Land Mines

[Swiftbrook]

Originally posted with the picture. Didn't see this thread:

It looks like you are describing a claymore mine. A gauss weapon "generates an electromagnetic field along the length of the barrel, which accelerates a 4mm, 4-gram needle bullet to velocities of 15000 meters per second." Since the mine doesn't have a barrel or a power source, it can't accelerate the needles.

It is exactly a hightech claymore, instead of explosive and ball bearings, it has needle rounds and small one shot cartridge type gauss mortars that disintegrate upon firing, 300 of them with a power source etc. .

For all the discussion, this mine just doesn't have a Gauss look and feel.


-Swiftbrook

 

[Andrew Boulton]

I'm not convinced the extra cost & complexity would get you a better result than a basic claymore.

 

[samuelvss]

My rework and alternatives.

A couple of things. A claymore is much cheaper and much simpler. I love 'em. Even have a useful anti-armor function (What, no more sights on your T-80? o: So sad. TC now a colander? :toast: Even sadder. Aiming to hit the sights and TC on a moving tank, black art that…. I digress.)

To make this thing pass even the loosest of tech assumptions, I would propose a few mods and alternatives:

1. Not the hundreds of darts you propose, but dozens, 120 to be exact. The penetration from a gauss rifle is achieved by the energy and the length of the coil. A 4cm barrel just doesn’t achieve what a full gauss rifle does, SO the thing is larger than you propose. Instead of a 4 cm barrel, each has a 20 cm barrel, and see 4, below.

2. It is "fed" by 4 gauss rifle mags that plug in, and lend their batteries, but not their needles.

3. The needles achieve their "oomph" by being somewhat lighter, thus with lots of energy that bleeds quickly: analogous to the plastic bullet rounds of the M16 (deadly at 2m, need for eye protection at 20m, useful (barely) only for drawing fire at 200m); in this case, deadly to 100m, but essentially useless past it.

4. The sacrificial gauss barrels are a secondary propellant to the sheet of explosive (ala claymore) behind it: While the needles are being shot down the barrel, hence spun and stabilized, the barrels are being shot forward at an additional 2,400 m/s. The accuracy is somewhat affected, but this does not disturb the desired “shotgun” effect, and achieves gauss-rifleesque penetration at a fraction of the weight of, say, 120 gauss rifle barrels.

5. The dimensions ( achieve the 3D6 plus autofire bonus) are 215 mm wide at one end, 430 mm wide at the other, 250mm deep, and 125 mm high. The mags plug in the sides of the back, and add to this width in the back, such that loaded it is 430 mm wide in the rear as well.

6. The other version of this is the “autofire special,” which has similar dimensions, costs twice as much, weighs 3 times as much, but actually fires the rounds (400 of ‘em) from 10 gauss rifle mags in one combat round; it is a little bulkier to set up, as the 10 somewhat-more-robust barrels have to have the mags plugged into them, ending up sticking up both above and below around the back . There is a somewhat more robust stand for this. The barrels are cheaper, but the fixture can still be reloaded a total of 2D6 +4 times, making it a favorite. Unlike the cheaper version, this does not get the autofire bonus. It is wildly popular with troops for setting up ambushes or defenses, having no backblast. Gauss mags that have been prepared, can be put into “clips” of 5, allowing it to be reloaded in one combat round; mags so loaded can be (permanently) broken out of the clips for use in gauss rifles at no time penalty. Another bonus of the “autofire special” is that it sounds like another 10 troopers unloading, so adds to the suppressive effect.

7. The “ambush special” is similar to the “autofire special,” but uses only 4 mags, and only covers a 15 degree arc. These are useful for flank emplacements in ambushes to sweep a very defined kill zone from close in, or in defensive positions to achieve something like a “final protective line.” Their costs, weight and widths are 50% of the “autofire special.” Reloading is similar, but uses 2 magazine clips; tactically, they are typically not reloaded while in contact.

My .02Cr

 

[Dragoner]

I'm not convinced the extra cost & complexity would get you a better result than a basic claymore.

A claymore is worthless in game terms by TL12.

