MGT Only: 5,000 ton battalion transport

[Brandon C]

This is a revised version of a design I posted in the Planetary invasion ships thread . The BatTrans is for a small-ship universe and really aimed more at raiding than invading.

5,000-ton battalion transport

The battalion transport is intended to carry a force of over 550 marines and their vehicles and provide bombardment support to their mission. It is frequently escorted by two or more destroyers or lighter warships, although it does have good defensive systems. Note that the battalion carried is designed for raiding and short term operations. For longer-term operations, larger army battalions (requiring multiple ships) are used.

The marine raiding battalion has 553 ready troops, with a 20 man HQ platoon in 2 G/Carriers, three line companies (each with 131 marines, 12 G/Carriers and 4 grav tanks), a support company (30 men, 6 G/bombers, 6 G/fighters and 3 G/carriers) and an engineer company (110 men in 10 G/carriers). Sixty replacements are carried in low berths and emergency low berths are available for up to 80 critical casualties.

The battalion transport is capable of 3G acceleration, jump-3 and has a factor 3 power plant. Fuel tankage of 1,667 tons supports one jump-3 and 4 weeks of operation. Thirty tons of fuel are reserved for the small craft. The bridge has holographic controls and is hardened, with three Model 4/fib computers. Electronics include military countermeasures and enhanced signal processing. There are 53 staterooms, 553 barracks 60 low berths and 20 emergency low berths. Teen briefing rooms and 10 armories are also provided. The ship has 50 hardpoints, with a large missile bay (w/1,200 missiles), 20 particle beam barbettes and 28 triple beam laser turrets. Two meson screens and two nuclear dampers are installed. The ship has stealth and armor 4. The ship's small craft include, in full hangars, four 30-ton ship's boats and five 10-ton maintenance pods. 51 G/carriers, 12 grav tanks, 6 G//bombers and 6 G/fighters are carried in bays. Cargo capacity is 198.5 tons.

Crew is a captain, first officer, 3 pilots, 3 navigators, 4 engineers, 58 gunners/screen operators, 4 medics, 13 boat crew, 9 flight mechanics, 553 marines. The ship costs MCr 3,898.

 

[wbyrd]

Okay that is a force to be reckoned with.The g-vehicles will make a rapid insertion a lot easier. and give the force a pretty respectable punch.

 

[Brandon C]

Okay that is a force to be reckoned with.The g-vehicles will make a rapid insertion a lot easier. and give the force a pretty respectable punch.

Yeah, the grav tanks are a pretty good hammer for the force. The support company mixes scout and light artillery functions.

 

[McPerth]

Very nice design. As said in your previous version, a good companion for my own task force to carry the armored tropos...

Some comments, though:

Carrying the tropos in barracks, instead of staterooms saves some money (barracks are 2dton and 0.1 MCr per troop, while staterooms are 4 dton and 0.5 Mcr per two troopers, so you could save about 75 MCr).

If the ship is intended to give direct support to the troops, armor may be too light. While well protected against meson fire, it might lack protection against more conventional weaponry.

 

[Brandon C]

Carrying the tropos in barracks, instead of staterooms saves some money (barracks are 2dton and 0.1 MCr per troop, while staterooms are 4 dton and 0.5 Mcr per two troopers, so you could save about 75 MCr).

What book are barracks in? Mercenary?

If the ship is intended to give direct support to the troops, armor may be too light. While well protected against meson fire, it might lack protection against more conventional weaponry.

I really wanted to, but I just couldn't free up the space for the armor without cutting into ship performance or troops carried.

 

[wbyrd]

What book are barracks in? Mercenary?.

Barracks are in high guard.....they give you more troops per ton, and a lower cost...You might be able to swap out staterooms for barracks to get enough room for those tweaks you wanted...or carry ore troops at the same tonnage.

 

[McPerth]

Barracks are in high guard.....they give you more troops per ton, and a lower cost...You might be able to swap out staterooms for barracks to get enough room for those tweaks you wanted...or carry ore troops at the same tonnage.

MgT:HG, Page 66.

The tonnage needed is the same that shared staterooms (2 dton/trooper), but the cost is quite lower.

 

[Brandon C]

MgT:HG, Page 66.

The tonnage needed is the same that shared staterooms (2 dton/trooper), but the cost is quite lower.

Huh, there it is, right there.

Thanks.

 

[flykiller]

an engineer company (110 men in 10 G/carriers)

what does the engineering company do?

