#1
|
|||
|
|||
World War 2 era landing craft
well since my first ideas for additions to campaigns fell flat here are a few others.
some of the old WW2 ships have found new life. i know for a fact that a few of the Tour bouts used around New York are actually ww2 LCI's (2 have still have patched bullet holes from the war and were used evacuate people from Manhattan on 9/11) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
alot of the landing craft ended up being used as car ferries for river barges and a few countries still use them as landing ships or replenishment ships
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Good stuff thanks. I wonder if the smaller ships could be made from scrapped tankers and such.
My players are caught between just moving back to sailing ships or try to take advantage of some of the technical benefits of the newer designs and such. Wind power is cheap and easy but you just cant move the volume.
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!" TheDarkProphet |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Not that there would be many around post Twilight War but the bigger clipper ships at the end of the Age of Sail could move some pretty impressive tonnages, especially over longer distances where their lack of a fuel load requirement made them more economically efficient than steam powered vessels.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Thats true...I wish someone had stats for ships like that.
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!" TheDarkProphet |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
car ferry
here is somthing you may enjoy the specs for a typical channel cat ferry, im sure they were pressed into service and LSD.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Again, nice find.
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!" TheDarkProphet |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Just wondering
I read somewhere on this site that the four Iowa class battleships had been activated just like IRL.
I was thinking about the USS Alabama, USS Massachussets, and the USS North Carolina. IF things get really squirley, wouldn't the govt reach for ANYTHING that floats and has weapons? If any of those ships needed something rebuilt, I think the Navy dept has all of the specs from WWII when these mighty ships were built. Just my mind drifting down a different path. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
hummm that gives me some good ideas. I'm thinking USS Texas..........
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
A little past the tech normally talked about in this forum ??? |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, once the majority of current naval shipping was on the bottom, the military would probably start scrounging around for whatever was available. However, with most of the older vessels being little more than rusted out hulks, it may not be worth the time and effort to conduct major works. It's likely that any modifications/upgrades would consist of little more than slapping a few anti-air guns and missiles onto existing civilian craft.
By Christmas 1997 the world is in bad shape. Nukes were first used by the Soviets on the 9th of July 1997 (in both China and Europe - both 1.0 and 2.0/2.2). This would undoubtedly have caused world wide panic as the reports of nuclear escalation rolled in across the news services. Many skilled workers, required to operate the shipyards, will have "run for the hills". Some would trickle back in the coming months, but never enough to satisfy demand and even keep up with repairs on existing warships. And then there was the escalation. Version 2.0/2.2 states: Quote:
Quote:
Howling Wilderness has this: Quote:
While not specifically stated anywhere in V1.0, it is therefore not unreasonable to assume some limited strikes were made against US soil prior to the 28th of November 1997. These limited, even surgical attacks would have inflicted damage far beyond their actual physical effects by driving away people from potential target areas and keeping them away. Bear in mind too that the last fleet of US/NATO warships were not sunk until approximately 3 weeks (sometime in June 1997) before the first nuke was used anywhere in the world. It is doubtful, as mentioned here http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2462 that there'd have been any significant headway made into even organising a search for potential warships to rebuild before the panic really set in. One more thing. With no effective enemy naval forces anywhere in the world, what would be the driving force behind such a huge undertaking? Where is the benefit versus cost?
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Probably but not necessarily. The first use of nukes may have been ICBM-launched or medium range missile launched, although I would tend to agree that it is a typo as you would expect the first use of nukes to have been "battlefield nukes" or bomber-deployed. But who knows? Perhaps the first use of nukes was the Soviets launching MIRVs from ICBMs on massed PLA ground forces?
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
your also forgetting Legbreaker that it wasnt the one large massive wave of missiles but a few here and a few there. as it states.
"fearful of a General (massive) strategic exchange, neither side launched so many warheads at once to risk of as convincing the other side that it was all-out attack. neither side wished to cross over Nuclear oblivion in one bold step threshold, so they inched across it, never quite realizing they had already done it till after the fact." (page 28 Ref Manual V.1) it goes on to state that the nukes fell from July till early December. and there was a 2nd smaller exchange in fall/winter '98 this gives those that dont panic time... tiem to possible move resources and items to less tempting target areas, and to try to get head, even if doomed to failure... ever wondered what both CivGov and MilGov use to more the trickle of troops to Europe in mid to late '99? my guess was alot of former rust buckets and anthing else that can float |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Someone brought the point up in the light carrier thread that a lack of fuel would be a serious issue post-TDM. Even if an old warship could be refurbished- an expensive and time-consuming process under the best of circumstances- finding enough fuel to give it any sort of mobility or operational freedom would be extremely difficult, at best.
