Some Interesting Military Data

[DangerousThing]

The trouble level varies. If the aggressor remains alive, he can lie and claim HE's the victim. But, when non-lethality is important, the staff is no better than the sword. And swords have been my weapon of choice for home defense, because the wankers likely to invade my home typically have great fear of swords, reinforced by TV and movies (Esp. Hilander and 3 Musketeers)....

True, but I have to go with the odds.

As for home defense, I'd go with a sword or a shotgun. I have a WW II katana at home.

 

[Piper]

So, if you do not have Striker, you have nothing to work from?

Actually, if you want this level of detail for aerial combat, you need COACC. To incorporate chaff dispensers in MT or Striker, you'd need to extrapolate from the ammunition listings.

 

[Timerover51]

Actually, if you want this level of detail for aerial combat, you need COACC. To incorporate chaff dispensers in MT or Striker, you'd need to extrapolate from the ammunition listings.

I was not talking aerial combat, but straightforward high-altitude anti-aircraft fire using heavier weapons that auto-cannon, such as the German 88mm, the US 90mm, or the British 3.7 inch guns.

 

[Piper]

COACC deals with all phases of aircraft and anti-aircraft combat.

 

[Timerover51]

MegaTraveller at least contains ECM in the computer/sensors section of starship design ... so its use is probably reflected in the combat rules (sorry, but I never ran a MegaTraveller vehicle combat to know for sure). That would be the abstract combat equivalent of a historic detail like this.

I will eventually get to the MegaTraveller ECM ideas, at least those dealing with Tech Level 5 and 6.

Beyond that, the 2D6 roll must (by the nature of the mechanics) reflect a multitude of small differences below the resolution of the game mechanics.

TNE, with its much finer granularity, may also have rules to accommodate a detail like basic vs enhanced radar [ultimately a form of counter-ECM].

Within the basic Classic Traveller rules framework, I might suggest an IMTU rule for a 'bis'-like upgrade to vehicular computers (which also reflects sensors in most interpretations of CT) that allows the computer to perform at one level higher for combat purposes rather than for Jump purposes.
So at TL 5 the Allies upgraded the Model 1 Battle Computers with the new Model 1-eccm Battle Computers to defeat the German Model 1 Battle Computers running an ECM program. [ ... or something like that].

I am not sure why you are mixing fire-control computers with radar. The WW2 counter to ECM measures was to go to a different radar frequency, larger, more focused antenna, and a few other things. It had nothing to do with the computer, which were analog mechanical or electro-mechanical.

And I much prefer using a percentile role for combat results than the highly restrictive 2D6 role.

 

[Timerover51]

COACC deals with all phases of aircraft and anti-aircraft combat.

Could you possibly translate "COACC"? It does not appear in the abbreviations sticky.

 

[mike wightman]

Close Orbit and Airspace Control Command

 

[rancke]

Close Orbit and Aerospace Control Command

I would even go so far as to say Close Orbit and Airspace Control Command. It's a MegaTraveller book.


Hans

 

[Timerover51]

Still looking for a translation of "COACC".

 

[rancke]

Still looking for a translation of "COACC".

Look no further than the two posts right about yours. They both give the full phrase of which COACC is the abbreviation. (Except Mike says 'Aerospace' instead of 'Airspace', which is the correct word). My post includes a link to more information.


Hans

 

[Timerover51]

While I would like to get away from the discussion of bayonets, I came across this account on Project Gutenberg, taken from, REMINISCENCES
OF THE GREAT MUTINY 1857-59, by WILLIAM FORBES-MITCHELL.

A short time back I read an article on sword-blades, reprinted I believe from some English paper. Now, in a war like the Mutiny sword-blades are of the utmost importance to men who depend on them either for taking or preserving life; I will therefore state my own experience, and give opinions on the swords which came under my observation, and I may at once say that I think there is great room for improvement in our blades of Birmingham manufacture. I consider that the swords supplied to our officers, cavalry and artillery, are far inferior as weapons of offence to a really good Oriental tulwâr. Although an infantry man I saw a good deal of sword-practice, because all the men who held the Secundrabâgh and the Begum's Kothee were armed with native tulwârs from the King of Oude's armoury, in addition to their muskets and bayonets, and a large proportion of our men were killed and wounded by sword-cuts.

In the first place, then, for cutting our English regulation swords are too straight; the Eastern curved blade is far more effective as a cutting weapon. Secondly, our English swords are far too blunt, whereas the native swords are as keen in edge as a well-stropped razor. Our steel scabbards again are a mistake for carrying sharp blades; and, in addition to this, I don't think our mounted branches who are armed with swords have proper appliances given to them for sharpening their edges. Even in time of peace, but especially in time of war, more attention ought to be given to this point, and every soldier armed with a sword ought to be supplied with the means of sharpening it, and made to keep it with an edge like a razor. I may mention that this fact was noticed in the wars of the Punjâb, notably at Râmnugger, where our English cavalry with their blunt swords were most unequally matched against the Sikhs with tulwârs so keen of edge that they would split a hair.

