[mmartin798]

This is why it could be possible for a fusion powered F-22, as it too uses a high-bypass turbofan. But that assumes the fusion plant + electric motor weight is about the same as the fuel and jet turbine. That and you need to support the maintenance of the rest of the aircraft, which in itself is no small feat.

[kato13]

Well anything without true Jet propulsion would be limited to sub mach speeds (around 80% IIRC). That makes me think more of Cargo and Coin aircraft, but the A-10 is subsonic :D.

[mmartin798]

I guess it all depends on design. A jet engine has compressor fans that feed into the combustion chamber where the jet fuel ignites and goes out the back through more fans to run the compressor fans. We currently have plasma torches that can convert normal air into plasma with a temperature of about 2700K. Used in the combustion chamber we would not have the added volume from burning fuel, but you would have cold compressed air rapidly heated to something over 1500K that would providing thrust. How much is something I really don't know. But then again, we currently don't have a portable fusion reactor capable of driving multiple plasma torches into a jet engine's combustion chamber to see what kind of output is possible. It would not be as much as a normal jet, but if it were a significant fraction, it might be useful.

[kato13]

While trying to determine the possibility of a project resource similar to Marvel's Quinjet from the Cinematic Universe (Earth-199999) running mostly on fusion power, I found this little gem.

http://www.janes.com/article/39936/darpa-to-progress-vtol-x-plane-as-boeing-reveals-phantom-swift-details

If you take this to full scale, and put a fusion engine on it, I could see this being an important resource for moving key components around for the project.

[mmartin798]

This does bring the whole size and weight of the reactor into play. The 17% scale model is has engines putting out over 2MW. If we scale this up and there are no additional efficiencies to the air moving parts of the engine, we are looking at... let see carry the one.... we will be looking at about 12 MW needed for operation. How big and heavy will this reactor be?

(Numbers calculated unitizing the model and assuming thrust increases by squaring and mass by cubing)

[kato13]

This does bring the whole size and weight of the reactor into play. The 17% scale model is has engines putting out over 2MW. If we scale this up and there are no additional efficiencies to the air moving parts of the engine, we are looking at... let see carry the one.... we will be looking at about 12 MW needed for operation. How big and heavy will this reactor be?

(Numbers calculated unitizing the model and assuming thrust increases by squaring and mass by cubing)


Canon reactors (3rd Edition) had insanely high output IIRC. Something like 100Mw for 500kg.

The numbers here (http://asmrb.pbworks.com/w/page/52302587/Morrow%20Project%20High-Tech%20Equipment) seem a little more plausible. Though personally I am not sure would not include the smallest reactor.

I still always seem to come back to 3He being necessary for those types of numbers as it would need minimal shielding. If the project can get a hold of about 4 tons of it I think things move into the feasible realm.

The only potential sources for that 4 tons take me far into the realms of science fiction where we are accessing someone's refined fuel source (crashed starship or use of something like the Stargate). Sorry for going way OT

[dragoon500ly]

I've been reading, with a great deal of intrest, all of the postings for the Aviation arm of the Project. Here are a few observations:

The Project itself is supposed to be a small group focused on rebuilding America. The more personnel pulled from the teams and into support functions is that many fewer personnel able to assist the surviving population.

Planning for the Project was based on a 5-year wake-up after TEOTWAWKI. The Aviation section would have small numbers of helicopters and transports for immediate use, with a plan to secure additional aircraft from surviving airfields. I can see a large-ish supply of spare parts and a pool of engineers, mechanics and pilots to repair and use existing aircraft.

The Project is, for the most part a civilian organization with some military aspects....it would be doubtful at best, that the planners would deem it necessary for the Morrow Air Force to acquire its own fleet of combat aircraft. With a 5-year wake up, there is a real possibility that the US Air Force may still be in existence, why confuse things more?

Aircraft means airfields and support structures. I can see the Project planning for auto-gyros...helicopters and rough-field capable transports because these can be used for reconnaissance and transport of essential supplies/personnel, but there comes a point where the question becomes how many aircraft are necessary? A handful of auto-gyros and a couple of helicopters at a regional base, Prime Base with its handful of larger helos and transport aircraft is a reasonable number. Anthing more than 30-50 aircraft would require the diversion of personnel and supplies from assisting the survivors.

[stormlion1]

This is all more of a "wish you could have" kind of thing. I honestly expect the Project had lots of small aircraft like Piper Cubs for scouting, a few private jets for higher ups, Helicopters galore-most likely old Hueys or Little Birds as who would notice a civilian company buying them? And several Cargo Aircraft. The main thing is storage and landing strips. A landing strip isn't easy to hide or maintain so my money would be ones outside the US Borders with strips carved out of Canada's wilderness and down in Mexico in airfields far from civilization. Kept openly, but maintained by small crews to keep them airworthy but when the project didn't wake up, were abandoned in place by those same crews wanting to go home.

[mmartin798]

Runways really don't matter. VTOLs don't need them and units like Cubs and C150's just need a grass field or even a firm packed beach. Jets would more than likely require a hard field to land on, but even there a salt flat could due. The real problems are, as you rightly mention, storage and maintenance.

[kato13]

I agree that above 40-60 active aircraft is probably overkill, but storing double or triple that makes sense for long term use. Losses and breakdowns are inevitable.

I have generally done the standard route of Hueys, MD-600s, C-130s and CH-47s in my prior games.

Restrictions on numbers is why I am looking at the ultimate multipurpose aircraft. The VTOL, fixed wing, mach capable, 20 troop capacity, medium range (but unfortunately very fictional) Marvel Quinjet. (For a modern game)

http://moviemet.com/sites/default/files/styles/column/public/vlcsnap-1029680.jpg

http://futuredude.com//wp-content/uploads/2012/10/top5-the-avengers-twin-fan-vtol-quinjet-shield.jpg

As far as the quinjet goes. I believe I am going to have to

Lose mach
Really fudge materials advancement to get the weight down and make the rotors and fusion heat exchangers possible
Get something in the realm of 40MW output from fusion engines. (Something I only think possible with 3He fusion)


Even with this aircraft I would still probably have some Hueys, MD-600s (modified to MH-6 standards) plus the 4 C-130s at prime. I know maintenance will be an Issue, but heck we can just get the Phoenix team to do it as apparently they can do EVERYTHING ;)

[mmartin798]

I still always seem to come back to 3He being necessary for those types of numbers as it would need minimal shielding. If the project can get a hold of about 4 tons of it I think things move into the feasible realm.

The only potential sources for that 4 tons take me far into the realms of science fiction where we are accessing someone's refined fuel source (crashed starship or use of something like the Stargate). Sorry for going way OT

After 150 years, you might have that 4 tons of He3 at Isla Nebular if you ended up including that D2 reactor.

[kato13]

After 150 years, you might have that 4 tons of He3 at Isla Nebular if you ended up including that D2 reactor.

Yeah I thought about using my time shifting technology (reversed to make time go faster of course) wrapped around a reactor to get it. I still may go that path but I wanted to find a solution for people who did not use the time bubbles as a replacement for cryotubes. There is also the need to bleed the energy out of the bubble, but I have made the "science" on that flexible enough that perhaps it can be radiated as some form of EM waves.

[ArmySGT.]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/94/K-1200_orthographical_image.svg/539px-K-1200_orthographical_image.svg.png


Specifications (K-MAX)
K-1200 orthographical image.svg

Data from K-MAX Performance and Specs[46]

General characteristics

Crew: 1
Capacity: 6,000 lb (2,722 kg) external load
Length: 51 ft 10 in (15.8 m)
Rotor diameter: 48 ft 3 in (14.7m)
Height: 13 ft 7 in (4.14 m)
Empty weight: 5,145 lb (2,334 kg)
Useful load: 6,855 lb (3,109 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 12,000 lb (5,443 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Honeywell T53-17 turboshaft, 1341 kW (1,800 shp), flat rated to 1118 kW (1500 shp) for take-off / 1350 shp in flight[47][48])

Performance

Maximum speed: 100 knots (185.2 km/h)
Cruise speed: 80 knots (148.2 km/h)
Range: 267 nm (494.5 km)
Fuel consumption: 85 gallons/hour[12]

[rcaf_777]

Based the needs and outcomes onf the project I figured they would have

McDonnell Douglas MD 500 Defender (Gunships and Team Lift)
Bell 204/205 (Gunships, Cargo, Team Lift, MEDVAC)
Bell 214ST (Cargo, Team Lift, MEDVAC)
Cessna O-2 Skymaster (Recon MEDVAC)
Boeing CH-47 Chinook (Heavy Cargo, MARS Support)
Beechcraft T-34 Mentor (Comand and Control, High Speed Personel Transport)

These would be grouped in a Wing and assigned as area assets, the number of the aircraft would depend on missions of near by teams.

Bolthole and Cache locations would be near small regional civilian airports, you might also see a small engieering team boltholed near by so that they could help with runway repair if needed. Given the ammount of people you need to run air operations, the project would have cluster it's boltholes around an airport.

I think an large cargo aircraft like the C-130 would be held at Prime Base, and forward deployed as need.

Here is two other aircraft that project might find usefull. I see them being used an airforce version of a MARS Team

Piper PA-48 Enforcer
Boeing Skyfox

[mmartin798]

Well anything without true Jet propulsion would be limited to sub mach speeds (around 80% IIRC). That makes me think more of Cargo and Coin aircraft, but the A-10 is subsonic :D.

Just did some research into supercruise. It IS possible for turbofan achieve and maintain supersonic speeds without afterburners. The aircraft just spends a great deal of time in the high-drag transonic flight envelope. So it is not preferred because it is fuel inefficient. But in a fusion powered aircraft, might not be a problem.

[kato13]

That is interesting. I am hoping to get ~ mach 1.3


When I get some time I will try to mock something up in VDS (the vehicle equivalent to BTRC's "Guns Guns Guns" firearm generator)

[mmartin798]

The numbers for speed I have seen for supercruise is mach 1.2-1.4. So you should be good.

[ArmySGT.]

“This is Black Bird four one to Recon Mike seven, over”.
“This is Black Bird four one to Recon Mike seven, over”.
“Hey you Scouts listening to your radios, over?”
“This is Black Bird four one to Recon Mike seven, over”.
“Mike Seven to Blackbird four, go ahead”“Good to hear you Mike Seven, Black Bird 41 is inbound yours with a drop, over”
“Black Bird four one, Dee Zee is hot. Hostiles on North and East flanks with 2 plus, crew served heavy belt feds, and on Arrr Pee Gee, probable platoon strength”
“Mike Seven, this is Black Bird four one, this drop will happen in two passes. South side approach, mark your DZ with smoke. Jumpers need air ground speed and direction, over”
“Black Bird four one, did you say jumpers, over?”
“Mike Seven, affirmative, Jumpers four total, say again Jumpers four total, MARS detachment”.

“Black Bird four one, Roger four jumpers, MARS, air speed is still too low from the west. “

“Mike Seven, first drop in nine minutes, two pallets, will home on your location and south 100 meters.”
“Black Bird four one, confirm two pallets in drop. My location plus 100 meters South, time now plus nine minutes, over”
“Affirmative, Mike Seven”

C-23 Sherpa A/B (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_C-23_Sherpa)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/C-23A_Sherpa_10th_MAS_in_flight_1987.JPEG/1280px-C-23A_Sherpa_10th_MAS_in_flight_1987.JPEG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/C-23.jpg
C-23A

Data from Jane's All the World's Aircraft, 1988-1989

General characteristics

Crew: Three (Two pilots plus one cabin crew)
Capacity: 30 passengers, or 18 Litter based passengers
Length: 58 ft 0 in (17.69 m)
Wingspan: 74 ft 9 in (22.78 m)
Height: 16 ft 3 in (4.95 m)
Wing area: 453 ft² (42.1 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 63 series, modified
Empty weight: 14,200 lb (6,440 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 22,900 lb (10,387 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-45-R turboprops, 1,198 hp (894 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 281 mph (245 knots, 453 km/h) at 12,000 ft (2,273 m)
Cruise speed: 255 mph (221 knots, 410 km/h)
Stall speed: 85 mph (73 knots, 136 km/h) with flaps and landing gear down
Range: 770 mi (670 nm, 1,239 km) passenger version, 1,966 kg payload with no reserves
Service ceiling: 27,000 ft (5,114 m)
Rate of climb: 2,100 ft/min (10.6 m/s)
Wing loading: 50.6 lb/ft² (247 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.052 hp/lb (170 W/kg)

C-23B/C

Data from U.S. Army Aircraft Since 1947

General characteristics

Crew: Three (Two pilots plus one flight engineer)
Capacity: 18-20 passengers
Length: 58 ft 0 in (17.7 m)
Wingspan: 74 ft 10 in (22.8 m)
Height: 16 ft 5 in (5.0 m)
Wing area: 456 ft² (42.4 m²)
Airfoil: NACA 63 series, modified
Empty weight: 16,040 lb (7,276 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 25,600 lb (11,610 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-65AR turboprop, 1,424 shp (1,062 kW) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 291 mph (252 knots, 468 km/h)
Cruise speed: 262 mph (228 knots, 422 km/h)
Range: 1,185 mi (1,030 nmi, 1,907 km)
Service ceiling: 28,000 ft (5,303 m)

C-23 Sherpa
Specifications
Contractor Short Brothers PLC
C-23A Sherpa C-23B Super Sherpa
Power Plant 2 Pratt-Whitney PT6A-45R turboprops 2 Pratt-Whitney PT6A-65AR turboprops
Take-off power
[Sea level static, uninstalled] 1197 shp 1424 shp
Design output shaft speed 1700 rpm 1700 rpm
Speed 218mph at 10,000ft
range 770 miles with 5000lb payload
Span 74ft 8in
length 58ft
height 16ft 3in
Weight Gross 25,500lb max
Accomodations Crew of three
up to 7000lb of freight, including 4 LD3 containers, and engines the size of F100 series
Date Deployed Entered USAF inventory 1984

[ArmySGT.]

“Kenworth two Alpha, this is Kenworth two Charlie, over”. The voice came across the digitally encrypted frequency hopping radios with minimal distortion of the woman’s warm Midwestern tenor.
“Kenworth two Charlie, this is Kenworth two Alpha; go ahead, over” Likewise answered with another woman’s Midwestern tenor plus some drawl in the bored tones that pilots exudes to display superior confidence.
“Kenworth two Alpha, This is Kenworth two Charlie, On Station, ready for Mission Hand off, over”.