I like the idea of bringing older ships back to action once the war starts, but as many have pointed out, there's really not that much time until the nuclear exchanges start. Once that happens, some of these old ships would be destroyed, some would remain unfinished as the workers flee (or die), and some would be left without any signicant fuels to get them moving again.
__________________
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 |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
In the east we had the absolute flattening of the Chinese with massive amounts of tactical nukes. In the west they were limted in number and scale, at least in the beginning. Quote:
One nuke alone would be enough to ground all flights (EMP), bring public transport (trains, trucks, buses) to a grinding halt, and send anyone in the cities with a car, motorbike, bicycle, or strong legs into the hills. News reports of continuing strikes throughout the world would keep them there. The exchange in 1998 is almost irrelevant - the damage had already been done. So yes there may have been time to move some resources around, but the manpower is likely to have been lacking. Also, where are you going to move them to? From one potential nuke site to another... Soviet spies and satellites are sure to have been providing updated target information.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#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
|
||||
|
||||
I do tend to agree, but even one surviving through to late November 1997 would have probably been enough for updating targets.
Spies on the ground would have been just as useful too. The internet may have been in it's infancy at the time, however I'm sure there'd have been plenty of BBS's around for "trainspotter" types. This information would have been very useful (after checking for accuracy of course) to those making the targeting decisions. Internet and general computer security was (and still is so I understand) VERY inadequate at the time although I'm sure there'd have been at lease some attempts to minimise publication of such information. The problem is of course that the internet is global, any one country alone can do little. Getting back to the original purpose of this thread, I do see the older vessels which were still maintained and in use being acquired by the military. Landing craft of almost any age would be handy to have when planning operations near water (if only to assist in logistics freeing up more modern designs for combat type roles). Unfortunately it's unlikely that there'd have been any great move to requisition these vessels until relatively late in the game - say mid to late 1997. Getting them, especially the smaller vessels unsuited to ocean travel, from the US to where they're needed (Europe, the middle east and Korea) might prove difficult. If they were collected on the west coast ready for transport to Korea, I can see somebody realising they weren't going to make it across the Pacific and instead sending them up towards Alaska. Who knows, maybe the plan may have been to send them around via the coast anyway but they get sidetracked when the Soviets invade across the strait? These old vessels could be very useful for transporting military units and material up and down the coastline.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
M/V Circle Line VII (ex-LCI (L)-191) Tour Boat for Circle Line Sightseeing M/V Circle Line VIII (ex-LCI (L)-179) Tour Boat for Circle Line Sightseeing M/V Circle Line X (ex-LCI (L)-758) Tour Boat for Circle Line Sightseeing Quote:
M/V Cape Henlopen(ex-USS Buncombe County (LST-510)) Auto Ferry for Cross Sound Ferry Services Inc.; Orient Point, New York (Long Island) Landing Craft Tank (LCT) Outer Island (ex-LCT-203) Dredge and Construction Barge, Bayfield, WI
__________________
"You're damn right, I'm gonna be pissed off! I bought that pig at Pink Floyd's yard sale!" |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
The others I can see being snapped up in about three seconds once the need was established, but this one I think would stay where it is for a while. The arguement would be made by it's owner/operator that it's a vital transportation link for the area. The others are nothing more than tour boats and a dredge (the latter being important, but not enough I would think to save it from requisition unless it had undergone major reworking for it's new role).
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon One of my favorite NPCs was also a downed fighter pilot -- USAF Captain Pamela Wagner, the Twilight War's top-scoring ace with 42 kills. She flew an F-16F Scamp (the version that was in reality only an experimental version of the F-16, with the cranked-arrow wings). The players had been told a lot of stories by the locals about her bravery and intelligence, and they they had heard of Captain Wagner -- they expected to meet some sort of Amazon. She turned out to be a short, pixieish (but tough) blond with short hair and barely over 5 feet tall. She almost got word out about the PC's whereabouts to friendlies after the group managed to steal a functioning A-37, but she got blown out of the sky by a ZSU-30-6 -- she didn't get out that time.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|