A few points I have noticed.
- Crew, Ships troops (5) are assigned to crew a ship gun/screen and are bunked near it pg-344 troop accom.
G'day Widda. I was going to address the Ships troops organization at some point in this thread. The organization of the Company for Ships Troops seems very light coming out at just 70 members so I'm not sure it would have any bearing on either Imperial Army of Imperial Marine Corps organization both of which I can see being augmented by more specialists such as signalers, medics and drivers/flyers/pilots.
Second and more important to the point I think you're making is that "Ships Troops" don't have to be hired on from the Soldier or Marine careers. In the same way a Ship's Medic or Steward are suitably qualified if they have a certain level in their respective skills Ship's troops can be hired on if they have suitable levels in one of the Soldier or Spacer Skills as required.
- Vehicle maker has the ability to create Tanks - usually direct fire (LOS) thou Armoured units are missing from the armed forces, not Cav.
Here's that American military-centric thing that Traveller does. You and I are familiar with the British organizational model that created a Royal Armoured Corps from the Royal Tank Regiment and maintained a separate Cavalry tradition despite converting cavalry regiments (and some infantry battalions) over to tanks between the world wars. In the US they had the Cavalry Branch which had horse and motorized units right up until their commitment to North Africa in WW2. US practice after this time was to allocate "tanks" to their cavalry forces or convert cavalry units to armored forces.
Where as you and I might see cavalry as light recce forces and armored as heavier forces synonymous with "tanks" the US see cavalry and armored forces as both being tank based (and since the 60's including helicopters).
I have no problem in placing "tank" units under the cavalry branch because I come from a tradition where the cavalry were always mechanized and incorporated tank units from the 30's.
In my term in the Aussie Army (Engineers) we were occasionally relocated by our friends in the Air Force and by those in the Navy. In the OTU if a army unit is shipped to another system for Peace Keeping or what ever, would they be assigned a weapon to crew, and if its a fairly peaceful occupation you could, quite easily, see them getting extensive training in ship board ops. Anything to keep those bored troops occupied, and out of trouble.
I think the Imperial Navy will operate some troop transports and the majority of troops and equipment would be moved by merchant shipping hired or taken up from trade for the purpose.
I think some of what you're asking will depend on if the OTU is a small ship or big ship universe.
- I have created a Laser version of the Vehicle Mount Cannon ( following AT line ) and my question for Armoured Gunners is: how much different would a single laser turret on a tank be from a single laser turret mounted on a ship? This is the same for slug throwers and projectile AT canons.
If the powers that be in the Imperial Armed Forces Cmd who oversee combined arms ops have any clue, they would standardize the weapon systems and have basic troops cross trained for that eventuality.
Having an army unit on board would be much better if they knew how to repair ship dmg, load ship class weapons and/or fight with them.
From an Adventure point of view - if a ship captain wanted to hire on a gunner for his only weapon and have some armed guards for his clandestine cargo drops - he would be better off with a ex navy gunner and an ex army guard - but cost effective - would have to hire ex navy if he wanted one crewman to fit both roles.
My 2 Bob
Widda
Way back in one of the T5 draft documents it seemed to me that the intention was to allow 1ton turrets to be dropped into 1ton weapons mounts on vehicles. So I've been doing that.
There's some over lap in weapon power but I think there would be major engineering differences eg. ship weapons have to have ultra fine adjustment and stabilization due to the ranges involved. Space weapons like lasers wouldn't have to take into account atmospheric interference and scattering.
The principle difference is the range over which Spacers and Soldiers expect to fight. Spacers prepare to, and equip to fight at up to a billion kilometers range (although millions of kilometers is more usual). Soldiers are mostly concerned with hitting things out to the horizon, over the horizon, or orbit. (5000km).
Assuming the powers that be ever have a clue is always risky and there's a whole aspect of the Imperial Army debate on what any higher command looks like or even if there is one. If the Imperium operates like NATO then there will still be a huge variety of weapons systems (good for the megacorps) and procedures although doctrine, organisation and tactics might be standardized.
Having soldiers on board ship that are familiar with running and repairing a ships stops them being ground infantry, grav tankers or anything else and moves them firmly into the space marine camp. Remember we're looking at the careers in the BBB. You could use the Marine career to represent your army or you could make all ships troops as serving Soldier career npcs, but the balance is Soldiers are in an army or fighting force and Marines are special forces serving on a starship.
). That's just a feeling I have, though.