I remember reading of a regiment of British cavalry charging a regiment of Sikh cavalry. The latter wore voluminous thick puggries round their heads, which our blunt swords were powerless to cut through, and each horseman had also a buffalo-hide shield slung on his back. They evidently knew that the British swords were blunt and useless, so they kept their horses still and met the British charge by lying flat on their horses' necks,[62] with their heads protected by the thick turban and their backs by the shields; and immediately the British soldiers passed through their ranks the Sikhs swooped round on them and struck them back-handed with their sharp, curved swords, in several instances cutting our cavalry men in two. In one case a British officer, who was killed in the charge I describe, was hewn in two by a back-handed stroke which cut right through an ammunition-pouch, cleaving the pistol-bullets right through the pouch and belt, severing the officer's backbone and cutting his heart in two from behind. It was the same in the Balaclava charge, both with the Heavy and the Light Brigade. Their swords were too straight, and so blunt that they would not cut through the thick coats and sheep-skin caps of the Russians; so that many of our men struck with the hilts at the faces of the enemy, as more effective than attempting to cut with their blunt blades.

In the article on English sword-blades to which I have referred, stress is laid on the superiority of blades of spring steel, tempered so that the tip can be bent round to the hilt without breaking or preventing the blade assuming the straight immediately it is released. Now my observations lead me to consider spring steel to be totally unfitted for a sword-blade. The real Damascus blade that we have all read about, but so few have seen, is as rigid as cast-iron, without any spring whatever,—as rigid as the blade of a razor. The sword-blade which bends is neither good for cut nor thrust, even in the hands of the most expert and powerful swordsman. A blade of spring steel will not cut through the bone; directly it encounters a hard substance, it quivers in the hand and will not cut through. Let any sword-maker in Birmingham try different blades in the hands of an expert swordsman on a green tree of soft wood, and the rigid blade of well-tempered steel will cut four times as deep as the blade of highly tempered spring steel which you can bend into a circle, tip to hilt. My opinion is that the motto of a sword-blade ought to be the same as the Duke of Sutherland's—"Frangas non flectes, Thou mayest break but not bend"; and if blades could be made that would neither break nor bend, so much the better.

I believe that the manufacture of real Damascus steel blades is a lost art. When serving in the Punjâb about thirty years ago, I was well acquainted with an old man in Lahore who had been chief armourer to Runjeet Sing, and he has often told me that the real Damascus blades contained a large percentage of arsenic amalgamated with the steel while the blades were being forged, which greatly added to their hardness, toughness, and strength, preserved the steel from rust, and enabled the blades to be sharpened to a very fine edge. This old man's test for a sword-blade was to get a good-sized fish, newly caught from the river, lay it on a soft, yielding bed,—cotton quilt folded up, or any soft yielding substance,—and the blade that did not cut the fish in two across the thickest part behind the gills, cutting against the scales, at one stroke, was considered of no account whatever. From what I have seen no sword-blade that bends, however sharp it may be, will do that, because the spring in the steel causes the blade to glance off the fish, and the impetus of the cut is lost by the blade quivering in the hand. Nor will any of our straight sword-blades cut a large fish through in this manner; whereas the curved Oriental blade, with a drawing cut, severs it at once, because the curved blade presents much more cutting surface. One revolution of a circular saw cuts much deeper into wood than one stroke of a straight saw, although the length of the straight saw may be equal to the circumference of the circular one. So it is with sword-blades. A stroke from a curved blade, drawn through, cuts far deeper than the stroke from a straight blade.[63]

I will mention one instance at Lucknow that came under my own notice of the force of a sword-cut from a curved sword of rigid steel. There were three brothers of the name of Ready in the Ninety-Third called David, James, and John. They were all powerful, tall men, in the prime of life, and all three had served through the Crimea. David was a sergeant, and his two brothers were privates. When falling in for the assault on the Begum's palace, John Ready took off his Crimean medal and gave it to his brother David, telling him that he felt a presentiment that he would be killed in that attack, and that David had better keep his medal, and send it home to their mother. David tried to reason him out of his fears, but to no purpose. John Ready replied that he had no fear, and his mother might know that he had died doing his duty. Well, the assault took place, and in the inner courts of the palace there was one division held by a regiment of dismounted cavalry, armed with swords as keen as razors, and circular shields, and the party of the Ninety-Third who got into that court were far out-numbered on this occasion, as in fact we were everywhere else. On entering James Ready was attacked by a sowâr armed with sword and shield. Ready's feather bonnet was knocked off, and the sowâr got one cut at him, right over his head, which severed his skull clean in two, the sword cutting right through his neck and half-way down through the breast-bone. John Ready sprang to the assistance of his brother, but too late; and although his bayonet reached the side of his opponent and was driven home with a fatal thrust, in doing so he came within the swoop of the same terrible sword, wielded by the powerful arm of a tall man, and he also was cut right through the left shoulder diagonally across the chest, and his head and right arm were clean severed from the body. The sowâr delivered his stroke of the sword at the same moment that he received the bayonet of John Ready through his heart, and both men fell dead together. David Ready, the sergeant, seized the tulwâr that had killed both his brothers, and used it with terrible effect, cutting off heads of men as if they had been mere heads of cabbage. When the fight was over I examined that sword. It was of ordinary weight, well-balanced, curved about a quarter-circle, as sharp as the sharpest razor, and the blade as rigid as cast-iron. Now, my experience is that none of our very best English swords could have cut like this one. A sword of that quality would cut through a man's skull or thigh-bone without the least quiver, as easily as an ordinary Birmingham blade would cut through a willow.