“Kenworth two Charlie, This is Kenworth two Alpha, Affirmative, Mission is yours, I am Arrr Tee Bee, don’t cut to many circles out of the sky before Bravo is up to relieve you, over”

“Kenworth two Alpha, this is Kenworth two Charlie, thanks, will do. Keep it above angels seven thousand. The dust storms coming up from Colorado and Kansas are kicking up fallout, over”.

“Thanks Charlie, will do, Alpha, Out”.

The Project discovered that the greater proportion of multi-engine off center line pilots with military and commercial experience easiest to recruit were women. The Project was looking for skills and not genders to fill roles in the desperately understaffed Morrow Project. Women had been flying various large cargo aircraft in various military non-combat roles, airborne surveillance being one.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/recon/e2/e2_schem_01.gif

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=35218

http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/PUB_E-2D_Hawkeye_Features_lg.jpg

http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_E-2D_Interior_Station_NGC_lg.jpg

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/e2c_2.jpg

http://hyperscale.com/images/MW_E2C_F001.jpg
Grumman
E-2 Hawkeye
Airborne Early Warning
And Control Aircraft

DESCRIPTION:
Although the US Navy had long desired an airborne surveillance platform, it took several years for electronics to sufficiently decrease in size to be fitted within an aircraft that could operate from an aircraft carrier. Even so, it took several more years for computers to become powerful enough that they could track and process more than a few targets at once. These conditions were finally met, however, culminating in Grumman being named the winner of a Navy contract to develop an airborne early warning and control (AWACS) aircraft.

The Grumman design featured twin turboprop engines fitted beneath a high-mounted wing. The long fuselage housed a crew of five, including three mission specialists, and featured a large rotating radome mounted on a pylon above the wing juncture. To compensate for the airflow around the radome, the tail assembly incorporated four fins on a horizontal tail with significant dihedral. This design, first flown in 1960, was originally known as the W2F-1 but was later redesignated the E-2A Hawkeye before entering service.

The Navy took delivery of 59 E-2A airframes by 1967, but these were quickly upgraded to the E-2B standard with the installation of a more powerful processing computer and inflight-refueling equipment. Shortly thereafter, Grumman began production of the E-2C model with far superior avionics and more powerful engines. These aircraft have been continuously upgraded with new radar and sensors, improved avionics, more powerful processing equipment, and software upgrades allowing the E-2C Hawkeye to track over 250 targets and control 30 interceptors at once.

In addition to protecting the US fleet, the E-2 has also been used in cooperation with law enforcement agencies to interdict drug traffickers. The E-2 has also proven popular with the French Navy and a variety of foreign air forces.

As production of the E-2C has wound down, development of a new variant called the E-2D with improved electronics is underway. The US Navy currently plans to purchase 75 of the E-2D model with deliveries beginning in 2010.

Data below for E-2C
Last modified 06 April 2011

HISTORY:
First Flight (W2F-1) 21 October 1961
(E-2C) 20 January 1971
Service Entry

(E-2A) 19 January 1964
(E-2C) November 1973

CREW: 2 pilots, 1 radar operator, 1 air control officer, 1 combat information center officer

ESTIMATED COST:

$51 million

AIRFOIL SECTIONS:
Wing Root NACA 63A216
Wing Tip

NACA 63A414

DIMENSIONS:
Length 57.56 ft (17.54 m)
Wingspan 80.58 ft (24.56 m)
Height 18.31 ft (5.58 m)
Wing Area 700.0 ft² (65.03 m²)
Canard Area

not applicable

WEIGHTS:
Empty 37,945 lb (17,210 kg)
Normal Takeoff unknown
Max Takeoff 51,815 lb (23,505 kg)
Fuel Capacity 19,015 lb (8,625 kg)
Max Payload

unknown

PROPULSION:
Powerplant two Allison T56-425 turboprops
Thrust 9,820 ehp (7,322 kW)

PERFORMANCE:
Max Level Speed at altitude: 390 mph (625 km/h)
at sea level: unknown
cruise speed: 310 mph (500 km/h)
Initial Climb Rate unknown
Service Ceiling 36,955 ft (11,275 m)
Range typical: 1,500 nm (2,780 km)
ferry: 1,540 nm (2,850 km)
Endurance 6 hr 15 min
g-Limits unknown

ARMAMENT:
Gun none
Stations none
Air-to-Air Missile none
Air-to-Surface Missile none
Bomb none
Other none

KNOWN VARIANTS:
W2F-1 Original designation for the E-2
E-2A Initial production model; 59 built
TE-2A E-2 trainers modified from E-2A airframes; 2 converted
E-2B Designation for upgraded E-2A airframes modified with an improved computer and inflight-refueling capability
E-2C Improved model with far more capable avionics; over 150 built by 2000
TE-2C Trainer model based on the E-2C; 2 built
E-2C+ Upgrade for US aircraft including improvements to the radar, software updates, and installation of more powerful engines
E-2D New build model equipped with an improved radar system, new workstations, better satellite communications gear, and advanced cockpit displays; 75 to be built from 2009 to 2020
E-2T Former E-2B aircraft upgraded for use by Taiwan; 6 converted
C-2 Greyhound

Ship-to-shore transport aircraft derived from the E-2 airframe

KNOWN COMBAT RECORD:

Vietnam War (USN, 1965-1972)
Lebanon (Israel, 1982)
Libya - Operation El Dorado Canyon (USAF, 1986)
Iraq - Operation Desert Storm (USN, 1991)
Bosnia - Operation Deliberate Force (USAF, 1995)
Afghanistan - Operation Enduring Freedom (USN, 2001-present)
Iraq - Operation Iraqi Freedom (USN, 2003-present)
Libya - Operation Unified Protector / Harmattan (France, 2011)

KNOWN OPERATORS:

Egypt, Al Quwwat al Jawwiya il Misriya (Egyptian Air Force)
France, Aéronautique Navale (French Naval Air Arm)
Israel, Tsvah Haganah le Israel - Heyl Ha'Avir (Israeli Defence Force - Air Force)
Japan, Nihon Koku-Jieitai (Japan Air Self Defence Force)
Singapore (Republic of Singapore Air Force)
Taiwan, Chung-Kuo Kung Chuan (Republic of China Air Force)
United States (US Navy)

3-VIEW SCHEMATIC:

E-2 Hawkeye


SOURCES:

Bishop, Chris, ed. The Encyclopedia of Modern Military Weapons: The Comprehensive Guide to Over 1,000 Weapon Systems from 1945 to the Present Day. NY: Barnes & Noble, 1999, p. 347.
Bonds, Ray, ed. The Modern US War Machine: An Encyclopedia of American Military Equipment and Strategy. NY: Military Press, 1987, p. 184-185.
Donald, David, ed. The Complete Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. NY: Barnes & Noble, 1997, p. 472, Grumman E-2 Hawkeye/TE-2/C-2 Greyhound.
Donald, David and Lake, Jon, ed. The Encyclopedia of World Military Aircraft. NY: Barnes & Noble, 2000, p. 185-187, Grumman E-2 Hawkeye.
Gunston, Bill, ed. The Encyclopedia of Modern Warplanes. NY: Barnes & Noble, 1995, p. 128, Grumman E-2 Hawkeye.
Laur, Timothy M. and Llanso, Steven L. Encyclopedia of Modern U.S. Military Weapons. NY: Berkley Books, 1995, p. 54-57, Hawkeye (E-2).
Miller, David, ed. The Illustrated Directory of Modern American Weapons. London: Salamander Books, 2002, p. 184-185, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye.
Müller, Claudio. Aircraft of the World. NY: Muddle Puddle Books, 2004, p. 258-259, Northrop Grumman Hawkeye 2000.
Rendall, David. Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide, 2nd ed. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 1999, p. 167, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye.
Taylor, Michael. Brassey's World Aircraft & Systems Directory 1996/1997. London: Brassey's, 1996, p. 191-192, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye and Hawkeye II.
Taylor, Michael J. H. Brassey's World Aircraft & Systems Directory 1999/2000. London: Brassey's, 1999, p. 169-170, Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye, Group II Hawkeye II and Hawkeye 2000.
US Navy E-2 Fact Sheet

[rcaf_777]

I think another good aircraft would the Grumman S-2 Tracker, and it Variants
the C-1 Trader COD, E-1 Tracer AWACS, and the Conair Firecat (Water Bomber)

[Old Fart]

F4's or A4's would be a good choice as some are still in the bone yards and still in use in some third world Air Forces. If updated with more modern capabilities (electronics) and engines these would be good backbone forces, kind of like the B-52's. On that note if it were possible for the MP procurers to get their hands on some A-6 intruders these would be the B-52's of the project.

[rcaf_777]

I am thinking if the project needs a low cost quiet low level reconnaissance aircraft they might have Lockheed YO-3 "Quiet Star"

Lockheed YO-3 "Quiet Star"

General characteristics
Crew: Two
Length: 30 ft 0 in (9.14 m)
Wingspan: 57 ft 0 in (17.37 m)
Wing Area: 180 sq. ft. (16.70 sq. m)
Powerplant: 1 × Continental six-cylinder horizonally-opposed, 210


Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_YO-3

[ArmySGT.]

http://media.radiocontrolzone.com/mair/online_articles/MD520N.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Notar_helicopter.png

http://images.mywork.com.au/uploads_photo_gallery/sunsethe/md500_011.jpg

http://www.peekhelicopters.co.uk/g_drkj/md500_small.jpg

General characteristics

Crew: 1-2
Capacity: 4-5 passengers
Length: 23 ft 0 in (7.01 m)
Rotor diameter: 26 ft 4 in (8.03 m)
Height: 8 ft 6 in (2.59 m)
Disc area: 544.63 ft² (50.60 m²)
Empty weight: 1,320 lbs (599 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 3,000 lbs (1361 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × One Allison 250-C20B Turboshaft, 420 hp (313 kW)

Performance

Maximum speed: 160 mph (257 km/h)
Range: 230 miles (370 km)
Service ceiling: 13,800 ft (4,205 m)
Rate of climb: 1,650 ft/min (503 m/min (8.4 m/s))

Armament

four TOW anti-tank missiles, or
two 7.62mm General Electric M134 Miniguns plus ammuntion, or
four General Dynamics Stinger air-to-air missile, or
Mk 44 or Mk 46 lightweight torpedoes (ASW Version), or
two seven-shot rocket pods

[stormlion1]

One of the bad things about aircraft and helicopters is they have a logistics chain. Fuel we can take care of with handwaving. But what about parts, grease, repairs, and dedicated tools? The Morrow Air Assets are all great five years after the war. But if they survive a hundred fifty years the maintenance alone will ground everything real damn fast.

[ArmySGT.]

One of the bad things about aircraft and helicopters is they have a logistics chain. Fuel we can take care of with handwaving. But what about parts, grease, repairs, and dedicated tools? The Morrow Air Assets are all great five years after the war. But if they survive a hundred fifty years the maintenance alone will ground everything real damn fast.

So far the canon aircraft have all been located inside a Morrow facility, Prime Base. It would be expected that these would operate from a dedicated facility established pre-War. Even a bolt hole style with one aircraft, two crews, and a 5-10 person maintenance team.

[cosmicfish]

One of the bad things about aircraft and helicopters is they have a logistics chain. Fuel we can take care of with handwaving. But what about parts, grease, repairs, and dedicated tools? The Morrow Air Assets are all great five years after the war. But if they survive a hundred fifty years the maintenance alone will ground everything real damn fast.
This is a great argument for the Project to limit the models for all vehicles as much as possible. It might be desirable to have a dozen different types of aircraft, but logistically that becomes much harder to support. The Project would be best served by a single multi-mission combat-capable aircraft (V-22 or H-60 perhaps?) supported by a single dirt-strip-capable transport aircraft (C-130 or C-23 perhaps?). I cannot see reducing the numbers any further than that and I cannot see any overreaching need that would justify any more models.

At the same time, it should be noted that electric vehicles in general have significantly lower maintenance requirements than ICE vehicles. There are a LOT fewer moving parts and that makes everything a lot easier. Your supply and support needs are going to be a lot lower for Morrow vehicles than the original versions required.

[stormlion1]

Very true, for Fourth Edition we have much more in the way of options for air assets. But there all also much more fragile-tech wise and expensive. So I think that older gear is better. Aircraft like the Huey or the Little Bird for Helicopters. Tried and true designs and C-130's for aircraft. Does the Project need anything more than those? Not really.

[cosmicfish]

Very true, for Fourth Edition we have much more in the way of options for air assets. But there all also much more fragile-tech wise and expensive. So I think that older gear is better. Aircraft like the Huey or the Little Bird for Helicopters. Tried and true designs and C-130's for aircraft. Does the Project need anything more than those? Not really.
I don't see any particular inherent virtue in "older" - certainly something that is brand new is going to be a risk, but (for example) the H-60 and C-23 have been around plenty long enough to be "safe". I would say that, for aircraft, a decade of use is an adequate buffer to ensure that (a) the kinks have been worked out, (b) there is an adequate supply chain, and (c) there is a supply of trained, experienced pilots. And that's a soft decade - the C-27 should certainly be in consideration! There is a tendency in this country to underestimate how long our military aircraft have been flying, and while the Project could make do with pre-Vietnam War aircraft like the C-130 or UH-1, there is not really any benefit in doing so.

The Little Bird bugs me for a different reason - it is too little. It is fine for observation and even light attack, but if it cannot transport a typical MARS or Recon team, along with standard crew including a door gunner or two, then it is going to be too limited in the missions it can handle. It would be fine as part of an assortment of helicopters, but an assortment of helicopters is what the Project should avoid.

[mmartin798]

I always try to reign in the "Oooo... Pretty! Me Want!" reaction by thinking how it would fit into the reconstruction plan. When I apply this to aircraft, I keep coming back to a short list for my manned depot/manufacturing incubator base. There are two VTOLs that usually make the list, CH-47 and V-22, and the C-130. I can make a good case for the C-27 as well. All these aircraft are proved, some with a shaky start, and have reconstruction uses as well. The CH-47 makes for an suitable sky crane, carries 10 tonnes and has the ability to transport many patients as an air ambulance. V-22 is much faster than the CH-47 with half the payload. The C-130 can carry a newly rebuilt or manufactured CNC Mill in the cargo bay for delivery to a plant with an improvised runway far way. The fact that all these aircraft are multi role from early warning, in-flight/ground vehicle refueling, vehicle and troop transport to support MARS operation is good too.

