RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Archive
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-21-2010, 09:20 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,657
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default The return of airpower

Ed the Coastie 05-12-2004, 01:23 AM Okay, let's assume for a moment that the Powers That Be (be it MilGov, CivGov, a New America satrap, or a local strongman with the resources and know-how) gets the bright idea to build a basic, easily-maintained airplane.


Just how possible and/or probable would such a project be? I recall a book by Dean Ing regarding survivalism and including instructions for building a "survival airplane". I can't imagine such a plane being much more complex than, say, a P-51 Mustang...but even something reminiscent of a WWI bi-plane would be relatively easy to build.


Come to think of it...what kind of fuel would such a plane use? IIRC, didn't WWI aircraft use gasoline?

********************

evilmike 05-12-2004, 05:38 AM Actually, a P-51 was a pretty complex machine....you would need factories to produce it (and the parts to maintain it).


Something along the lines of a WW1-style aircraft seems about right....the engines were about the most complicated part of the aircraft, and you could probably jury rig a car engine to do it (IIRC, some of the WW1 fighters USED engines that were initially produced for racecars).


And they would use gas, of course.


Range wouldn't be much......but it beats walking.

********************

ReHerakhte 05-12-2004, 06:04 AM There was a company in the USA I think, a while back that was producing a light plane powered by a Chevy car motor, now I can't remember specifics but I posted something about it way back in the days of the TownHall RPG boards. I have a vague recollection that one of the Challenge mags had a data card for it for use with Merc: 2000 but I could be imagining things. The thing was effective enough to carry light weapons and with a car motor, fuel is not the problem that an AvGas engine is.


I'll have a trawl through my Challenge issues and see if it's there and report back once I find it (or not) unless someone else can remember it?


Cheers,

Kevin

********************

evilmike 05-12-2004, 06:12 AM Hell, IIRC, ultralights use lawnmower engines.

********************

ReHerakhte 05-12-2004, 06:40 AM Found it, bloody thing was in Issue 76, the very last mag in my stack! Typical...


Anyways, here's the name...


Sadler A-22 Light Air Support Aircraft.

Design derived from ultra light and sport aircraft concepts, can be transported by truck and is powered by a V-6 Chevy car motor.

Now I can't recall the exact year that Challenge stopped publication (due to the demise of GDW thanks to T$R's corporate greed) but Issue 76 was published sometime in 1995.

Therefore the A-22 would have been available for the early years of the war or at least as an inspirational item.


Cheers,

Kevin

********************

TiggerCCW UK 05-12-2004, 07:02 AM Any chance of posting the stats for it?

********************

TR 05-12-2004, 07:40 AM Here's some basics of the real world sats for those thinking about doing the game conversion...


(William) Sadler Aircraft Co, Scottcdale AZ.


A-22 Lasa 1989 = 1pCmwM rg; 300hp Chevrolet V-6 pusher. span: 22'0" length: 15'8" load: 1300# v: 190/x/72 range: 300; ff: 10/8/89. POP: 1 [N22AB]. Light-armed, twin-boom surveillance aircraft.


http://www.sadlerair.com/



Until Later


TR

********************

Webstral 05-12-2004, 03:26 PM I think GDW covered the best options in Airlords of the Ozarks. Ultralights don't have any carrying capacity, but their principal purpose is reconnaissance. The engines powering ultralights are nothing special, so alcohol would probably do for short recon flights.


Airships shouldn't be especially hard to construct. The frame could be steel, or maybe aluminum, or maybe even wood if designed and manufactured well. After all, the Nazis manufactured a couple of sucessful aircraft using wood and epoxy for the frame. From a manufacturing standpoint, the toughest part would be the engines.


Handling airships might be a bit more of a challenge. Twilight: 2000 airships would have to be anchored and housed somewhere when not in flight. Building the barns for them would be a challenge for some of the Milgov cantonments. Still, I imagine it could be done if it meant communication with other Milgov (or Civgov) cantonments.


Of course, coming up with the helium might be a bit of a challenge, too. I know that since WW2 getting helium out of the ambient air has become a much cheaper and easier process. But how widespread are the right machines? If Milgov in Colorado wants to field a number of airships, do they have access to the right machines? Naturally, they could go with hydrogen instead of helium. Despite the risk to the crew, the Joint Chiefs might decide that the benefits are worth the risk.


I also don't know how hard it is to manufacture material for the skin of the airship. Again, can Milgov do this?


One advantage Milgov might have in the air is the use of synthetic fuels and even some gasoline and avgas. The Colorado enclave has access to the oil shale deposits of southeastern Wyoming. Though it takes a lot of energy input to get a useful product out of the oil shale, you can distill and refine the products to get the whole range of petroleum products. Lubricants for industry and avgas for airships would give Milgov the means of providing useful support for its outlying cantonments and the means of shipping the products (and personnel).


Anyway, I'm in favor of ultralights and airships being the air power of choice in the years immediately after 2000.


Webstral

********************

ReHerakhte 05-13-2004, 04:56 AM Hey Tigger, drop me a line at clone65@bigpond.com and I'll email you a scan, I'm too lazy to type out all the info that's on the sheet and the scan itself is too big for RPGHost to accept (I don't want to reduce it cos all the detail gets lost, that's what I get for having a dodgy scanner!)


Cheers,

Kevin

********************
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

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 09:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.