I may also mention the case of a young officer named Banks, of the Seventh Hussars, who was terribly cut up in charging through a band of Ghâzis. One leg was clean lopped off above the knee, the right arm cut off, the left thigh and left arm both cut through the bone, each wound produced by a single cut from a sharp, curved tulwâr. I don't know if the young fellow got over it;[64] but he was reported to be still alive, and even cheerful when we marched from Lucknow.

In this matter of sword-blades, I have no wish to dogmatise or to pose as an authority; I merely state my observations and opinion, in the hopes that they may lead to experiments being made. But on one point I am positive. The sharpening of our cavalry swords, if still the same as in 1857, receives far too little attention.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Still looking for a translation of "COACC".

*jiggles timerover's account to make sure there's nothing stuck in there*

One thing on the 2D6: it provides a built-in bell curve. If you want most of your rolls to fall in a "normal" range, it's pretty easy to do. Of course, 2D6 isn't very granular, either. But, you can improve it slightly simply by adding more dice.

(2D6 is also handy because you can raid your Yahtzee and Risk games and have enough dice for everybody! No searching for d10 or d20 or d4. )

 

[atpollard]

I am not sure why you are mixing fire-control computers with radar. The WW2 counter to ECM measures was to go to a different radar frequency, larger, more focused antenna, and a few other things. It had nothing to do with the computer, which were analog mechanical or electro-mechanical.

Let me explain my logic:
In Classic Traveller, the Starship combat rules are the closest thing to vehicular combat rules outside of Striker. In the Starship combat rules only six things tend to affect hits and misses:
1. The skill of the shooter
2. The model of the computer
3. The target's anti-missile fire
4. The size of the target
5. Range
6. The 2D6 roll

Of those choices, the Computer Model (TL availability of models) and the anti-missile fire (+1 hit bonus at some specific TL) are the only ones that are affected by TL. Forced (by the game mechanics) to choose between those two, I think that "the computer" reflects the TL difference that you described better than "anti-missile fire" would have.

And I much prefer using a percentile role for combat results than the highly restrictive 2D6 role.

Different tools for different jobs, I guess.
A D100 will support lots and lots of small modifiers for a detail rich simulation, but I personally prefer 2D6 BECAUSE it requires limited modifiers* and I generally don't want to take cross winds or leading a moving target into account when deciding on a "to hit" target number.

*[beyond -1 to +2, "roll 8+ on 2D6" quickly approaches no point bothering to roll ... 83% chance at +3, 92% chance at +4 and 97% chance at +5 or 17% chance at -2, 8% chance at -3, 3% chance at -4]

 

[atpollard]

While I would like to get away from the discussion of bayonets, I came across this account on Project Gutenberg, taken from, REMINISCENCES
OF THE GREAT MUTINY 1857-59, by WILLIAM FORBES-MITCHELL.

Interesting.
Doesn't it point to the effectiveness of even light armor as much as the benefits of a sharp sword over a dull one?

 

[Garyius2003]

Interestingly, at least in my mind, at one time the Market Garden rules called for the use of the bayonet as part of the AO ('arming order').

Market Garden was the US Army rules for use of military in civilian disorder. It is perhaps most famous for the insistence that troops go into the conflict area only after the stocks of the M16s be removed and a sheet metal device installed that literally blocked the ability to switch past semi to auto, and the stocks reinstalled.

The AO required that before the magazines could be inserted the bayonet had to also be installed.

During the most 1990s Los Angles riots the national guard was delayed greatly because ammo and the special parts, as well as shields and riot staves, were at a distant guard facility and a staff officer refused to allow more than one helicopter sortie due to budget concerns on blade replacement. During the first night the guard was deployed they self dropped the bayonet requirement in the field as silly, and self authorized the loading of weapons (AO5).