I think this is a needed conversation. It is completely unreasonable to assume the Project would not have air assets. But I keep going back to thinking why they would have them first and then picking airframes that make sense.

[stormlion1]

I don't see any particular inherent virtue in "older" - certainly something that is brand new is going to be a risk, but (for example) the H-60 and C-23 have been around plenty long enough to be "safe". I would say that, for aircraft, a decade of use is an adequate buffer to ensure that (a) the kinks have been worked out, (b) there is an adequate supply chain, and (c) there is a supply of trained, experienced pilots. And that's a soft decade - the C-27 should certainly be in consideration! There is a tendency in this country to underestimate how long our military aircraft have been flying, and while the Project could make do with pre-Vietnam War aircraft like the C-130 or UH-1, there is not really any benefit in doing so.

The Little Bird bugs me for a different reason - it is too little. It is fine for observation and even light attack, but if it cannot transport a typical MARS or Recon team, along with standard crew including a door gunner or two, then it is going to be too limited in the missions it can handle. It would be fine as part of an assortment of helicopters, but an assortment of helicopters is what the Project should avoid.

I find the Little Bird to be perfect is a few ways for a Recon team. There small yes, but if you think about it, they can actually be stored inside a Bolthole with all there maintenance gear. Every other helicopter will need a larger hanger. Most teams are only four members large anyway and a Little Bird can carry six, two up front and four in the rear and with cargo pods attached they can carry all the excess gear. An advantage is that with a four man team you need two pilots and the other two can man guns in the rear and have excess room for gear inside and weapon pods on the outside.
Of course a Little Bird and any helicopter is just fine five years after the nukes, but a 150 showing up in one really isn't the way to recon a settlement.

[ArmySGT.]

I find the Little Bird to be perfect is a few ways for a Recon team. There small yes, but if you think about it, they can actually be stored inside a Bolthole with all there maintenance gear. Every other helicopter will need a larger hanger. Most teams are only four members large anyway and a Little Bird can carry six, two up front and four in the rear and with cargo pods attached they can carry all the excess gear. An advantage is that with a four man team you need two pilots and the other two can man guns in the rear and have excess room for gear inside and weapon pods on the outside.
Of course a Little Bird and any helicopter is just fine five years after the nukes, but a 150 showing up in one really isn't the way to recon a settlement.

Either 5 years or 150 it is still excellent for reconnaissance of roads, highways, bridges, rivers, railroad.......

It can take video or still images for assessment and using milimeter wave radar or LIDAR make accurate measurements for assessing areas to rebuild.

[cosmicfish]

I find the Little Bird to be perfect is a few ways for a Recon team. There small yes, but if you think about it, they can actually be stored inside a Bolthole with all there maintenance gear. Every other helicopter will need a larger hanger.
I am not sure what you are talking about here - are you suggesting that this helicopter be issued as an auxiliary vehicle for Recon teams in addition to their regular MPV? In addition to their other skills, they are supposed to have a couple of experienced helicopter pilots? Chopper pilots don't exactly grow on trees, you know.

And it has twice the footprint of a Stryker, so I am not sure how you figure fitting one into a bolthole is going to be easy, but then again boltholes aren't standardized anyway.

Most teams are only four members large anyway and a Little Bird can carry six, two up front and four in the rear and with cargo pods attached they can carry all the excess gear. An advantage is that with a four man team you need two pilots and the other two can man guns in the rear and have excess room for gear inside and weapon pods on the outside.
That doesn't change that it is one of the least versatile helicopters out there. It can carry a six man team, but only 4 can then dismount and fight (2, if you insist on the helicopter being protected as it leaves), and they can't really bring anyone or anything back with them. Even without passengers it has a minimal cargo capacity. Unless the Morrow aerial inventory is large enough to permit this kind of specialization, something that can do all this stuff and carry an actual team or their MPV or large sensor pods or serve as a medevac might be a better choice.

[cosmicfish]

It can take video or still images for assessment and using milimeter wave radar or LIDAR make accurate measurements for assessing areas to rebuild.
I am honestly not even sure if an OH-6 can mount a LITENING pod - the pylons are only rated to carry a couple hundred pounds (I think), and I don't think you can get much of a sensor in a pod that small. Conversely, a UH-60 or V-22 or really anything larger would be able to carry decent-sized sensors AND still carry armament and even personnel!

[cosmicfish]

I find it hard to discuss specific vehicles (especially specialized ones) without the context of the overall inventory. For those advocating the OH-6, what is your vision of the Morrow aerial force? How many aircraft of each type, and how are they distributed?

For example, I recently tossed together a TOE for my version of TMP. I had a large airbase at Prime Base and 6 much smaller regional airbases. Scattered between these I had 8 MH-53M, 16 MH-60M, 24 MV-22B, 8 C-130J, 12 Twin Otters, and 48 MQ-9 Reapers, for a Project of approximately 50,000 people.

Bear in mind that this was just a first cut, but I thought that was actually quite a lot of aircraft even though I thought it was what the Project really needs. Even still, it runs heavy simply because these aircraft need to fulfill a lot of different roles and would replace the thousands and thousands of aircraft the US has flying at any given time. And even with 68 manned aircraft I don't see the advantage of the OH-6, because pilots are hard to come by and everything the OH-6 can do, a UH-60 or V-22 can do better.

[stormlion1]

I never figured for a large Morrow Air Force but I did plan on it being scattered about. Prime Base itself only having a small number of aircraft. Its C+C, not an airbase. The Regional Bases have the same thing. Few Aircraft. The Main Supply Depots are the aircraft hubs as there the ones getting supply's out and transporting them. The various teams themselves maybe one in a dozen has a helicopter for use and never an aircraft as landing strips will be few and far between.
Say Prime Base and the Regional Hubs have maybe five Blackhawks and one or two private jets each. The Supply Hubs have a dozen C-130's (For supply airdrops), another dozens Blackhawks (for when dropping it out of an airplane cannot happen or to transport MARS teams), and maybe two dozen Little Birds (For Air Support and scouting) and space for scavenged aircraft the project might find and reuse five years after the nukes drop.. And several teams across the US are equipped with Little Birds.

[kato13]

I have 24 A/MH-6s that are to be used during the first phase of recon and then shifted to be be scouting/liason/med-evac/gunship.

They have a few advantages IMO

Easier to fit into a bolthole
Lower Maintenance
Quiet (with fusion engines even more so)
Civilian airframe

Ease of Acquisition
Ability to stockpile spare parts without notice.



Other than some small drones, they are my only dispersed aviation assets. The rest being at prime or my 8 regional bases

[cosmicfish]

Prime Base itself only having a small number of aircraft. Its C+C, not an airbase.
I agree with this - I actually have a "national aviation command" under the command of the national command, but I don't have it collocated.

The various teams themselves maybe one in a dozen has a helicopter for use and never an aircraft as landing strips will be few and far between.
How many teams do you have? If you have a hundred teams then having 16 part-time helicopter pilots is difficult, if you have a thousand teams then having 166 is almost absurd! There are not that many helicopter pilots out there, expecting to draw a bunch of them into the Project (assuming they would even qualify) is a bit of a stretch, as is training them up from scratch.

Oh, and there are a ton of small airplanes (bush planes) that can land just about anywhere flatish.

Say Prime Base and the Regional Hubs have maybe five Blackhawks and one or two private jets each.
So perhaps 35 Blackhawks? And how do you figure jets? With fusion power, a propeller airplane or helicopter can stay aloft as long as you can keep someone conscious at the controls, jets require massive amounts of perishable, volatile fuel that the Project could not realistically anticipate replenishing. And why does the Project even need jets?


The Supply Hubs have a dozen C-130's (For supply airdrops), another dozens Blackhawks (for when dropping it out of an airplane cannot happen or to transport MARS teams), and maybe two dozen Little Birds (For Air Support and scouting) and space for scavenged aircraft the project might find and reuse five years after the nukes drop.. And several teams across the US are equipped with Little Birds.
Now I'm confused - you said "Regional Hubs have maybe five Blackhawks" and now you say "The Supply Hubs have ... another dozens Blackhawks" - which is it?

[cosmicfish]

I have 24 A/MH-6s that are to be used during the first phase of recon and then shifted to be be scouting/liason/med-evac/gunship.
They are terrible in either a med-evac OR gunship role. They were designed as scout helicopters back in the day when the sensor package was the Mk I Eyeball.

They have a few advantages IMO

Easier to fit into a bolthole
Lower Maintenance
Quiet (with fusion engines even more so)
Civilian airframe

Ease of Acquisition
Ability to stockpile spare parts without notice.



There is zero reason for boltholes to all be the same size. Indeed, the variety of team sizes and vehicles combined with environmental factors all but ensures that boltholes are all but unique.
How much lower maintenance? Given that the scaling of maintenance requirements in helicopters is primarily a function of the very same systems that get replaced by fusion in TMP, the difference in maintenance between a UH-60 and OH-6 is primarily going to be in the added mission systems in the former.
Fusion engines will kill some sound, but the Project's mission would not seem to make aircraft noise a particular issue.
Civilian airframe

If the Project can acquire all the other military assets it has, acquiring a few more helicopters would hardly seem an issue.
Many of the spare parts would not be stock anyway, but regardless, the former point still applies - if the Project can get V-150 (or whatever) parts and scads of 20mm ammo, then this would seem a minor point. On top of that, civilian parts do not generally reach MILSPEC performance even when they come from MILSPEC suppliers - relying on civilian parts is asking for something to fail when the feces hit the giant fan over your head.


Other than some small drones, they are my only dispersed aviation assets.
Small drones are unsexy, but they make tremendous sense for field teams. They require minimal skill to use, risk little in their operation, and are perfectly acceptable for most tactical needs.

[kato13]

So perhaps 35 Blackhawks? And how do you figure jets? With fusion power, a propeller airplane or helicopter can stay aloft as long as you can keep someone conscious at the controls, jets require massive amounts of perishable, volatile fuel that the Project could not realistically anticipate replenishing. And why does the Project even need jets?


Most modern civilian "jets" use turbofan engines which could be converted fusion as the propulsion comes mostly from the fans and not from heated exhaust. If you are ok with a 600 mph top speed fusion turbo fans should be fine.

[stormlion1]

I agree with this - I actually have a "national aviation command" under the command of the national command, but I don't have it collocated.
I figure Prime Base was the Main HQ, the Pentagon of the project. At most it has a small runway and a few helicopter pads for getting around. Even the pilots there have other jobs rather than being pilots alone.


How many teams do you have? If you have a hundred teams then having 16 part-time helicopter pilots is difficult, if you have a thousand teams then having 166 is almost absurd! There are not that many helicopter pilots out there, expecting to draw a bunch of them into the Project (assuming they would even qualify) is a bit of a stretch, as is training them up from scratch.
Never figured it out, just figured the Project at some point found and trained pilots and crews and froze them. Many of the Team Members can also be cross trained as pilots and Loadmasters and such as well. When I was in the Air Force I was cross trained as a Loadmaster on the side even though I was in the Security Police. A little cross training never hurt anyone.

Oh, and there are a ton of small airplanes (bush planes) that can land just about anywhere flatish.
True, but the idea is to keep numbers down. And the more and different kinds of aircraft there are, the longer the logistics chain. I can see them in service in area's though where C-130's cannot operate or at the furthest corners of the logistics chain. They would be the exception, not the rule.

So perhaps 35 Blackhawks? And how do you figure jets? With fusion power, a propeller airplane or helicopter can stay aloft as long as you can keep someone conscious at the controls, jets require massive amounts of perishable, volatile fuel that the Project could not realistically anticipate replenishing. And why does the Project even need jets?
Very few jets, and mostly private ones for moving higher ups around. They wouldn't see much use early on but only when the rebuilding requires someone of import to be there. By that point fuel supplies can be found or they just don't fly or they have Bruce Morrows lovely reactors installed.


Now I'm confused - you said "Regional Hubs have maybe five Blackhawks" and now you say "The Supply Hubs have ... another dozens Blackhawks" - which is it?
I separate the two. Regional Hubs are Regional Command Bases that report to Prime and collect info and dispatch orders. They can in the event of failure replace Prime Bases functions in part. They also exist as a point for extra personnel to congregate to then be dispatched to under strength Teams in the field. There Mini-Prime Bases in charge of the various regions. I kind of figure at most a compliment of maybe a 100 personnel. And even the aircraft there wouldn't have assigned pilots but in fact have a pilot for every two aircraft. Less stress on the aircraft themselves and can be replaced if there is a breakdown. They can also be borrowed by supply hubs for there operations if needed. Call it a Ready Reserve.
The Supply Hubs are outright Supply Bases and Airfields. They exist to be the stockpiled supply's and are the Teams Grocery Store. They like the various Recon Teams, MARS Teams, Medical Teams, etc report to there Regional Hubs who in turn report to Prime Base.

[kato13]

They are terrible in either a med-evac OR gunship role. They were designed as scout helicopters back in the day when the sensor package was the Mk I Eyeball.




There is zero reason for boltholes to all be the same size. Indeed, the variety of team sizes and vehicles combined with environmental factors all but ensures that boltholes are all but unique.
How much lower maintenance? Given that the scaling of maintenance requirements in helicopters is primarily a function of the very same systems that get replaced by fusion in TMP, the difference in maintenance between a UH-60 and OH-6 is primarily going to be in the added mission systems in the former.
Fusion engines will kill some sound, but the Project's mission would not seem to make aircraft noise a particular issue.
Civilian airframe

If the Project can acquire all the other military assets it has, acquiring a few more helicopters would hardly seem an issue.
Many of the spare parts would not be stock anyway, but regardless, the former point still applies - if the Project can get V-150 (or whatever) parts and scads of 20mm ammo, then this would seem a minor point. On top of that, civilian parts do not generally reach MILSPEC performance even when they come from MILSPEC suppliers - relying on civilian parts is asking for something to fail when the feces hit the giant fan over your head.



Small drones are unsexy, but they make tremendous sense for field teams. They require minimal skill to use, risk little in their operation, and are perfectly acceptable for most tactical needs.


Drones are possible now, and if I plan a modern game with a modern wardate I use them everywhere (down to a 40mm disposable one fired from an M203). I still like to plan for an earlier wardate as well.

Duningan's how to make war has the OH-6 beating the UH-60 in Attack rating, Sortie rate and Average Availability. Personally I would go with the UH-1 over the UH-60 as there are literally thousands of retired airframes that could be brought into the program.