 

[Brandon C]

what does the engineering company do?

Removing obstacles (walls, minefields, etc). with emplaced explosives in a precise manner, as compared to a grav tank just blasting it with a fusion Z gun in a semi-random fashion.

Combat engineers can also construct defensive positions (given proper equipment) but it is unlikely engineers in a raiding/assault force will have the chance to do do.

 

[wbyrd]

Removing obstacles (walls, minefields, etc). with emplaced explosives in a precise manner, as compared to a grav tank just blasting it with a fusion Z gun in a semi-random fashion.

Combat engineers can also construct defensive positions (given proper equipment) but it is unlikely engineers in a raiding/assault force will have the chance to do do.

if anyone ever doubted the combat utility of an engineer they need to talk to a Construction Battalion member..ya know the Seabees

Engineers can make a huge difference in an assault, since most fortifications are designed to resist incoming fire rather nicely....engineers are needed to apply judicious amounts of explosives in proper manner to break them open...

also someone has to set up fuel depots, resupply points, and landing zones....even a grav vehicle has to set down somewhere..and if there is an entire forest where you want to land..someone has to go and clear it.

 

[flykiller]

I'm sure engineers have utility at our tech level. but I just don't see it at tech 10+. if you need that kind of support then naval gunfire should be adequate.

in fact given the nature and extent of traveller naval weapons I see ground troops of any kind having utility only in situations where the naval commander decides the target is not to be destroyed, but taken with only necessary destruction, in fact likely with no unnecessary damage at all. engagements within human habitats surrounded by hostile environments will be common, thus damage must be minimized. the most utilized weapons will be gauss and acr, not fgmp-14 and tac missile.

 

[McPerth]

I'm sure engineers have utility at our tech level. but I just don't see it at tech 10+. if you need that kind of support then naval gunfire should be adequate.

in fact given the nature and extent of traveller naval weapons I see ground troops of any kind having utility only in situations where the naval commander decides the target is not to be destroyed, but taken with only necessary destruction, in fact likely with no unnecessary damage at all. engagements within human habitats surrounded by hostile environments will be common, thus damage must be minimized. the most utilized weapons will be gauss and acr, not fgmp-14 and tac missile.

I agree with you in this: invasions are only conducted when you don't want wanton destruction. And in this missions engineers can be quite useful.

As you say yourself, naval artillery is quite destructive, so cannot be indiscriminately used in ground support (nor even FGMP will, as you state, if you want to conquer something else than irradiated ruins). Engineers, OTOH, can be quite selective (as Brandon and wbyrd say).

Also don't understimate the needs for repairs, be them civilian relief tasks, reparing/engaging a PP (or sensor array, or starport facilities, or whatever can it be) that has been damaged or shut down, etc...

Also remember not all planets are TL 15, and at lower TLs obstacles built by engineers can help. And even at TL 15 bobytraps will be used, explosives must be disarmed, etc...

 

[Condottiere]

I'd send in the drones to set off most booby traps.

Which means that booby traps become more sophisticated that you do need engineers and bomb disposal experts; but you lose momentum, which is one of the goals of placing them.

 

[wbyrd]

I'm sure engineers have utility at our tech level. but I just don't see it at tech 10+. if you need that kind of support then naval gunfire should be adequate.

in fact given the nature and extent of traveller naval weapons I see ground troops of any kind having utility only in situations where the naval commander decides the target is not to be destroyed, but taken with only necessary destruction, in fact likely with no unnecessary damage at all. engagements within human habitats surrounded by hostile environments will be common, thus damage must be minimized. the most utilized weapons will be gauss and acr, not fgmp-14 and tac missile.

Engineers are one of those things you cant get away from.They have been a part of warfare since the first armies took to the field. A fortified city was nearly invulnerable to direct assault..until the sappers/tunnelers got there.

You can largely replace the meat with robots, and automated machinery. But you still need them to handle those situations that require human ingenuity..such as finding a way to neutralize enemy obstacles, fortifications, communications networks.etc...

On the defense they become even more valuable while any architect, or engineer can build an office block, building an office block that can stand up to artillery, orbital bombardment, and who knows what else takes a special skill set.

on a smaller scale, any competent technician can repair or install a communications net..but doing it under enemy fire, while having to defend themselves is a very special skill set.


setting and disarming minefields..and yeah mines are here to stay..the ore advanced the tech, the more advanced the mine. or laying out field fortifications, trenches are another thing that's here to stay..good old solid dirt is a wonderful improvised armor.

in more advanced situations..who sets u the portable nuclear dampeners, and point defense guns. firing positions for anti armor guns, and missile emplacements.

as or the utility of ground forces, and their demise in the face of aerial/orbtal bombardment....