Originally posted with the picture. Didn't see this thread:




For all the discussion, this mine just doesn't have a Gauss look and feel.


-Swiftbrook

Gauss is just a fancy word for magnetic levitation. This is just a directional mine that throws shrapnel, eg gauss rounds or darts at high enough velocity to penetrate CA/BD.

 

[Dragoner]

A couple of things. A claymore is much cheaper and much simpler. I love 'em. Even have a useful anti-armor function (What, no more sights on your T-80? o: So sad. TC now a colander? :toast: Even sadder. Aiming to hit the sights and TC on a moving tank, black art that…. I digress.)

To make this thing pass even the loosest of tech assumptions, I would propose a few mods and alternatives:

1. Not the hundreds of darts you propose, but dozens, 120 to be exact. The penetration from a gauss rifle is achieved by the energy and the length of the coil. A 4cm barrel just doesn’t achieve what a full gauss rifle does, SO the thing is larger than you propose. Instead of a 4 cm barrel, each has a 20 cm barrel, and see 4, below.


3. The needles achieve their "oomph" by being somewhat lighter, thus with lots of energy that bleeds quickly: analogous to the plastic bullet rounds of the M16 (deadly at 2m, need for eye protection at 20m, useful (barely) only for drawing fire at 200m); in this case, deadly to 100m, but essentially useless past it.


My .02Cr

IIRC, from the claymore wiki, it costs $119, so this is only moderately more expensive. As per complexity, it's not complex by TL12. If one looks at the jump in technology, in electronics from ww2 to now, say two TL jumps, they are conservatively 10% of the size they once were. To go from now until TL12 that is double the advance, so electronics are realistically going to be about 1% the size they are now and most likely a 1000% more efficient. So components, power supply, no problem as far as I can see. As to the barrel length of a gauss rifle, I'm leerly to say it's length is to impart velocity versus adding spin for stabilization, from what I have seen, the gauss or rail gun technology dumps most of it's power in at the initial point and many of the smaller versions have very short barrels. That being said, the effective range of the mine's darts or rounds is less than one tenth a gauss rifle's, nor is there a need for accuracy, so it essentially dumps it's power in, fires the rounds and destructs in the process. Something I think would be designed in as well, so it couldn't be reloaded by the enemy, also I would say the GDM's rounds don't match gauss rifle rounds as to not be interchangeable. A claymore has 780 ball bearings, so I dropped the amount considerably to 300. Your suggestions are great and would be good for more advanced or developed weapons, for this I am just making it as simple as a regular claymore is my idea.

What I would add to this as an accessory, would be a small tripod that can adjust (rotate) to fire for the greatest effect.

 

[McPerth]

They're just as disposable.

The added benefits are:

• lack of Smoke.

Aside from lack of smoke, there would neither be not noise nor light flash (at night). What I'm not so sure is about that being an advantage.

Mines being AFAIK mostly defensive devices, and mainly for prepared positions, I'm not sure it's so important to keep stealthy, as you asume the enemy knows your position. The lack of smoke, noise and flash means also (IMO) the lack of warning effect they might have, while little benefit is obtained from it.

Even in an ambush situation, where you use the directional mines to set up the ambush, I see no great benefit about them to be stealthy, unless you believe you can pick the advancing enemy soldiers one by one with them, but if you believe you can do that, maybe you don't need the mines, as one sniper may be quite more efficient.

 

[aramis]

Aside from lack of smoke, there would neither be not noise nor light flash (at night). What I'm not so sure is about that being an advantage.

Mines being AFAIK mostly defensive devices, and mainly for prepared positions, I'm not sure it's so important to keep stealthy, as you asume the enemy knows your position. The lack of smoke, noise and flash means also (IMO) the lack of warning effect they might have, while little benefit is obtained from it.

Even in an ambush situation, where you use the directional mines to set up the ambush, I see no great benefit about them to be stealthy, unless you believe you can pick the advancing enemy soldiers one by one with them, but if you believe you can do that, maybe you don't need the mines, as one sniper may be quite more efficient.