My project plans to use the stealth (sound) factors of the AH-6 for placement of initial recon teams. As far as my bolt holes go, yes all are generally custom, but I expected my aircraft boltholes to be placed in abandoned railway tunnels, The dimensions of the OH-6 would allow for tighter turning (not flying of course) inside of such a small space.

Yes I admit the OH-6 would not be as good as a UH-60 (or UH-1) for Medevac, but it could certainly perform the role as well as the OH-1 (as made famous by M*A*S*H) did. It did perform the role in Vietnam, so I am guessing it maybe saved a life or two.

[cosmicfish]

Most modern civilian "jets" use turbofan engines which could be converted fusion as the propulsion comes mostly from the fans and not from heated exhaust. If you are ok with a 600 mph top speed fusion turbo fans should be fine.
If you take away the fuel, what you have left is a ducted fan, not a jet - literally. And as odd as it may sound, that jet, even when dominated by fan thrust, changes everything. I started out in aerospace engineering, and the physics of fan propulsion says that ducted fans work best in a pusher configuration and at low speed, as at high speed duct drag dominates. There is a reason you don't really see ducted fan aircraft that don't have that jet running down the center.

And even if you could, why would Morrow want the added complexity? Are they really in that much of a hurry?

[stormlion1]

I'm using equipment I'm familiar with. C-130's were prime movers of gear and are old dependable aircraft with an easy to maintain airframe. Blackhawks have a relatively good safety record and can pull plenty of gear and personnel around. Huey's would be good too but I know nothing about there operations or repair. Just that there are plenty of them around. I mean if you look there everywhere. The Little Birds are on my list because of there size and multi-purpose nature. They can act as gunships, transports, small scale supply, and medevac. And most importantly there small. They can be buried in a Bolthole and pulled out when needed. larger helicopters will require a full on hanger, something that in the original 5-year timeframe can be destroyed, damaged by weather or human disaster, or just to conspicuous.

[cosmicfish]

I figure Prime Base was the Main HQ, the Pentagon of the project. At most it has a small runway and a few helicopter pads for getting around.
I agree 100%.

Even the pilots there have other jobs rather than being pilots alone.
I disagree about 97%. I work with pilots, some very very good ones. Pilots who are not pilots alone are the ones who tend to crash, especially if called upon to do anything tricky. Piloting requires constant practice, especially for helicopters.

Never figured it out, just figured the Project at some point found and trained pilots and crews and froze them. Many of the Team Members can also be cross trained as pilots and Loadmasters and such as well. When I was in the Air Force I was cross trained as a Loadmaster on the side even though I was in the Security Police. A little cross training never hurt anyone.
Being a loadmaster is not the same as being a pilot. Cross-training is indeed good, but pilots don't grow on trees and the time required to learn and maintain that skill means that any other work will be relatively minor.

True, but the idea is to keep numbers down. And the more and different kinds of aircraft there are, the longer the logistics chain. I can see them in service in area's though where C-130's cannot operate or at the furthest corners of the logistics chain. They would be the exception, not the rule.
I never said you had to have multiple varieties of bush plane, I am just saying that it is easier and cheaper to have bush planes and bush pilots than even the cheapest and easiest helicopters and their pilots. Seriously, in the exact situations you describe, there are bush planes handling the vast bulk of the work.

Very few jets, and mostly private ones for moving higher ups around. They wouldn't see much use early on but only when the rebuilding requires someone of import to be there. By that point fuel supplies can be found or they just don't fly or they have Bruce Morrows lovely reactors installed.
I just commented on the issue of fusion-powered turbofans (i.e., they can't exist), and a jet you can only use occasionally seems a hard trade against a prop-plane you can use constantly.

I separate the two. Regional Hubs are Regional Command Bases that report to Prime and collect info and dispatch orders. They can in the event of failure replace Prime Bases functions in part.
Alright, I have something similar.

And even the aircraft there wouldn't have assigned pilots but in fact have a pilot for every two aircraft. Less stress on the aircraft themselves and can be replaced if there is a breakdown.
Doesn't seem particularly efficient. Most military and civilian operations reverse that ratio, having more pilots than aircraft. Throw in fusion reactors and you all but need it!

So do a little math, and list your complete Morrow Air Force. Until you have an actual inventory it is impossible to say whether or not any given aircraft makes sense.

[cosmicfish]

Duningan's how to make war has the OH-6 beating the UH-60 in Attack rating, Sortie rate and Average Availability.
I don't have Dunnigan's, but I know that the kind of reduction you are describing is very difficult in any real application. I also think that a good chunk of that changes anyway with fusion power.

Personally I would go with the UH-1 over the UH-60 as there are literally thousands of retired airframes that could be brought into the program.
There are reasons why those airframes are retired. Metal fatigue is a real issue, you know.

My project plans to use the stealth (sound) factors of the AH-6 for placement of initial recon teams.
You really think that is adequate reason? It's a nice perk, but I can't see a trade study weighting that very highly.

As far as my bolt holes go, yes all are generally custom, but I expected my aircraft boltholes to be placed in abandoned railway tunnels, The dimensions of the OH-6 would allow for tighter turning (not flying of course) inside of such a small space.
Boltholes are meant to be abandoned, so unless you are actually talking about using the tunnels as hangers (not a good idea, btw), then you can stow the rotors and fit anything but the heavy-lift helos in there. UH-60's can be ferried in a C-130, and that hold is 40' long by 9' wide by 8' high. There is no US railroad gauge that is so small.

Yes I admit the OH-6 would not be as good as a UH-60 (or UH-1) for Medevac, but it could certainly perform the role as well as the OH-1 (as made famous by M*A*S*H) did. It did perform the role in Vietnam, so I am guessing it maybe saved a life or two.
The standards in Korea and Vietnam were a lot different than they are now. There is no room for a medic, minimal room for any life-support equipment (or even first aid gear!), and no capacity for adding any kind of protective systems (i.e., guns) when you are using the hauling capacity for medevac. Seriously, there is a reason no one willingly uses these in this role anymore - it's not medevac, it's just giving the victim a nicer view as he dies.

[cosmicfish]

I'm using equipment I'm familiar with. C-130's were prime movers of gear and are old dependable aircraft with an easy to maintain airframe. Blackhawks have a relatively good safety record and can pull plenty of gear and personnel around.
I agree with all of this.

Huey's would be good too but I know nothing about there operations or repair. Just that there are plenty of them around. I mean if you look there everywhere.
Huey's are like buying cheap used cars - they're cheap and easy to find, but there's a reason they're so cheap to begin with and you really shouldn't plan on them lasting long. Heck, the newest ones are 30 years old! And the reason they are around is because they are being used for relatively gentle work by people with no better options - you can make an aircraft last a long time if you do that, but it's really just spreading the lifespan by injecting idleness. I don't know about you, but I expect ALL MPV's to be in near-constant use!

The Little Birds are on my list because of there size and multi-purpose nature. They can act as gunships, transports, small scale supply, and medevac. And most importantly there small. They can be buried in a Bolthole and pulled out when needed. larger helicopters will require a full on hanger, something that in the original 5-year timeframe can be destroyed, damaged by weather or human disaster, or just to conspicuous.
Again, I don't understand this. Little Birds are NOT utility helicopters, for good reason - they aren't good multi-taskers! They are specialists that fill very specific roles as part of a massive collection of aircraft. And I think the bolthole/hanger divide is more than a little false - botlholes are for storage, hangers are for operation, and realistically all aircraft will require some level of access to both, and the most efficient approaches do not particularly limit the use of larger aircraft.

[Askold]

The way I see it, spare parts are going to be an issue with aircraft.

Assuming best case scenario where the Morrow teams can find intact factories (either built with stuff the Morrow project had hidden in bunkers or simply salvageable factories from before the war) aircraft parts still won't be priority number 1. Even worse if you have several types of aircraft and you would need highly specialized parts.

Worst case scenario where everything outside has been destroyed and the Morrow project has to do with the meager stuff they had in their facilities... Spare parts will run out soon. How long can you fly a helicopter without proper maintenance? Or even an airplane.

You can keep a car functional for years (although some spare parts will be required) and in that time you can: Recon the area, establish contact with the survivors, start educating the survivors (if they have lost knowledge of modern technology) and even rebuilding the society. Who knows, you could even manage to keep the cars in working condition until you can make more parts and fuel for them. (Though you might have to store the fancy fusion powered stuff for a while and switch back to bio-diesel until a few decades have passed.)

With aircraft... Well, you can achieve things that would otherwise be impossible but they will be nearly one-shot devices. "Do you have a battle where air-support is absolutely vital? Do you need to pick up someone/something from a location that cannot be accessed by foot? Yeah, we can do that. ...Once."

[cosmicfish]

Worst case scenario where everything outside has been destroyed and the Morrow project has to do with the meager stuff they had in their facilities... Spare parts will run out soon. How long can you fly a helicopter without proper maintenance? Or even an airplane.
Well, there are a few things going in the Project's favor here. First, fusion reactors are canonically reliable, and replace a lot of the heavy wear parts in aircraft - there are going to be fewer moving parts, and the ones that remain are not the ones most likely to fail. Second, the Project retains not only its own stores but also some manufacturing capacity - once the stores run out they should be able to keep a modest number of aircraft flying for years afterwards by building new parts.

Besides, air vehicles are just too useful to abandon entirely.

[mmartin798]

If you take away the fuel, what you have left is a ducted fan, not a jet - literally. And as odd as it may sound, that jet, even when dominated by fan thrust, changes everything. I started out in aerospace engineering, and the physics of fan propulsion says that ducted fans work best in a pusher configuration and at low speed, as at high speed duct drag dominates. There is a reason you don't really see ducted fan aircraft that don't have that jet running down the center.

And even if you could, why would Morrow want the added complexity? Are they really in that much of a hurry?

I tend to agree that jets by and large add unnecessary complexity to the Project. To make it work, we have to assume a different design reactor for jet aircraft that generate less electrical power by diverting the heat from the plasma into producing thrust rather than electrical power. This would also require some modification to route a couple of plenums to the reactor, but that shouldn't be that onerous.

A case could be made for the Project's use of jets for priority transport. But this would not require many. Something like a Citation CJ4. Might as well order a couple of those with all those V-150/300s.

[cosmicfish]

I tend to agree that jets by and large add unnecessary complexity to the Project. To make it work, we have to assume a different design reactor for jet aircraft that generate less electrical power by diverting the heat from the plasma into producing thrust rather than electrical power. This would also require some modification to route a couple of plenums to the reactor, but that shouldn't be that onerous.
There's an awful lot of assumptions in that statement all for a single narrow purpose. And if this could work at all, it would certainly be onerous!

A case could be made for the Project's use of jets for priority transport.
So make the case already! Seriously, why move mountains to travel 600mph instead of 500 mph (or whatever speed you think a fusion-powered propeller plane could handle)?

[mmartin798]

So make the case already! Seriously, why move mountains to travel 600mph instead of 500 mph (or whatever speed you think a fusion-powered propeller plane could handle)?

VIP transport, moving biologic samples with a limited viability from a field base to a central lab facility, moving a critical patient from a field hospital in western NY to an activated Morrow Hospital base in Kansas. There are time critical function that could take advantage of the time saving.

[stormlion1]

OK, lets look at the various Regions the Project is set up over. I will use my home region for this. The Northeast. which is Region Foxtrot. It compromises New Jersey, New York, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia and West Virginia. That's a lot of room to cover.
Now lets say we put the regional Command base in Upstate New York, it has two commercial Lear Jets, the 55's for simplicity's sake.. Left overs from when the Project was in its start up stages. Because the Council of Tomorrow had to get around right? They have Five Blackhawks for Security Sweeps, Supply Runs, and for use by the bases MARS Team. That's 4 crew for the two Lears and 10 pilots. The Crew Chiefs and Gunners are not counted. That's 14 pilots right there.

The Supply Hubs have a dozen C-130's with two pilots apiece and a loadmaster. That's 3 crew right there apiece. And these guys are going to be busy! That's 39 crew right there, 24 of whom are pilots. Now we have a dozen Blackhawks doing the midrange supply drops, reinforcements, and going places the C-130's can't. 24 Pilots and another dozen Crew Chiefs right there. Last we have the Little Birds Two Crew apiece. Another 24 Pilots.
Total Number of pilots: 38 and various crew chiefs and Loadmasters and Door Gunners all of whom can be cross trained personnel and have other jobs. Joe the Door Gunner can be Supply Base Security Joe who sits in the coffee room all day.
And they have to cover all of the Foxtrot Region. Now the guys down in Region Bravo have got to cover Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska. They have the same amount of gear, pilots, etc. There going to have it somewhat easier but they still have to cover large swathes of ground. But if there is need aircraft and crews can be sent to help the Foxtrot Region when the Prime Base needs them too and there is some slack.

[cosmicfish]

VIP transport
Why? I honestly cannot think of any VIP's that are that urgent to move.

moving biologic samples with a limited viability from a field base to a central lab facility
Isn't that what the Science Teams are for? And what are the odds that the time for this trip (or any other, for that matter) isn't dominated by the need then to first get the sample to the airstrip where your high speed plane is located... if one even exists in the area? Even ignoring propulsion, I cannot think of any high-speed aircraft that can operate from a dirt field, and without that it seems like a slightly slower aircraft that can land nearby is superior to a faster aircraft that you have to traverse a hundred miles in a random direction just to reach!

moving a critical patient from a field hospital in western NY to an activated Morrow Hospital base in Kansas.
Why is this person so important that an entire engineering team needs to devote massive pre-war resources against the possibility of their survival? And how is it that they can survive a 2-hour trip with Morrow's massive medical technology base, but not a 3-hour trip?

There are time critical function that could take advantage of the time saving.
If that time saving didn't come with massive costs, sure... but it does. Engineering another vehicle with specialized and not-currently-extant engines, creating and maintaining the support including parts and staff, and either somehow creating a dirt-strip, high-speed aircraft or else ensuring a network of conveniently placed landing strips. That's a lot of work for little justification.

[cosmicfish]

Now lets say we put the regional Command base in Upstate New York, it has two commercial Lear Jets, the 55's for simplicity's sake.. Left overs from when the Project was in its start up stages. Because the Council of Tomorrow had to get around right?
First, why would these be Morrow assets, and not part of the corporations that the CoT was drawn from? Second, to the best of my knowledge the CoT were not frozen with the Project (if at all) so why would the Project have their planes? Third, why would they all be the same, when each CoT member was likely to have different needs that they would need to justify to their corporations? Last, even if they were commandeered, how do you justify the supply chain and personnel, like fuel, jet parts, and turbine technicians?

