RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Morrow Project/ Project Phoenix Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #91  
Old 05-10-2014, 04:35 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 05-10-2014, 05:08 PM
stormlion1's Avatar
stormlion1 stormlion1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Vineland, NJ
Posts: 581
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 05-10-2014, 05:48 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 05-10-2014, 06:29 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Lee
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.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 05-10-2014, 06:58 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 05-20-2014, 09:54 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

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?
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 06-26-2014, 11:19 AM
bobcat bobcat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 409
Default

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.
__________________
the best course of action when all is against you is to slow down and think critically about the situation. this way you are not blindly rushing into an ambush and your mind is doing something useful rather than getting you killed.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 06-26-2014, 04:59 PM
welsh welsh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 49
Default

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).

Last edited by welsh; 06-26-2014 at 05:27 PM. Reason: Added info to the post.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 06-26-2014, 05:38 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

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.

Last edited by kato13; 06-26-2014 at 06:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 06-27-2014, 11:27 AM
welsh welsh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 49
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 06-27-2014, 05:38 PM
LBraden's Avatar
LBraden LBraden is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England
Posts: 150
Default

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.
__________________
Newbie DM/PM/GM
Semi-experienced player

Mostly a sci-fi nut, who plays a few PC games.
I do some technical and vehicle drawings in my native M20 scale. - http://braden1986.deviantart.com/
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 07-12-2014, 05:25 AM
bobcat bobcat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 409
Default

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.
__________________
the best course of action when all is against you is to slow down and think critically about the situation. this way you are not blindly rushing into an ambush and your mind is doing something useful rather than getting you killed.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 09-25-2014, 02:06 AM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

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

Quote:
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-et...brid-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.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 09-25-2014, 08:26 AM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 09-25-2014, 12:11 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

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 .
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 09-25-2014, 12:26 PM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 09-26-2014, 09:06 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

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/d...-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.

Last edited by kato13; 09-26-2014 at 09:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 09-30-2014, 08:06 AM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

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)
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-30-2014, 03:12 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmartin798 View Post
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 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

Last edited by kato13; 09-30-2014 at 03:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 10-07-2014, 10:29 AM
dragoon500ly dragoon500ly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee, USA
Posts: 2,844
Default

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.
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 10-07-2014, 11:41 AM
stormlion1's Avatar
stormlion1 stormlion1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Vineland, NJ
Posts: 581
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 10-07-2014, 12:13 PM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 10-07-2014, 12:31 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

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)





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

Last edited by kato13; 10-07-2014 at 12:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 10-07-2014, 02:21 PM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kato13 View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 10-07-2014, 02:27 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmartin798 View Post
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.

Last edited by kato13; 10-07-2014 at 02:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 10-08-2014, 08:00 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default




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]
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 10-14-2014, 12:11 PM
rcaf_777's Avatar
rcaf_777 rcaf_777 is offline
Staff Headquarter Weinie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Petawawa Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,104
Default

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
__________________
I will not hide. I will not be deterred nor will I be intimidated from my performing my duty, I am a Canadian Soldier.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 11-07-2014, 09:21 AM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kato13 View Post
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 .
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.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 11-07-2014, 01:18 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,572
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

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)

Last edited by kato13; 11-07-2014 at 01:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 11-07-2014, 01:26 PM
mmartin798 mmartin798 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 649
Default

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


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 7 (0 members and 7 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.