When you melt down the coils, yes, you DO get a flash. And for maximum force options, you'll run it to the maximum...

And there will be a noise. Not a "BOOM!" but definitely a "Whump!", from several sources, not the least of which is the casing being pushed back by the equal and opposite reaction, and the transfer through the ground spikes.

 

[samuelvss]

A claymore is worthless in game terms by TL12.

No. It can still do what it ever did. If everyone at TL12 is running around in CA/BD 24/7, then you reduced effects. Firstly, I don't think they all are in all military/police/security units. I think the teeth get them, but the tail may not. Nonetheless, let's look at reduced effects. Get your BD-equipped trooper 10m from a multi-claymore ambush, and you have shredded optics, cables, and joints. Is he dead? No, anymore than the T-90 is dead without sights. Incidentally, claymores are a lot more effective in vacuum.

Also, however, with about 8,000 m/s to play with, and different projectiles (smaller/harder/denser), the performance could be upped considerably at higher tech levels. Remember what it was originally designed to penetrate: shirts and flesh. Diddle with the explosive/projectile ratio does a lot for penetration. Compared to batteries, combat armor and the like, C-4 is pretty cheap.

IIRC, from the claymore wiki, it costs $119, so this is only moderately more expensive.

Point taken, but I'll concede only that they may be within an order of magnitude, however. The $119 presumably covers the picture claymore "kit;" it includes the reusable clacker and tester. You can order just the mines in bulk IIRC (different DODAC [sp?]). I think comparing credits and 2011 dollars is not a good one-to-one. That said, the mine itself could likely be made in China for about $20. A field expedient of roughly 50% of the efficacy, less than that.

 

[Enoki]

Thinking about this, I think I'd opt for another cheaper alternative. That would be a mine that is hand or machine scatterable and basically looks exactly like say a small rock or some other naturally occuring local thing that commonly lies on the ground. Step on the mine and it takes your foot and the bottom half of your leg off with a semi-shaped charge / linear charge that directs the explosion up in the direction of the pressure exerted on it.

You can't visually detect these with any ease. They will fool an IR sensor or explosives sniffer. You use them alot like caltrops. Just scatter them where you want to deny approach and you are good to go.....

 

[Dragoner]

No. It can still do what it ever did. If everyone at TL12 is running around in CA/BD 24/7, then you reduced effects. Firstly, I don't think they all are in all military/police/security units. I think the teeth get them, but the tail may not. Nonetheless, let's look at reduced effects. Get your BD-equipped trooper 10m from a multi-claymore ambush, and you have shredded optics, cables, and joints. Is he dead? No, anymore than the T-90 is dead without sights. Incidentally, claymores are a lot more effective in vacuum.

Also, however, with about 8,000 m/s to play with, and different projectiles (smaller/harder/denser), the performance could be upped considerably at higher tech levels. Remember what it was originally designed to penetrate: shirts and flesh. Diddle with the explosive/projectile ratio does a lot for penetration. Compared to batteries, combat armor and the like, C-4 is pretty cheap.

Thing is, none of that is covered in Book 4, which this mine is made off of, regular mines (or mortar rounds to be exact, if one was to use the Hand Grenade rules, that's the LAG Flechette values or -5) use RAM grenade HE rules at -2, which are ineffective against CA/BD (for the most part), which by using the Gauss column, it's a lot more effective. For simplicity's sake, you would use one mine, not two if facing second or first line forces, especially with a jump turn around of weeks. I would be leery that a TL6 weapon would be that effective at TL12, for example, sights are hardened, joints and cables armored. As for now, has a T-90 even seen action? IIRC the latest model Sov/Rus armor to see action was the T-72 and those may have very well been monkey models. Also The Imperium has time and money, so a mine that can be left uncharged for a couple hundred of years and then thrown on your handy armorer's hour charger and handed out to the troops is a valuable weapon, more valuable than C4 with a shelf life as it decomposes. Even at $120, the Gauss mine wouldn't change appreciably as it's more the black market price for players that is important.