They have Five Blackhawks for Security Sweeps, Supply Runs, and for use by the bases MARS Team. That's 4 crew for the two Lears and 10 pilots. The Crew Chiefs and Gunners are not counted. That's 14 pilots right there.
Per region, are you going with the canonical ten regions?

The Supply Hubs have a dozen C-130's with two pilots apiece and a loadmaster. That's 3 crew right there apiece. And these guys are going to be busy! That's 39 crew right there, 24 of whom are pilots. Now we have a dozen Blackhawks doing the midrange supply drops, reinforcements, and going places the C-130's can't. 24 Pilots and another dozen Crew Chiefs right there. Last we have the Little Birds Two Crew apiece. Another 24 Pilots.
Total Number of pilots: 38 and various crew chiefs and Loadmasters and Door Gunners all of whom can be cross trained personnel and have other jobs. Joe the Door Gunner can be Supply Base Security Joe who sits in the coffee room all day.
The only place I have seen that kind of ratio of aircraft to personnel is for experimental units where the expectation is that most days any given aircraft is under modification. Seriously, you have the expense of acquiring and supporting all those aircraft, and your best case scenario has 2/3 of them idle for lack of pilots? What happens when one or more of your pilots gets killed?

Ignoring all that, with ten regions, ignoring the Prime Base contingent, you have 520 pilots, 170 crew chiefs, an unknown number of non-flying technical and support staff, and 430 aircraft. In case you are wondering, that is about 1/13 of the USAF, an organization that has about 500,000 full-time personnel (and admittedly more duties than just operating aircraft, but that is their primary mission!). Heck, acquiring the aircraft alone is going to be well more than $10B, not counting parts, training, storage, or conversion!

How big do you see the Project as being, overall?

[mmartin798]

Why? I honestly cannot think of any VIP's that are that urgent to move.


Isn't that what the Science Teams are for? And what are the odds that the time for this trip (or any other, for that matter) isn't dominated by the need then to first get the sample to the airstrip where your high speed plane is located... if one even exists in the area? Even ignoring propulsion, I cannot think of any high-speed aircraft that can operate from a dirt field, and without that it seems like a slightly slower aircraft that can land nearby is superior to a faster aircraft that you have to traverse a hundred miles in a random direction just to reach!

Science teams in the field would be able to collect and do some limited analysis in the field. But if they need the results of a GC, HPLC or to grow cultures in a controlled environment, then they need a lab. As for jets that can operate from a gravel runway, there is the Boeing 737 and a large number of Russian MIGs. It's just a matter of getting the intakes high enough above the ground.


Why is this person so important that an entire engineering team needs to devote massive pre-war resources against the possibility of their survival? And how is it that they can survive a 2-hour trip with Morrow's massive medical technology base, but not a 3-hour trip?

Dying warlord, whose survival at the hands of the Morrow Project could stabilize the political climate in a large area, there by contributing to the mission of restoring the CONUS and allowing the redistribution of MARS assets to more other unstable regions.

If that time saving didn't come with massive costs, sure... but it does. Engineering another vehicle with specialized and not-currently-extant engines, creating and maintaining the support including parts and staff, and either somehow creating a dirt-strip, high-speed aircraft or else ensuring a network of conveniently placed landing strips. That's a lot of work for little justification.

Much of that engineering is already done. The US was flying bombers using fission powered jets in the 1950's. Using those engine designs and adapting the plenums from blowing the cold air through the fission fuel rods to cool them and create the superheated air that goes out the other plenum to create the thrust is not like making this thing from scratch. Modify the fusion reactor to express the heat more directly rather than driving the thermoelectric generators that would usually be there to produce electricity and rely on the electron capture only for on-board electrical power. Granted, that last part assumes a great deal about Project reactors that to my knowledge does not exist in canon, but which has been discussed here at great length in another thread.

I am not saying that the jet powered aircraft would be everywhere, but a small number would be useful.

[cosmicfish]

Science teams in the field would be able to collect and do some limited analysis in the field. But if they need the results of a GC, HPLC or to grow cultures in a controlled environment, then they need a lab.
But the only option is transport by jet? They can't be preprocessed by the Science Team, or transported by prop plane? I worked in a biochem lab years ago (dark, dark days) and I'm having trouble remembering anything other than an organ that was anywhere close to that time sensitive.

As for jets that can operate from a gravel runway, there is the Boeing 737 and a large number of Russian MIGs. It's just a matter of getting the intakes high enough above the ground.
Actually, it is more than that. There is also the issue of debris damaging other vulnerable parts of the plane, for example. For the 737 at least it also still requires a very long, wide, flat, compacted surface - a good engineering team with lots of equipment might prep an acceptable strip in a few weeks (a lot faster than tarmac!) but that doesn't work so well in an emergency. The idea of using things like C-130's was always that even their relatively mild runway requirements still made them impractical without massive amounts of preparatory work, and even with that infrastructure built it is still not particularly conducive to the kind of tasks you are describing.

Dying warlord, whose survival at the hands of the Morrow Project could stabilize the political climate in a large area, there by contributing to the mission of restoring the CONUS and allowing the redistribution of MARS assets to more other unstable regions.
I'm having trouble imagining someone starting this discussion in a pre-war planning meeting and not finding themselves reassigned to fund-raising or some other affair. It's a huge reach, and even you add all the huge reaches together they don't justify anything.

Much of that engineering is already done. The US was flying bombers using fission powered jets in the 1950's. Using those engine designs and adapting the plenums from blowing the cold air through the fission fuel rods to cool them and create the superheated air that goes out the other plenum to create the thrust is not like making this thing from scratch. Modify the fusion reactor to express the heat more directly rather than driving the thermoelectric generators that would usually be there to produce electricity and rely on the electron capture only for on-board electrical power. Granted, that last part assumes a great deal about Project reactors that to my knowledge does not exist in canon, but which has been discussed here at great length in another thread.
No nuclear-powered aircraft has ever been built, much less flown. The US and Russia both built conventionally-powered aircraft that carried fission reactors, to study the feasibility of nuclear bombers, but the reactors were never connected to anything. There were prototype jets created, but they were never flown - the aircraft I was discussing were propeller planes.

I am not saying that the jet powered aircraft would be everywhere, but a small number would be useful.
But they wouldn't. The expense and difficulty of creating even one would be huge (all that development work!), and operating it requires a huge infrastructure, especially if you want it to go more than a couple of places. The infrastructure that TMP can support is exactly the infrastructure that kills any advantage of these aircraft.

[nuke11]

Here's a few questions; If you are converting all of these to some sort of fusion, how do you keep the players flying in the general vicinity of the expected game? As a PD you better have the entire continent fleshed out as the players are going to get the bright idea that hay they are fusion I can fly this all day. And this is where the Prime Base module lost me, a fusion power C-130 is a really bad idea.

Then how do you convert these to fusion in the first place? Also what did the project do before the 1987 attempted fusion refit? All of the infrastructure to be abandoned that support the pre-fusion project?

The 1987 date and the 1989 expected war date are hard targets that are known. How much time does it take to go from a plan to a working fusion engine that firstly fits in a vehicle and then has to be modified and made light enough to fit into an airframe. There is some 2 years before the drop dead date and there is a lot of equipment that needs to be re-worked and de-deployed throughout the entire project.

[nuke11]

No nuclear-powered aircraft has ever been built, much less flown. The US and Russia both built conventionally-powered aircraft that carried fission reactors, to study the feasibility of nuclear bombers, but the reactors were never connected to anything. There were prototype jets created, but they were never flown - the aircraft I was discussing were propeller planes.

This wiki page has a few interesting projects that did show results : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-powered_aircraft

[cosmicfish]

If you are converting all of these to some sort of fusion, how do you keep the players flying in the general vicinity of the expected game?
Ideally, by not introducing aircraft to the characters prior to Prime Base. Seriously, they should be pretty high-level assets, not something the team can just have. And by the time the team has restored the Project they will either have nationwide issues to deal with (if they are in charge) or else will be subservient to some other group (like Phoenix) that controls the aircraft.

And this is where the Prime Base module lost me, a fusion power C-130 is a really bad idea.
I think it's a really good idea. As I said before, aircraft are too useful for the Project to not have any.

Then how do you convert these to fusion in the first place? Also what did the project do before the 1987 attempted fusion refit? All of the infrastructure to be abandoned that support the pre-fusion project?
Answer that for the rest of the Morrow vehicle fleet! Seriously, if they can do it for all the V-150's or Strykers or whatever vehicles are being used then they can do it for some helicopters and a few planes as well.

The 1987 date and the 1989 expected war date are hard targets that are known. How much time does it take to go from a plan to a working fusion engine that firstly fits in a vehicle and then has to be modified and made light enough to fit into an airframe. There is some 2 years before the drop dead date and there is a lot of equipment that needs to be re-worked and de-deployed throughout the entire project.
Yeah, well, the back story was never really well thought through...

[cosmicfish]

This wiki page has a few interesting projects that did show results : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-powered_aircraft
Yes and no. They developed some conceptual engines, and they built a fission reactor into a plane without actually connecting it to anything. They were extremely preliminary results.

That having been said, I knew that the planes were not really nuclear but I was surprised to see how far they got with nuclear propulsion. I still don't think it really helps the Project, however - the infrastructure required for jet aircraft (nuclear or not) is simply beyond what the Project can support for a benefit they don't really need.

[nuke11]

Answer that for the rest of the Morrow vehicle fleet! Seriously, if they can do it for all the V-150's or Strykers or whatever vehicles are being used then they can do it for some helicopters and a few planes as well.

Yeah, well, the back story was never really well thought through...

I have talked with all of the original designers and writers of TMP and Kevin came up with the idea of fusion powered vehicles, so the game wouldn't turn into a Mad Max Road Warrior search for gasoline game. The idea of fusion was to unshackle the players from a constant search for fuel, that's it. The rest of the premise evolved out of the fusion power premise. The glaring holes where never filled in as there was no need to, as anything pre-fusion was glossed over or ignored completely.

So anyone that read the game and played it, the first thing that was changed was the war date. Most increased the date to allow more time for the fusion switch over or to add the new weapons coming out in the 80's and 90's. My group we changed the date to one in the mid 1990's and then a last change to the year 2000.

For either series of games 1st/2nd/3rd or 4th edition the 1987 and 1989 dates are all that are common and are fixed in time.

As to how the project converted from petroleum to fusion is for another thread, but from the 1st/2nd/3rd editions we start sometime in the late 60's to 1987 and the 4th edition we start sometime in the mid 70's to 1987 as well.

[cosmicfish]

I have talked with all of the original designers and writers of TMP and Kevin came up with the idea of fusion powered vehicles, so the game wouldn't turn into a Mad Max Road Warrior search for gasoline game. The idea of fusion was to unshackle the players from a constant search for fuel, that's it. The rest of the premise evolved out of the fusion power premise. The glaring holes where never filled in as there was no need to, as anything pre-fusion was glossed over or ignored completely.
My point was simply that the problem with the introduction with fusion does not really apply preferentially to one type of vehicle or another - if you can gloss over ignore the way the Project created a fusion ground fleet, then gloss over or ignore that they were able to do so for aircraft as well. And if you have an alternate explanation, then use that alternate explanation for aircraft as well.

Personally, I think that there are better ways to handle the backstory that would lead to a better foundation for the game... but who doesn't? Regardless, as you suggested, anything not related to aircraft should really be in another thread.

[stormlion1]

First, why would these be Morrow assets, and not part of the corporations that the CoT was drawn from? Second, to the best of my knowledge the CoT were not frozen with the Project (if at all) so why would the Project have their planes? Third, why would they all be the same, when each CoT member was likely to have different needs that they would need to justify to their corporations? Last, even if they were commandeered, how do you justify the supply chain and personnel, like fuel, jet parts, and turbine technicians?


Per region, are you going with the canonical ten regions?


The only place I have seen that kind of ratio of aircraft to personnel is for experimental units where the expectation is that most days any given aircraft is under modification. Seriously, you have the expense of acquiring and supporting all those aircraft, and your best case scenario has 2/3 of them idle for lack of pilots? What happens when one or more of your pilots gets killed?

Ignoring all that, with ten regions, ignoring the Prime Base contingent, you have 520 pilots, 170 crew chiefs, an unknown number of non-flying technical and support staff, and 430 aircraft. In case you are wondering, that is about 1/13 of the USAF, an organization that has about 500,000 full-time personnel (and admittedly more duties than just operating aircraft, but that is their primary mission!). Heck, acquiring the aircraft alone is going to be well more than $10B, not counting parts, training, storage, or conversion!

How big do you see the Project as being, overall?

Yeah god I hate all these quotes and unqoutes. I see it as the aircraft had to be somewhere and I said for simplicitys sake. That's why all the Lears were the same. I needed an example and used one type of aircraft.

Yes, I am going with the canon regions.

World war 2 Airstrips were sometimes run like this. Particulary Marine Corp ones in the Pacific and far out on the supply chain Army ones. That's what I based it off of. And I actually asked a crew chief who was there to help hammer out details. As for more pilots and crews and all that. Local recruitment. Remember the plan was to wake up after 5 years. There should still be pilots and ground crews running around from civil aviation who can be recruited. Once the planes start flying the secrecy is over for the project.

Yes its expensive. But so is everything else the Project is buying. In comparison to the armor, vehicles, weapons, training, and facilitys the aviation assets are a good chunk of change. But not insurmountable. especially if some of the CoT run those firms that make the aircraft.

As for the size of the project, well to have any affect on the future it would have to be large. And if its large to have a impact it will need a air mobility assets. Maybe this is way to large. But also note I said they would be hugely busy. In many ways its not large enough to take all the work that's coming to it.

It might actually be easier for the project not to invest in aircraft but in spare parts and electronics and putting crews in cryosleep. Then after five years waking up and moving on grounded aircraft and refitting them. At which point you take what you can get. The Project might end up with refitted news helicopters used as transports and 737's as supply planes and the Bush Planes doing all the light work.

[nuke11]

How is an aircraft converted to fusion? We have a decent idea as to how a ground vehicle (and by extension boats/ships) can be done, but what is needed for an airplane?

We have space and weight restrictions as well as power to weight ratios that would need to be somewhat maintained for the power plant.

[Askold]

How is an aircraft converted to fusion? We have a decent idea as to how a ground vehicle (and by extension boats/ships) can be done, but what is needed for an airplane?

We have space and weight restrictions as well as power to weight ratios that would need to be somewhat maintained for the power plant.