There was an issue when the active duty general arrived and placed the guard into federal service, and ordered the guard rifles unloaded in accordance with the Market Garden plan. There has not been a US military mutiny in a long time, and this wasn't going to be one, so he and his staff had to not notice some issues with following those orders.

The plan was later changed.

My point is, troops in the field at both close quarters with crowds looting and burning, and under scattered fire in the open areas near the no-go welfare housing complexes, decided in both cases the bayonet was not only not needed, but made their jobs harder to the point they disobeyed orders, and took them off the rifles.

 

[Timerover51]

One thing on the 2D6: it provides a built-in bell curve. If you want most of your rolls to fall in a "normal" range, it's pretty easy to do. Of course, 2D6 isn't very granular, either. But, you can improve it slightly simply by adding more dice.

(2D6 is also handy because you can raid your Yahtzee and Risk games and have enough dice for everybody! No searching for d10 or d20 or d4. )

My bag of dice weighs about 2 pounds, and has dice from D3 to D100, although the largest that I normally use is D30. I have D6 in a wide range of sizes and colors, with the smallest used as turning point markers for the 1898 Janes's rules. The problem with using the D100 is that it is about the size of a golf ball, never stops rolling, and it is a pain to determine what number is showing on top. Nice conversation piece though.

Let me explain my logic:
In Classic Traveller, the Starship combat rules are the closest thing to vehicular combat rules outside of Striker. In the Starship combat rules only six things tend to affect hits and misses:
1. The skill of the shooter
2. The model of the computer
3. The target's anti-missile fire
4. The size of the target
5. Range
6. The 2D6 roll

Of those choices, the Computer Model (TL availability of models) and the anti-missile fire (+1 hit bonus at some specific TL) are the only ones that are affected by TL. Forced (by the game mechanics) to choose between those two, I think that "the computer" reflects the TL difference that you described better than "anti-missile fire" would have.

Thank you for your explanation. That is probably the best that can be done within the confines of the straight game rules.

Different tools for different jobs, I guess.
A D100 will support lots and lots of small modifiers for a detail rich simulation, but I personally prefer 2D6 BECAUSE it requires limited modifiers* and I generally don't want to take cross winds or leading a moving target into account when deciding on a "to hit" target number.

*[beyond -1 to +2, "roll 8+ on 2D6" quickly approaches no point bothering to roll ... 83% chance at +3, 92% chance at +4 and 97% chance at +5 or 17% chance at -2, 8% chance at -3, 3% chance at -4]

Actually, I do not take things like cross winds or leading a moving target into account. One reason for using them is that some of the US Navy's Operational Effectiveness tables that I use have the likely outcomes in percentages, as does some of the data I have on accuracy of air attacks by the 14th Air Force in China in World War 2 and hit probabilities in Korea against point and line targets. The Coast Artillery War Game from the 1912 Edition to the 1922 Edition also uses percentages for hit determination. I also have worked up a table on WW2 Anti-Aircraft Effectiveness in the Pacific in WW2 for both the US and the Japanese Navies where using the percentile dice gives the best fit for the data. Using the percentile dice allows me to use one set of dice to cover outcomes from 4% to 50%, without any need for die modifiers.

Also, I use the combat tables in Don Featherstone's Skirmish Wargaming book for most of my combat, and those are based on percentile die. Using those, I can handle combat ranging from flint daggers to modern infantry weapons, along with taking armor and cover into effect at the same time.

Typically, I use a roll of "00" to indicate something catastrophic has happened. Exactly what depends on the situation.

Edit Note: Thinking of aircraft accuracy against ground targets, I do not remember anything in the Classic or basic MegaTraveller rules for the dropping of various objects from flying vehicles, nor does MegaTraveller have any tables for various types of aerial ordnance.

 

[Piper]

Edit Note: Thinking of aircraft accuracy against ground targets, I do not remember anything in the Classic or basic MegaTraveller rules for the dropping of various objects from flying vehicles, nor does MegaTraveller have any tables for various types of aerial ordnance.

Because these rules are in COACC.

 

[Timerover51]

Because these rules are in COACC.

So, in order to find out what happens when something that is an aerial vehicle or creature drops anything, I need to get COACC, whatever that is? And I assume that the only way to get that is on the MegaTraveller CD ROM, unless I can find one used online?

Edit Note: Hmmm, found something called COACC: Close Orbit and Airspace Control Command (Megatraveller) online at Abe Books right away. I assume that this is what you are referring too?

I might get it as I have a ton of data on bomb damage. Be interesting to compare what they have verses the Real World.

Order for book placed. Should have it sometime next week.

 

[rancke]

So, in order to find out what happens when something that is an aerial vehicle or creature drops anything, I need to get COACC, whatever that is?

You've been told what it is three times so far.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

He has most of us on ignore so he can't read it even when we help him out.