![]() |
![]() |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Would armed Chinooks reappear in the Twilight War? Just Curious
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cB-6BSHJws http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WttpWwcSjy4 http://gunsagogo.org/ http://www.redstone.army.mil/history...unsagogo2.html
__________________
aka shrike6 |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
or ran into some modern air defense artillery/SAMs.
__________________
I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like... victory. Someday this war's gonna end... |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Or if they needed some ready-made ground shelters -- just line the insides and outsides with sandbags, wood, and scrap metal...
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
aka shrike6 |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The first 6-8 months of the Twilight War, there would be (pardon the term) an orgasm of air power. Then it will begin to taper off as aircraft are destroyed, older aircraft are pressed back into service and eventually also destroyed, and eventually the virtual impossibility of getting oil anywhere without the tankers being sunk will paralyze air forces. The November Nuclear Strikes will just be the coup de grace for air power in T2K. There will be isolated places where some aircraft are functioning, but it's more likely that it will be a Cessna than a Raptor, more likely a Robinson than a Chinook.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
aka shrike6 |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048 https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thats I was thinking was low intensity conflict or wolf in sheeps clothing escort like they did in Nam. Only a moron would use one against 1st and 2nd line gunships. Did anybody actually read what I put up there? Just curious.
__________________
aka shrike6 Last edited by Brian S; 05-04-2009 at 08:55 PM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Given what I have seen recently (Apache shoot down rates in Iraq) I feel that all helicopters would have had atrocious casualty rates during all phases of the war. I honestly think that late in the war use for transport of key supplies would overshadow use for combat. Transport helicopters would be irreplaceable assets and as a commander I would not risk them in combat unless I felt they were relatively safe from ADA and would provide a significant combat advantage.
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I agree with Kato. I think that from 1998 to 2000 in T2K remaining operations Chinooks (while certainly festooned with door guns) would be kept well away from combat situations by commanders.
__________________
![]() |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'd say they would be used for more unique operations.
Remember, they are an asset, but also the materials they would need would also be a scarce asset, hydraulic fluid, fuel and consumable as well as common maintenance items would be well husbanded resources. The insertion of a covert team into enemy controled territory would be a one. Or using the helos again to land a platoon or company of troops to secure an oil facility would be a good risk. And even using such a craft as a SAR could be a good use. More like a rescue vessel from a RP. Another, the transport of personel or material across say, the arctic would be a good use. The key to it however is the materials needed to keep it running.
__________________
"God bless America, the land of the free, but only so long as it remains the home of the brave." |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The prime year 2000 helicopter example has to be Krakows.
It's in virtually mint condition, more weapons and ammo than it can carry, but never flies because it's just too valuable to risk ANYTHING happening to it. The same could be said for virtually all aircraft, rotary or fixed wing. Come to think about it, there's probably some ground and sea assets that fall into the same category... |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
any thing and everything would be pressed into action -depending on the situation in the AO.
Sure - a Chinook wouldnt be sacrificed needlessly against the adversaries purpose built attack planes etc . But I adhere to the theory that if organization and command chain is kept ,adapting and improvising will recieve merit .Cessnas will be used for scouting and spotting ,and if nothing else is available - Cessnas will be used to try and shoot down the Cessnas etc . There have been many an improvised airforce in history : Cuban revolutionaries under Castro and Cienfuegos Sri Lankan Rebels in Tamil areas Israeli planes in 1947-1948 Bosniak planes in Bosnia in the early 1990s and more that I cant recall of the top of my head . The more sophisticated the system ,the poorer operational stability in terms of T2K.I.e gazillion dollar modern stuff quickly goes down - older tech with cruder parts survive longer . In any case - lack of good aviation fuel along with any number of other materials and parts will end modern air power and usher in a new era of prop engined death crates with machineguns and smal GP bombs as main armament.. all imho -of course Last edited by headquarters; 05-05-2009 at 05:51 AM. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Yep, ain't life in 2000 grand! You've got what everyone wants and fears but can't use it just in case your mechanic forgot to tighten that one critical nut properly.
:/ |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
![]() |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
(I'll note that I see the supply situation as being worse than canon generally suggests) |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Well, in my opinion, one point commonly forgotten in the T2K background is the availability of light civilian aircraft. I know that I'm going a little off thread here...but taking as example old and proven planes like the Cessna 152 or 172, series etc. we'll have less electronic devices and less mechanical complexity than in our present-day cars. Airports availability will be a minor problem for this type of planes (one only needs to see some of the air strips used in South America or Africa) and some of them, depending of their prewar role, could be equipped with floating devices or skies.
They would be worth its weight in gold and their owners would use them accordingly, keeping the risks at minimum. That's specially true if taking into account their extreme vulnerability to small arms fire at low altitude. These type of planes, for example, would be key pieces in large territories with low density of military units and isolated population areas. Of course, fuel would be still a problem. But they have a low fuel consumption and less maintenance requirements (and less electronics) than other heavier aircraft. And the basics of flying are easy to learn with these planes, being easier for a pilot to instruct an apprentice. Good reasons to try to keep them flying in the Twilight world. Among their normal roles, and depending of their load capacity, we could find: the light transport of critical materials (spare parts, medicines...) or people (technicians, doctors, an injured or sick person...), air mail, observation (location of marauder bands or refugees, monitoring the direction of a dangerous forest fire). Although their vulnerability, other, more dangerous roles are possible. Forward observer, target signalling with rockets...the Cessna Skymaster is a good example of these types of mission (do you remember "BAT 21"?) .
__________________
L'Argonauta, rol en català |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
![]() |
#24
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Bases, which don't have to worry about having the things around, would be more likely to have SAMs, but they are still one-trick ponies waiting for an unlikely show, so I don't see them being that well maintained even by units that do have still have them. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I always thought the game was badly supported by GDW in terms of aircraft - why did we need stats for a Galaxy and a Starlifter in the Nautical Aviation book - surely players in both T2K and Merc are more likely to run into a cessna than them? I'd the same issue with the US vehicle guide in particular - surely they could have given stats for something more useful than a laser AA gun that there were only ever a handful of in the game world. Paul, I can't remember, have you civvy light aircraft stats on your site?
__________________
Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one bird. |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#30
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
You seem to be right Paul. I should have researched first. Clutter from ground heat seems to confuse the seeker. In "CotK" Clancy rectified that by having it be night and winter as well as having having the targets be heated and above ground. The scenarios where they would be useful would be few, but I still see commanders holding on to them.
|
![]() |
Tags |
aircraft |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests) | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AT Guns | Raellus | Twilight 2000 Forum | 55 | 07-01-2009 06:23 PM |
Twilight Today or Twilight 2009 if you will... | General Pain | Twilight 2000 Forum | 17 | 06-27-2009 03:22 PM |
What happened to all those guns? | Jason | Twilight 2000 Forum | 2 | 12-22-2008 05:05 AM |
Sub Machine guns | Brother in Arms | Twilight 2000 Forum | 30 | 12-04-2008 01:17 PM |
Large Calibre Guns - are they being used? | kato13 | Twilight 2000 Forum | 0 | 09-10-2008 01:46 AM |