If you are talking about converting an existing plane into being fusion powered, the weight distribution would be a bigger issue than the weight limit. There simply might not be any place to set up the fusion plant that wouldn't also take up cargo/passenger space. At least with smaller planes. (I know a few things about electric cars and have been involved with converting one petrol powered car into an electric car and even then the weight distribution, was an issue and we actually had to sacrifice the back seats and the trunk in order to find a place where we could physically fit the batteries AND keep the weight distribution from getting messed up too much. It was a school project. Not quite the same as airplanes, I assume that with planes this will be even harder. With a large cargoplane this might not be such an issue, just like converting an electric bus is SO much easier than a smaller car.)

What you can do instead is design a plane that is powered by fusion, by starting from zero. (Kinda like the "joke" about how the A-10 Warthog started from "we have this huge gun, how can we make it fly" rather than "we have this plane, what are we going to arm it with?")

And I still think that there isn't enough justification for jet planes. The only scenarios where rotor planes and helicopters aren't enough are so unlikely that they won't be worth all the trouble.

Meanwhile, Zeppelin's could have a place in Morrow project...

[cosmicfish]

Yeah god I hate all these quotes and unqoutes.
Sorry.

I see it as the aircraft had to be somewhere and I said for simplicitys sake. That's why all the Lears were the same. I needed an example and used one type of aircraft.
My point is that whether you are scrounging or simply pulling from diverse sources you lose the possibility of getting the same models. You won't have ten Lears, you'll have 3 different Lears and 4 different Gulfstreams and 2 Bombardiers and one CoT who could only convince his company to do a share of a Cessna!

World war 2 Airstrips were sometimes run like this. Particulary Marine Corp ones in the Pacific and far out on the supply chain Army ones. That's what I based it off of. And I actually asked a crew chief who was there to help hammer out details.
Different circumstances, different time, different needs. No one does this anymore, and for good reason.

As for more pilots and crews and all that. Local recruitment. Remember the plan was to wake up after 5 years. There should still be pilots and ground crews running around from civil aviation who can be recruited. Once the planes start flying the secrecy is over for the project.
The secrecy is over, but you think you have a realistic chance of salvaging useful pilots 5 years post-war? Ignoring that they will likely die at a much higher rate than other occupations (what with being militarily desirable and also engaged in a dangerous occupation), how many will be willing or even desirable to work in the Project in these kinds of aircraft? There are only about 30,000 helicopter pilots in the US anyway, the handful that survive are likely to be hard to get!

Yes its expensive. But so is everything else the Project is buying. In comparison to the armor, vehicles, weapons, training, and facilitys the aviation assets are a good chunk of change. But not insurmountable. especially if some of the CoT run those firms that make the aircraft.
My point is that this is money that can be used on other things, like boots on the ground. You need aircraft, absolutely, but you do not need an Air Force.

It might actually be easier for the project not to invest in aircraft but in spare parts and electronics and putting crews in cryosleep. Then after five years waking up and moving on grounded aircraft and refitting them. At which point you take what you can get. The Project might end up with refitted news helicopters used as transports and 737's as supply planes and the Bush Planes doing all the light work.
That is tremendously risky, but I figure your odds at finding salvageable aircraft is probably about the same as finding worthwhile crews, so I would suggest the Project plan on providing a functional minimum and anything else that can be found is a bonus.

[cosmicfish]

How is an aircraft converted to fusion? We have a decent idea as to how a ground vehicle (and by extension boats/ships) can be done, but what is needed for an airplane?

We have space and weight restrictions as well as power to weight ratios that would need to be somewhat maintained for the power plant.
We do not know enough about Project fusion reactors to say. I don't immediately see a reason why not.

[cosmicfish]

What you can do instead is design a plane that is powered by fusion, by starting from zero. (Kinda like the "joke" about how the A-10 Warthog started from "we have this huge gun, how can we make it fly" rather than "we have this plane, what are we going to arm it with?")
I always liked this idea, but it would be far, far more expensive and harder to conceal, and therefore much harder to justify.

And I still think that there isn't enough justification for jet planes. The only scenarios where rotor planes and helicopters aren't enough are so unlikely that they won't be worth all the trouble.
Amen.

Meanwhile, Zeppelin's could have a place in Morrow project...
Yes... burning on the ground, like ALL Zeppelins!!

[Askold]

Meanwhile, Zeppelin's could have a place in Morrow project...



Yes... burning on the ground, like ALL Zeppelins!!

Lets put it like this...

Zeppelins and blimps offer unique advantages such as:

+Flying crane. These can be extremely valuable during the reconstruction process as regular cranes that are still functional are likely to be extremely rare. And with the infrastructure in shambles (at least in the first few years of the project) moving the cranes from one location to another will be extremely difficult. Besides, there are places where a Zeppelin/blimp or an helicopter are the only means of bringing a crane for construction work.

+Cargo transport. Even now blimps are cheaper than airplanes for cargo transport although they are slower. Unless speed is REALLY important blimps can compete with other aircraft particularly due to my next point...

+Like helicopters the airfield requirements are less strict than with airplanes.

+Although helicopters are able to compete with lighter-than-air-craft they use much more fuel and can't carry as much cargo.


In combat helicopters and planes are superior but for civilian, and particularly construction, work lighter-than-air-craft are great.

And you don't need to fill them with hydrogen if you are afraid of explosions.

[stormlion1]

Not Zeppelins but Blimps. And they are workable. The US Navy has one flying about in Lakehurst right now, they did excellent service during World War II. And they can be stored easier than a Zeppelin. And the best part? The US is the manufacturer of Helium, so no burning.

Just have to keep from crashing the damn things or flying them in storms.

[kalos72]

Other then the T2K module where its stat'd out...does anyone know the stats on blimps?

Love to see some numbers since I dont really like the ones in T2K as they seem really light.

[ArmySGT.]

Other then the T2K module where its stat'd out...does anyone know the stats on blimps?

Love to see some numbers since I dont really like the ones in T2K as they seem really light.

Depends upon size, class, and rigid or non rigid. There is information on wikipedia but, I don't know what to believe. I think the U.S. Naval blimps information is probably the most accurate of the information available.

[kato13]

I started looking at lighter than air vehicles for my project, but hit a stumbling block early in my research regarding how much helium you would need to stockpile.

In an interview with a blimp pilot I heard him state the "We lose 10 percent of our volume of helium per week", but I have also seen a Military contractor pushing blimps claiming that 3% loss per year is what could be expected.

Those numbers (the only ones I could find) are so radically different that I pretty much gave up figuring out the logistics.

[stormlion1]

Assume 20%, that way you have more than you will ever need. wasn't one group in the Project you can encounter Balloon people?

[kato13]

20% Annually might be feasible. 20% weekly would require a huge stockpile as you have to think that you are not going to be getting new supplies for decades.

Using the 10% weekly number I crunched the Airships mentioned in the T2k Module "Airlords of the Ozarks" and came up with something under 2 years of operations IIRC.

[mmartin798]

One reason for the differences in He and H loss is the permeability of the material used to make the gas bags. That alone can make a huge difference. I have also struggled with the idea of how to make Ballooners work.

The end of this thread makes an interesting argument for nuclear zeppelins: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/hot-air-zeppelins.595663/

[kato13]

A nuclear zeppelin is part of the back story of "Airlords of the Ozarks" from T2k.

(Going from memory so forgive mistakes on details)

The story being that a Military contracted zeppelin manufacturer sees the writing on the wall before the T2k nuclear attacks on the US. They take their huge SW5 reactor powered airship along with tons liquid of helium and their staff and familys into the air right before the attack. Their plan is to ride out the attack and land somewhere safe.

They crash in the area controlled by a warlord and the staff are forced to use the materials from the ship (masses of aluminum and durable skin) and the stored helium to make new smaller airships which the warlord uses to expand their domain.

[nuke11]

I've been thinking about how an aircraft would be converted to fusion based.

Taking the MD500/MD530 series of helicopter, the engine is an Allison/Rolls-Royce Model 250-C20B or C20R Turbo Shaft Engine.

To keep the helicopter in balance the fusion source should not exceed the following specs (C20R Replacement);

Overall Length: 1038 mm
Overall Width: 527 mm
Overall Height: 589 mm

Total Weight: 78.5 kg

Everything else should stay the same as originally installed.

Something this size, it wouldn't be out of character to have a limited operating timeframe, say 3 to 6 months, before the engine has to be pulled and then refurbished (this would nicely simulate a real world maintenance cycle for the gas counterpart).

Anything that is converted to fusion should be a 1 for 1 swap, if the airframe has 4 engines then 4 fusion engines are changed that are similar in details.

[mmartin798]

This is where things can get a little off. There is an electric motor that can be stacked to provide 300 kW continuous to the rotor in place of the C20R. It would have a length of 540 mm, diameter of about 245 mm and a total mass of 129 kg. Add in the (3rd edition) manportable 20MW reactor at 15kg and you have 145 kg give or take fully fueled. The non-fusion MD500/520 carries 183kg of fuel in addition to the 78.5 kg of the engine for about 260 kg. The two fuel cells of the MD500 are under the floor more or less centered around the rotor. Assuming the reactor can fit inside the space as the fuel cells, we will still have to add more weights to the front of the MD500 for load and balance.

This is doable in the MD500 case, but the electric motors will tend to be heavier and smaller than the ones they replace and the reactor, assuming 20MW sufficient, will be lighter than the fuel. This will be a problem with planes with engines mounted far out on the wings. This will increase the moment of inertia and will impact handling.

So the takeaway is that center line drive trains should be easy to convert with little impact to the flight characteristics. Anything with the engine further out on the wing and you will have some slower turn and roll.

[cosmicfish]

+Flying crane.
This might work for something that needs to be placed only approximately, but blimps see a lot of shear and aren't good for precision placement, especially when there are other structures nearby.

+Cargo transport.
I haven't even seen a blimp design that can carry more than 40 tons and that never even got past the design phase. I know there are people extolling the virtues of blimps for this, but are any actually flying?

+Like helicopters the airfield requirements are less strict than with airplanes.
Less strict than airplanes but more strict than helicopters.

+Although helicopters are able to compete with lighter-than-air-craft they use much more fuel and can't carry as much cargo.
Fuel is a non-issue for the Project, and unless there are big single cargos around that I missed this would seem to be at best a minor advantage.

In combat helicopters and planes are superior but for civilian, and particularly construction, work lighter-than-air-craft are great.
I've always liked LTA craft but they tend to be niche players, and the combination of fusion power and propellors seems to offer much more versatile systems. You also have to assume that any Morrow asset could come under fire at any time. Air vehicles that can be taken down by the smallest of arms are a pretty big risk.

And you don't need to fill them with hydrogen if you are afraid of explosions.
If they are Zeppelins, you really do need to use hydrogen (hence my earlier comment), but even with blimps getting the most lift requires the explosive option...

[cosmicfish]

Anything that is converted to fusion should be a 1 for 1 swap, if the airframe has 4 engines then 4 fusion engines are changed that are similar in details.
@mmartin798 beat me to a lot of this, but really the combination of engine/transmission/fuel system/fuel gets replaced by electric motor/transmission*/reactor/fuel system/fuel, and there is no inherent need for the form factor to remain identical or for the number of engines to remain the same or anything like that. Even balancing within the aircraft is manageable with relatively little work, especially given that there is a decent chance that the fusion system will offer more power than the comparable gas system, which in turn allows for the placement of ballast. Or just tweak the design.

*: Electric motors don't need transmissions at low speeds (like what a V-150 would do) but do need them at high speeds. But it would not be the same transmission as the gas motor regardless, it would be much simpler and smaller.

Something this size, it wouldn't be out of character to have a limited operating timeframe, say 3 to 6 months, before the engine has to be pulled and then refurbished (this would nicely simulate a real world maintenance cycle for the gas counterpart).
I can see something like this needing to be refueled more often if fuel capacity is sacrificed to make weight, but I don't see why refurbishment would be necessary. I am honestly not sure if there is much in there to be refurbished in the first place!

[cosmicfish]

So the takeaway is that center line drive trains should be easy to convert with little impact to the flight characteristics. Anything with the engine further out on the wing and you will have some slower turn and roll.
Electric systems are a lot more modular than gas systems, systems can be decentralized to spread things out more. In a worst case, you can pull the motor itself inboard and then just run a drive shaft out to the propellers - so long as you have the airframe and the wings, you can do a lot to an aircraft and keep it flyable, it's getting that airframe and wings that is the hard part!

Oh, and is there a reason to think that the Project couldn't/wouldn't/didn't develop an electric motor with a better power to weight ratio?

[mmartin798]

I haven't even seen a blimp design that can carry more than 40 tons and that never even got past the design phase. I know there are people extolling the virtues of blimps for this, but are any actually flying?

The Graf Zeppelins*, arguably very successful pre-Hindenburg, only carried about 16 tons of cargo. A freighter only 20% the length of a Graf Zepplin can carry 10 times the cargo at about half the speed.

Plus having watched blimps landing at the airport near my home a number of times, they can't just land anywhere like a helicopter. This further limits their usefulness for cargo carrying.

*Lookup LZ 127 for details

[cosmicfish]

The Graf Zeppelins*, arguably very successful pre-Hindenburg, only carried about 16 tons of cargo. A freighter only 20% the length of a Graf Zepplin can carry 10 times the cargo at about half the speed.

Plus having watched blimps landing at the airport near my home a number of times, they can't just land anywhere like a helicopter. This further limits their usefulness for cargo carrying.

*Lookup LZ 127 for details
Very familiar with the old Zepps, less familiar with new blimp developments. The only blimp developments I AM familiar with are designed to operate unmanned, at a relatively high altitude, with a light load. My best information agrees with you that they have relatively poor carrying capacity and maneuverability, especially in a wind.

[mmartin798]

Very familiar with the old Zepps, less familiar with new blimp developments. The only blimp developments I AM familiar with are designed to operate unmanned, at a relatively high altitude, with a light load. My best information agrees with you that they have relatively poor carrying capacity and maneuverability, especially in a wind.

And by wind, we are not talking much. The one that I remember had the ground crew with the mooring mast all set up and the blimp coming in to land. There was about a 5 MPH wind with 10 MPH gusts. It still took the pilot almost a dozen tries to get the job done. It was fun to see him take it almost vertical to finally get it down.