Le May, Bomber Harris, and Some German guy thought the same thing...they could reduce an enemy to the point of surrender by massed bombardment....they were sadly mistaken. The large scale bombardment campaigns had a major impact on warfare..but were not decisive...

While, reduction of war industry/fighting capacity is one thing that orbital bombardment can excel at.Historically the enemy adapts by moving it's vital industry/assets out of the reach of bombers, and big guns.

a few dozen meters of bedrock, and a hundred more of dirt and clay makes for a great bullet stop..Add meson screens, and nuclear dampeners to ground facilities and you can spend all week lobbing ordnance at a deep facility and it just keep on churning out material....

now imagine the same facility protected by not only dirt but bonded superdense armor, and other high tech materials. and lets not even think of a multi million D-ton asteroid of nickle iron....A fleet could hammer at it all day and not destroy it.

A battalion of marines inserted after knocking a hole in the defense net can seize it intact.

Also the main objective of most campaigns against an inhabited planet, is to take with resources, facilities and population intact. So you you need an army. A big one....

Orbiting massive ships, with big guns can be a valuable asset, and can potentially force negotiations, or outright surrender. Which is entirely defendant on the enemy leadership and their control of the populace.

if they refuse to surrender, you have two choices wholesale slaughter, or direct invasion. the wholesale slaughter of millions tends to have negative consequences.such as the other guy deciding your population is fair game.

so your left with direct invasion. which means lots of troops..

 

[mike wightman]

Lots of very dead troops.

Lots of very dead troops and lots of expensive destroyed machinery.

Do you sacrifice tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of your own youth to try an take an enemy planet. Do you gear your economy to producing the replacements for the machinery that will be destroyed?

Or do you establish space superiority (necessary for any invasion attempt) and then start playing drop the rock.

I just wonder if we would get an emergence of champion based warfare...

 

[flykiller]

Do you sacrifice tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of your own youth to try an take an enemy planet.

if naval supremacy has been achieved then how necessary is an invasion?

A fortified city was nearly invulnerable to direct assault..

(shrug) in traveller nothing is invulnerable to direct assault.

Also don't understimate the needs for repairs

'don't. my version of a marine fleet battalion includes naval mechanics, electricians, and computer techs as support, both during and after combat ops, because I envision most marine operations as taking place within populated structures. illustrated this in the "assault on the jefferson davis" thread.

 

[flykiller]

I just wonder if we would get an emergence of champion based warfare...

now there is a grand idea. might work with quite a few cultures.

a new character class - "champion". leads the way in defeating primitive societies in culturally proper ways so that the societies accept their defeat.

 

[Brandon C]

Battledress and FGMPs make sense for troops dropping without vehicles. Supplement 4 lists several battledress variants, such as those mounting missiles or light artillery,

For troops with at least G/carriers, combat armor and gauss rifles are a possibility.

I am leaning to battledress and PGMPs as common, for now.

 

[wbyrd]

Lots of very dead troops.

Lots of very dead troops and lots of expensive destroyed machinery.

Do you sacrifice tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of your own youth to try an take an enemy planet. Do you gear your economy to producing the replacements for the machinery that will be destroyed?

Or do you establish space superiority (necessary for any invasion attempt) and then start playing drop the rock.

I just wonder if we would get an emergence of champion based warfare...

Hmmm...lets see..yeah...History indicates that war is part of human nature..

Drop the rock is called total war. At Traveller tech levels...if the sides get to total war then in the end they both end up in the stone age. So limited war, invasions, and ground combat remain an option.

if naval supremacy has been achieved then how necessary is an invasion?



(shrug) in traveller nothing is invulnerable to direct assault.



'don't. my version of a marine fleet battalion includes naval mechanics, electricians, and computer techs as support, both during and after combat ops, because I envision most marine operations as taking place within populated structures. illustrated this in the "assault on the jefferson davis" thread.

considering that unless you are willing to destroy the enemies cities, and slaughter its population wholesale. The opposition can just hunker down and wait for a relief force...or wait for the enemy to run out of funds/supplies to support it's siege.