[ArmySGT.]

http://drawingdatabase.com/bell-222/

Just for fun....... Should I do some stats for Airwolf? Would Airwolf be a fun PC machine?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwolf_(helicopter)
aqcQUmKJEK8

[rcaf_777]

Why not Blue Thunder, to me these seem better options than then alot of CAS options listed here. I think the project could easly get there had on examples of both ;)

[tsofian]

So some of you know me, some don't. I am Terry Sofian. I've been thrown off a couple of MP lists back in the old days of BBS. Kevin Dockery once wrote I made him sorry he ever wrote the game.

Other than that I'm a pretty nice guy.

I thought the Project had a general rule of taking gear from "failed" development programs and making it there own. For aircraft I included the AH-56A Cheyenne helicopter gunship, the AV-15 tilt rotor prototypes, the Canadian CL-84 Tilt wings and the XC-142A tilt wings. They gave all of them fusion packs and electrical motors. All of these craft are vertical take off.

I also think various production helicopters like the OH-6, CH-47 and possibly one of the coast guard amphibious helos would also be in the mix.

There were 12 AH-56's built and 4 or so of the XC-142A so that will limit the power of Morrow Air Force

[ArmySGT.]

So some of you know me, some don't. I am Terry Sofian. I've been thrown off a couple of MP lists back in the old days of BBS. Kevin Dockery once wrote I made him sorry he ever wrote the game.

Other than that I'm a pretty nice guy.

I thought the Project had a general rule of taking gear from "failed" development programs and making it there own. For aircraft I included the AH-56A Cheyenne helicopter gunship, the AV-15 tilt rotor prototypes, the Canadian CL-84 Tilt wings and the XC-142A tilt wings. They gave all of them fusion packs and electrical motors. All of these craft are vertical take off.

I also think various production helicopters like the OH-6, CH-47 and possibly one of the coast guard amphibious helos would also be in the mix.

There were 12 AH-56's built and 4 or so of the XC-142A so that will limit the power of Morrow Air Force

Sounds fair, I figure anything in NATO is fair as is the chance of surreptitiously purchasing airframes and parts from aircraft abandoned or surplused.

I figure the Project can purchase from Viet Nam a slew of UH-1 Iroquois and some AH-1s even A-1 Skyraiders that are off anyone's attention.

[tsofian]

As a first principal I always had Morrow Project do its shopping in cancelled military procurement. During the period that the Project was active 1950 to TEOTWAWKI (1989 in original canon) there were a lot of projects that produced some exciting equipment that for one reason or another never entered full production. In my Project (YMMV) I had them scoop up a number of these sets of hardware, convert them to fusion/electric drive and otherwise Morrowize them.

For aircraft I chose Vertical Take off systems only but that gives a really nice choice of platforms. These are some I chose

XC-142 Tilt wing cargo aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTV_XC-142 5 build
CL-88 Tilt Wing light aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CL-84 4 built
XV-15 Tiltrotor light aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_XV-15 2 built
AH-56A Cheyenne Compound helicopter Gunship 12 built

These I positioned as follows
XC-142s at Prime base replacing or supplementing the C-130s in canon
XV-15 at Prime Base
Four "aviation bases" each with either four Cheyennes or the four CL-84s. These would be scattered about but within range of supporting each other and Prime Base and possibly the Back Up Base as well

[cosmicfish]

As a first principal I always had Morrow Project do its shopping in cancelled military procurement. During the period that the Project was active 1950 to TEOTWAWKI (1989 in original canon) there were a lot of projects that produced some exciting equipment that for one reason or another never entered full production. In my Project (YMMV) I had them scoop up a number of these sets of hardware, convert them to fusion/electric drive and otherwise Morrowize them.
I don't agree with this approach.

First of all, many such early-stage aircraft have limited functional capacity. Consider the VX-15 - If you add fuel, crew, and basic provisions to the empty weight, you get an aircraft that only has about a thousand pounds of payload and even that would probably require adding hardpoints due to a lack of internal stores. Converting it to fusion only helps so much when you are starting with a technology demonstrator that was never meant to be used in a functional manner.

Second, if they never went into full production that also means that they were never extensively tested. Think of the recent debacle with the F-22's oxygen supply system, and ponder how many of these aircraft are lemons whose weaknesses were never realized during the relatively limited testing period they were allotted? For that matter, these vehicles, with massive technical efforts behind them, ALL had flaws that kept them out of production... so why would Morrow think they could make them work?

Third, if they were never in the field then that means that there is no real support base for them, either in terms of parts and tool inventory or in experienced maintenance and repair personnel. You lose a lot of advantage in these things if you are exclusively relying on Morrow-produced supplies and home-grown knowledge.

Finally, when there are only a handful of these things, it can be a lot harder to make them disappear. If the some Huey's bound for a South American customer get stolen by gun runners, or if some M113's are discovered to have had a fatal structural flaw and need to be scrapped, or if a CH-47 goes down over the ocean, then there are a few fervent memos passed and everyone moves on. If even one of only five very expensive test aircraft disappears from a military base then it becomes not only hard to conceal the disappearance but also the fact that someone on that base is a traitor!

I just don't see TMP realistically building an aviation program off of such things when you could get actual functional, proven, and supported military-grade (or upgradable) hardware with minimal subterfuge and little risk.

[cosmicfish]

XC-142 Tilt wing cargo aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTV_XC-142 5 build
CL-88 Tilt Wing light aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CL-84 4 built
XV-15 Tiltrotor light aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_XV-15 2 built
AH-56A Cheyenne Compound helicopter Gunship 12 built
The XC-142 is poorly documented but at least 1 of the 5 crashed.

Of the CL-88, only 3 were very flyable, and 2 of those crashed.

Of the XV-15, 1 did eventually crash, but it did so as part of a long career as a demonstrator - these were in use as test vehicles for decades, I am not sure how Morrow would have gotten them!

Of the AH-56, only 7 were ever flyable, and only 1 was considered even moderately functional.

[tsofian]

Again to each their own. A lot of these programs ran many hours on the equipment, It was rejected from military service because of expense, or political reasons or changes in specifications or because programs ran too long. Both the XC-142 and the AH-56A were very close to entering service when they got cancelled. The CL-84s did really well during test.

The Project fielded a lot of stand alone equipment such as Science 1 and Mars 1, Hamm suits, fusion packs, lasers, freeze tubes the silly computer system the holograms at Prime Base, the autodcocs, the three vehicles from Operation Lonestar, the autogyro, FACEME and that is just a quick list. Crap the Stoner system itself falls into the category of not ever really accepted for service.

Also remember the aircraft aren't carrying any fuel accept for a little bit of heavy hydrogen, so they can probably carry a bit more playload

As for making this equipment disappear that is the easy part-the prototypes would be bought as scrap and listed as destroyed.

The final decision comes down to the PD.

[tsofian]

There has been some discussion about electric drive vs turbines. If the project concentrated on fusion powered electric propulsion I think they probably would have been able to get their electric motors to a similar power to weight ration of a turbine engine. If the fusion/electric drive is weaker then the turbine drives the Project will be operating at a disadvantage. I feel that they would have been able to boost these systems to at least parity with conventional systems for them to deploy them so widely

[kato13]

If a ducted fan is not a true jet engine, could you make it one by adding heat the exhaust gasses with lasers or microwaves. My initial thought was lasers, but I came across a patent that suggested that water could be added to the air behind the compressor blades and then the air could be bombarded with microwaves.

This might allow jet engine like exhaust with fusion only (if lasers) or fusion plus water (if lasers and microwaves). Either way your logistical tail is reduced significantly.

[cosmicfish]

Again to each their own. A lot of these programs ran many hours on the equipment, It was rejected from military service because of expense, or political reasons or changes in specifications or because programs ran too long.
I would not rush to statements like that. I've worked professionally with experimental and production aircraft and their systems, test vehicles often have significant differences from production, and the tests they go through represent a tiny fraction of what a production model goes through. Going into production is always a gamble because of all the things you can't know from the limited testing time available, as well as all the small changes from test to production. Those gambles are relatively small when you have alternatives, but TMP won't have backups if these aircraft turn out to have fatal flaws.

Both the XC-142 and the AH-56A were very close to entering service when they got cancelled. The CL-84s did really well during test.
The XC-142 was never more than a prototype, the CL-84 was much the same, and the AH-56 was still being developed and lacked a true final design. Those vehicles in production would have had some very important differences, and I doubt that the vehicles actually produced would have been fully functional - there is simply no reason for that functionality on these test beds, that is not the engineering process works.

FWIW, the CL-84 was an excellent design that could have been developed into an excellent vehicle. The demonstrated performance was good enough that it probably would have required only minimal changes for production... but it still never got there.

The Project fielded a lot of stand alone equipment such as Science 1 and Mars 1, Hamm suits, fusion packs, lasers, freeze tubes the silly computer system the holograms at Prime Base, the autodcocs, the three vehicles from Operation Lonestar, the autogyro, FACEME and that is just a quick list.
So? Those items where developed entirely within the Project for their own purposes. Most of the issues I mentioned would not be a problem for something developed entirely in-house - they could presumably developed all the way to production, they could be tested discretely for decades (with the exception of the gyro), and since they did all the engineering and production they could ensure the knowledge and part base without having to make entire government programs disappear.

And for what it is worth, the vast majority of the items you mentioned were either narrative necessities (like fusion) and/or stupid ideas that should not be referenced (like MARS 1). A great many of them were little used in game or never at all, and if/when they WERE used they were generally shown to be bad ideas.

Crap the Stoner system itself falls into the category of not ever really accepted for service.
"Limited production" is a lot different than "not ever really accepted for service". Thousands were made and they were used for decades. But the Stoner wasn't that great of an inclusion for Morrow either.

Also remember the aircraft aren't carrying any fuel accept for a little bit of heavy hydrogen, so they can probably carry a bit more playload.
We don't have any real engineering comparison on the fusion plants other than that they can be used as a more-or-less 1-to-1 replacement for the conventional power systems. Morrow vehicles don't seem to outperform their conventional predecessors, I am not sure why you would assume that you could do that with these vehicles. Remember that your "little bit of heavy hydrogen" has to last a very long time and comes with a lot of shielding.

As for making this equipment disappear that is the easy part-the prototypes would be bought as scrap and listed as destroyed.
That is not my experience with experimental aircraft. They are rarely scrapped, there is almost always more to be learned from them, especially after you have invested so much. Experimental aircraft listed as destroyed were almost always destroyed in testing, not just left to rust into scrap or sold for parts. When they are no longer viable they are stripped down and sent to museums, but relatively few make it that far.

The final decision comes down to the PD.
Sure, that doesn't mean that the arguments against should not be considered.

[cosmicfish]

There has been some discussion about electric drive vs turbines. If the project concentrated on fusion powered electric propulsion I think they probably would have been able to get their electric motors to a similar power to weight ration of a turbine engine. If the fusion/electric drive is weaker then the turbine drives the Project will be operating at a disadvantage. I feel that they would have been able to boost these systems to at least parity with conventional systems for them to deploy them so widely
For clarity, are you talking about jet engines or the types of turbine engines used in modern tanks? The former is doubtful to be replaced by a fusion engine even with the hypothetical systems @kato13 mentioned, the latter is no different than replacing any other gas engine.

[tsofian]

[QUOTE=cosmicfish;66816]I would not rush to statements like that.

Why do you feel I have "rushed" to this? I've been involved with Morrow Project since the 1980s. I've worked closely with engineers from Boeing (it was actually McDonnell Douglas back then) to look over these systems. The weapon systems for the AH-56A were to be built by Emerson Electric. They were designed and developed in St. Louis and would have been built here. I was lucky enough to get a large amount of information on them before Emerson closed their weapons divisions.

As for the disposition of experimental platforms think what happened to the Avro Arrow (every bit of it that wasn't hidden against specific orders was destroyed) The TSR2-two air-frames saved everything else scrapped or used as range targets. Sometimes parts are saved or reused in other cases everything gets scrapped. Sometimes things get donated to museums or sold off. I saw an AH-56A at an Army surplus yard in Times Beach, Missouri in the early 1980s. It was for sale, but sadly no one was available to ask the price and then Times Beach ceased to exist because of dioxin contamination.

[tsofian]

We don't have any real engineering comparison on the fusion plants other than that they can be used as a more-or-less 1-to-1 replacement for the conventional power systems. Morrow vehicles don't seem to outperform their conventional predecessors, I am not sure why you would assume that you could do that with these vehicles. Remember that your "little bit of heavy hydrogen" has to last a very long time and comes with a lot of shielding.

If the Project uses hot fusion there will be need for a lot of thermal shielding, but if they are using cold fusion not so much. If you are worried about the heavy water then almost no shielding is needed. Tritium is a very weak Beta emitter. In fact exit signs have used Tritium for years. The weak Beta could be stopped by nothing more than a 3/4 inch thickness of plexiglass.

[cosmicfish]

Why do you feel I have "rushed" to this?
Because you are suggesting scavenging an air force out of the remains of experimental programs without really giving any reason why it would be worth the effort.

I've been involved with Morrow Project since the 1980s. I've worked closely with engineers from Boeing (it was actually McDonnell Douglas back then) to look over these systems. The weapon systems for the AH-56A were to be built by Emerson Electric. They were designed and developed in St. Louis and would have been built here. I was lucky enough to get a large amount of information on them before Emerson closed their weapons divisions.
I've worked for two different defense contractors and with several more, first on archaic systems and then on research and development. I have seen what goes into these programs, I've seen what happens in the middle, and I've seen what is left at the end. I have never laid hands on these specific aircraft but it would not surprise me if I had laid hands on things that came out of them.

As for the disposition of experimental platforms think what happened to the Avro Arrow (every bit of it that wasn't hidden against specific orders was destroyed) The TSR2-two air-frames saved everything else scrapped or used as range targets. Sometimes parts are saved or reused in other cases everything gets scrapped. Sometimes things get donated to museums or sold off.
And my point is that what you can buy discretely is only a fraction of what is needed to make them work. Once you have invested millions of dollars in a prototype it is amazing how many uses you can find for the whole or for the parts. So how do you (Morrow) sneak in and grab this stuff without it being noticed? Remembering that there is probably no greater level of scrutiny and oversight than with these kinds of prototype systems?

I saw an AH-56A at an Army surplus yard in Times Beach, Missouri in the early 1980s. It was for sale, but sadly no one was available to ask the price and then Times Beach ceased to exist because of dioxin contamination.
If it was flyable, then that is one airframe with no logistical support. Why is that better than just buying a couple of perfectly legal hueys?

[cosmicfish]

If the Project uses hot fusion there will be need for a lot of thermal shielding, but if they are using cold fusion not so much. If you are worried about the heavy water then almost no shielding is needed. Tritium is a very weak Beta emitter. In fact exit signs have used Tritium for years. The weak Beta could be stopped by nothing more than a 3/4 inch thickness of plexiglass.
I am aware, but as I mentioned before the Project seems to insert fusion in place of conventional power systems without noticeably improving or degrading performance, I was just positing a reason why. Perhaps they are on hot fusion, perhaps they are cold but the reactor itself is huge. All I know is that assuming improved performance would seem to contradict canon.

[mmartin798]

If the Project uses hot fusion there will be need for a lot of thermal shielding, but if they are using cold fusion not so much. If you are worried about the heavy water then almost no shielding is needed. Tritium is a very weak Beta emitter. In fact exit signs have used Tritium for years. The weak Beta could be stopped by nothing more than a 3/4 inch thickness of plexiglass.

I beg to differ on this. A D-D reaction produces fast neutrons that would be fatal without shielding at power levels of just 1 Watt. It does not matter if we are talking hot or cold fusion. All that means it the temperatures needed to start the reaction. The products are still the same. Tritium decay is not my major problem about the shielding needed.

[tsofian]

I beg to differ on this. A D-D reaction produces fast neutrons that would be fatal without shielding at power levels of just 1 Watt. It does not matter if we are talking hot or cold fusion. All that means it the temperatures needed to start the reaction. The products are still the same. Tritium decay is not my major problem about the shielding needed.

In this case there is no way that fusion packs will be workable. The amount of shielding needed to deal with fast neutrons is generally fairly heavy. There is also an issue with that material becoming activated by neutron absorption.

http://www.academia.edu/3311242/Calculation_of_Fast_Neutron_Removal_Cross-Sections_for_Different_Shielding_Materials

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1122/ML11229A721.pdf

https://www.osti.gov/opennet/servlets/purl/16291147/16291147.pdf

The final document states "To reduce the
neutron flux from a generator producing 1O to the 10th
neutrons per second to acceptable levels for
limited operation, 12 feet of distance that
included 27 inches of water and 16 inches of
solid concrete block were used."

This is a fairly serious amount of mass. I am not certain what the neutron production rate of the fusion packs would be. Does someone haave an estimate of that available?

[tsofian]

Because you are suggesting scavenging an air force out of the remains of experimental programs without really giving any reason why it would be worth the effort.


I've worked for two different defense contractors and with several more, first on archaic systems and then on research and development. I have seen what goes into these programs, I've seen what happens in the middle, and I've seen what is left at the end. I have never laid hands on these specific aircraft but it would not surprise me if I had laid hands on things that came out of them.


And my point is that what you can buy discretely is only a fraction of what is needed to make them work. Once you have invested millions of dollars in a prototype it is amazing how many uses you can find for the whole or for the parts. So how do you (Morrow) sneak in and grab this stuff without it being noticed? Remembering that there is probably no greater level of scrutiny and oversight than with these kinds of prototype systems?


If it was flyable, then that is one airframe with no logistical support. Why is that better than just buying a couple of perfectly legal hueys?

I suggest them because provide capabilities that few other aircraft provide. The AH-56A is still the most capable compound helicopter ever built. Even in prototype form it far out performed the AH-64. The XV-15 and the XC-142 have not been equaled until the V-22 became operational. And I will admit I just have a soft spot for the CL-84s.

Even 5 years after the war ends I believe that the ONLY source of spare parts the Project can count on it what it has stored or what it can make on its own. To count on anything else is folly. To my mind (and the minds of my Project's planners) this means that every piece of equipment has to be provided with sufficient spare parts to operate it until an infrastructure can be rebuilt that can produce the needed parts from scratch.

Hueys are wonderful, Chinooks are very capable. That being said the Project will need to lay in the exact same amount of spares for these two craft as they would for stand alone machines because they simply can't count on getting the parts after the war. Any place that has Chinooks is likely to catch a nuke. There are lots of private and non military Huey's but even those might be near nuclear targets. Additionally the parts represent the same high value to the post war survivors in the 5 year scenario as they do for the Project and they will have been claimed early on if that was remotely possible. This also doesn't mention that sitting out in the weather for five years won't do most of this material a whole lot of good and it will need to be inspected and possibly remanufactured before it can be life safety rated for use in manned aircraft.

You don't sneak, you publicly buy. Morrow is a huge defense contractor. Hell maybe they bought LTV's VSTOL division and Lockheed's Helicopter Division and just got everything as part of the deal. It is never stated in canon exactly what companies are part of the huge conglomerate that Bruce owns. For all we know they may have been rolling extra air-frames off the prototype production lines and boxing them up as spares for the development process.

For me it comes down to a couple of things, one is equipment that is very capable (at least on paper) All these aircraft are around before 1989. They are all at least as capable if not more so than front line military equipment available at that time. They provide a "signature" Morrow Project feel that enhances story telling. I have found them to be "fun" items that intrigue players and spark their interest in the gaming universe.

[mmartin798]

In this case there is no way that fusion packs will be workable. The amount of shielding needed to deal with fast neutrons is generally fairly heavy. There is also an issue with that material becoming activated by neutron absorption.

http://www.academia.edu/3311242/Calculation_of_Fast_Neutron_Removal_Cross-Sections_for_Different_Shielding_Materials

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1122/ML11229A721.pdf

https://www.osti.gov/opennet/servlets/purl/16291147/16291147.pdf

The final document states "To reduce the
neutron flux from a generator producing 1O to the 10th
neutrons per second to acceptable levels for
limited operation, 12 feet of distance that
included 27 inches of water and 16 inches of
solid concrete block were used."

This is a fairly serious amount of mass. I am not certain what the neutron production rate of the fusion packs would be. Does someone haave an estimate of that available?

1 watt should produce 10 to the 12th neutrons per second for D-D reaction. This is why I have proposed a few hidden underground D-D fusion reactors that capture the He3 from the reaction and use that as fuel for the portable reactors in my game. That does limit the amount of time the portable reactors can used to the rate of He3 production. But since He3 is produced from half of the reactions, it seems somewhat reasonable. He3-He3 produces no neutrons and it is just (relatively) easy to capture power from protons and the heat.

[cosmicfish]

I suggest them because provide capabilities that few other aircraft provide. The AH-56A is still the most capable compound helicopter ever built. Even in prototype form it far out performed the AH-64. The XV-15 and the XC-142 have not been equaled until the V-22 became operational. And I will admit I just have a soft spot for the CL-84s.
How do they meaningfully outperform the other aircraft available in a world where there really are no other aircraft expected to be flying? And what role do you see for the XV-15, when it seats two and can carry perhaps 1500 pounds?

Even 5 years after the war ends I believe that the ONLY source of spare parts the Project can count on it what it has stored or what it can make on its own. To count on anything else is folly. To my mind (and the minds of my Project's planners) this means that every piece of equipment has to be provided with sufficient spare parts to operate it until an infrastructure can be rebuilt that can produce the needed parts from scratch.
I agree. Where I disagree is where you can (pre-war!) get a worthwhile supply of parts and personnel experienced in maintaining and operating the vehicle for prototypes! Even at the time these aircraft were flying, parts were essentially being made on the fly and there were only a handful of people capable of doing real work on them. Is the Project going to create a special factory to churn out parts for these things? Are they going to recruit that crew, bearing mind that most of them are probably poor choices for the Project anyway?

Compare that to a production platform, where stocking the Project's shelves takes up little resources and you can recruit flight crews who are the people you want and not just "the only show in town."

And in case it was not obvious, I agree that post-war you cannot count on supplies, my point is that getting everything pre-war is already hard enough without making it harder.

You don't sneak, you publicly buy. Morrow is a huge defense contractor. Hell maybe they bought LTV's VSTOL division and Lockheed's Helicopter Division and just got everything as part of the deal. It is never stated in canon exactly what companies are part of the huge conglomerate that Bruce owns. For all we know they may have been rolling extra air-frames off the prototype production lines and boxing them up as spares for the development process.
And yet we still have V-150's and Stoners and flamethrowers in the official list of gear? They can roll off all the extra airframes they want, but doesn't that seem like a big expenditure of Morrow resources for a handful of marginally (on paper) superior aircraft? And how are they going to continue all the developmental work on these aircraft to get them to the point where they can be used for continuous operations? The US government has Area 51, but Morrow doesn't, and it won't take long before unauthorized eyes are going to take note of these aircraft being test-flown.

For me it comes down to a couple of things, one is equipment that is very capable (at least on paper).
And that is a big chunk of the point. On paper. Most of these aircraft had only a handful of flights, there were a huge number of unanswered questions and each one is a gamble. If you are going to take those gambles, there better be a pretty big advantage, and considering that the assumption is that Morrow is the only real functioning air power anyway ANY aircraft is going to be a massive asset. To me it's like buying 30-round magazines from a questionable manufacturer for $200 when you can get 27-round magazines from a reliable supplier for $20 - the small advantage is not worth the cost or risk.

They provide a "signature" Morrow Project feel that enhances story telling. I have found them to be "fun" items that intrigue players and spark their interest in the gaming universe.
I have always had an opposite reaction from players with the more "fun" items. I have never seen anyone look at MARS 1 or the Airscout and not say "that's stupid". There are some unique items that are essential to the game or are an abstraction for dealing with stuff no one wanted to spend time on anyway, but a lot of the weapon and vehicle selections are pretty impractical and some are outright dumb, and I don't see a new reason to add new items to that list.

[tsofian]

And what role do you see for the XV-15, when it seats two and can carry perhaps 1500 pounds?

Liaison air ambulance

And in case it was not obvious, I agree that post-war you cannot count on supplies, my point is that getting everything pre-war is already hard enough without making it harder.


And yet we still have V-150's and Stoners and flamethrowers in the official list of gear? They can roll off all the extra airframes they want, but doesn't that seem like a big expenditure of Morrow resources for a handful of marginally (on paper) superior aircraft?

EVERYTHING IS ON PAPER. If in my fictional world my fictional project planners go a different way than your fictional project planners because my fictional morrow industries had fictional resourses that your fictional one did not I really think it's ok. Your fictional planners are conservative. For the most part mine are as well. That being said mine also decided that if possible they would get some riskier more cutting edge gear as well.

They don't have to keep the flight test programs secret. Sikorsky ran the S-67 Blackhawk program in the open for years. Heck morrow might be under a NASA contract or a Darpa one.



I have always had an oppositloope reaction from players with the more "fun" items. I have never seen anyone look at MARS 1 or the Airscout and not say "that's stupid". There are some unique items that are essential to the game or are an abstraction for dealing with stuff no one wanted to spend time on anyway, but a lot of the weapon and vehicle selections are pretty impractical and some are outright dumb, and I don't see a new reason to add new items to that list.[/QUOTE]

I have had good luck with airscouts. We had a team of four scouts and eight hummers to tow and support them and it worked very well.

As I started off ymmv

[ArmySGT.]

Airwolf (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwolf_(helicopter))

v=l8syGlAMTKA

[kato13]

Airwolf

I loved Airwolf. I even turned in 20 or so sheets of extra credit in my Drafting class of the schematic drawings from the opening credits. I painstakingly drew them from paused images.

Here are some modern thoughts on how Airwolf might look today. (From Deviant Art)

[tsofian]

Adding mass is easy. That is what depleted uranium is all about and it used to be used for the purpose of balancing aircraft regularly. Not sure if it still is but during the 80s it was a pretty common practice. Of course the missing mass could be used for something mission related like armor or such. The issues with engines further out can be dealt with by moving the electric motors or assuming that the Project has better electric motors.

This is where things can get a little off. There is an electric motor that can be stacked to provide 300 kW continuous to the rotor in place of the C20R. It would have a length of 540 mm, diameter of about 245 mm and a total mass of 129 kg. Add in the (3rd edition) manportable 20MW reactor at 15kg and you have 145 kg give or take fully fueled. The non-fusion MD500/520 carries 183kg of fuel in addition to the 78.5 kg of the engine for about 260 kg. The two fuel cells of the MD500 are under the floor more or less centered around the rotor. Assuming the reactor can fit inside the space as the fuel cells, we will still have to add more weights to the front of the MD500 for load and balance.

This is doable in the MD500 case, but the electric motors will tend to be heavier and smaller than the ones they replace and the reactor, assuming 20MW sufficient, will be lighter than the fuel. This will be a problem with planes with engines mounted far out on the wings. This will increase the moment of inertia and will impact handling.

So the takeaway is that center line drive trains should be easy to convert with little impact to the flight characteristics. Anything with the engine further out on the wing and you will have some slower turn and roll.

[tsofian]

Adding mass is easy. That is what depleted uranium is all about and it used to be used for the purpose of balancing aircraft regularly. Not sure if it still is but during the 80s it was a pretty common practice. Of course the missing mass could be used for something mission related like armor or such. The issues with engines further out can be dealt with by moving the electric motors or assuming that the Project has better electric motors.

This is where things can get a little off. There is an electric motor that can be stacked to provide 300 kW continuous to the rotor in place of the C20R. It would have a length of 540 mm, diameter of about 245 mm and a total mass of 129 kg. Add in the (3rd edition) manportable 20MW reactor at 15kg and you have 145 kg give or take fully fueled. The non-fusion MD500/520 carries 183kg of fuel in addition to the 78.5 kg of the engine for about 260 kg. The two fuel cells of the MD500 are under the floor more or less centered around the rotor. Assuming the reactor can fit inside the space as the fuel cells, we will still have to add more weights to the front of the MD500 for load and balance.

This is doable in the MD500 case, but the electric motors will tend to be heavier and smaller than the ones they replace and the reactor, assuming 20MW sufficient, will be lighter than the fuel. This will be a problem with planes with engines mounted far out on the wings. This will increase the moment of inertia and will impact handling.

So the takeaway is that center line drive trains should be easy to convert with little impact to the flight characteristics. Anything with the engine further out on the wing and you will have some slower turn and roll.

[ArmySGT.]

AT-6 Wolvernine COIN / CAS war plane (http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/08/18/meet-wolverine-wwii-style-with-state-art-tech.html).

<script type="text/javascript" src="//video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5544203479001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="//video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>

[ArmySGT.]

This is sooooooooo Morrow Industries subsidiary.

Flugwerk (http://www.skandalshirt.com/Flugwerk/html/page.php?GID=19&SID=4)

A German company is building FW-190 parts kits to repair or rebuild....even in some cases, a new airframe.


FW-190 and Buker 131B

Something to think about for Atlantis Project.