With house rules everything could be different, but that is another story and complexity works against playability, even if it adds realism. Could Claymores be still in use? Sure, but at some point it would be like taking a crossbow onto today's battlefield or trying to stop an Abrams with a Boys ATR. The Imperium is typically TL12, with max TL15, so I'm trying to work up as much TL12 stuff as I can.

 

[Dragoner]

Thinking about this, I think I'd opt for another cheaper alternative. That would be a mine that is hand or machine scatterable and basically looks exactly like say a small rock or some other naturally occuring local thing that commonly lies on the ground. Step on the mine and it takes your foot and the bottom half of your leg off with a semi-shaped charge / linear charge that directs the explosion up in the direction of the pressure exerted on it.

You can't visually detect these with any ease. They will fool an IR sensor or explosives sniffer. You use them alot like caltrops. Just scatter them where you want to deny approach and you are good to go.....

Submunitions...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-43_Dragontooth

Yes, those I would make as well as the GDM and I have a Directional Plasma Warhead AT plate mine called a "Frisbee" and a mobile "Scurry" mine.

 

[samuelvss]

Submunitions...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-43_Dragontooth

Yes, those I would make as well as the GDM and I have a Directional Plasma Warhead AT plate mine called a "Frisbee" and a mobile "Scurry" mine.

FASCAM, or FAmily of SCAtterable Mines includes submunitions, most of which are not mines, but also mechanical and explosive dispensers.

A toe-popper is meant to penetrate the bottom of the sole. Anything else is wasted weight. Some FASCAM anti-personnel (AP) submunitions shoot out tripwires, then arm, and will fragment. Mines are primarily not killers, but fixers.

A key here, though, is that a directional mine has a different purpose and employment. The most important use for a directional mine is command-detonated, as casualty-producing. Most mines are really meant to be obstacles rather than casualty-producing: they hit a minefield, and they stop. When they stop, you have fixed them, for a while, in time and space and they become easier to hit with your most important casualty-producing weapons, artillery.

In assymetrical warfare, the mine (manufacured or improvised) gives the less-capable insurgent a method of annoying and bleeding. This is why I believe the Imperium would be little interested in mines, as they are primarily defensive in nature, used for holding ground. Directional mines, however, are useful for ambushes as are other mines to a lesser extent.

I can imagine all sorts of mines; the best way probably to play them, however, is just as area denial. "Harry lost a foot, and you can't go there!" OTW, if you play mines comprehensively, then you need to play breaching, detecting and breaching. This gets REALLY complex, even for professionals.

If we have an RPG, though, the chrome is useful. TL disparity changes the efficacy of weapons, yet it does not remove it entirely. A trebuchet (more likely a bevvy of them!) that gets the drop on a Type-S on the pad could do some damage; pro'lly when everyone's asleep because the native are only TL1, and seem friendly! A lucky shot and the turret's jammed

Under the right conditions, a rock can be used to damage an MBT. I won't elaborate here. Does that make it sound tactics to try to do a David and Goliath rematch with one of the T-90's that was in Georgia? Oh heck no! However, technology makes those who possess it complacent.

The we used Montagnard crossbowmen with effect in Vietnam, at reduced but not negligible efficiency.

Sometimes, great TL disparities make for the best chrome. I remain unconvinced that 4cm is a long enough barrel to accelerate and stabilize a needle enough, I think all of our designs were overly optomistic on hit probability. The Claymore itself only had a 50% casualty rate at the optimal 50m; this is why we daisy-chain them.

I once wargamed putting my entire platoon's load (18) out overwatching a single crossroads back in REFORGER 90. We got credit for decimating some poor company from the Berlin Brigade 9 times over. There was also a tank platoon on their flank when they stacked up on the crossroads, also though, poor bast$%ds... The point is that single claymores, though impressive, were not preferred. It's a matter of how many balls over how much area.

 

[DaveChase]

Don't forget morale issues and missdirection use of mines and direction ammuntions (claymores).

Dave Chase

 

[samuelvss]

Don't forget morale issues and missdirection use of mines and direction ammuntions (claymores).

Dave Chase

And scooping the C4 out, one spoonful at a time, to cook rations with....

 

[aramis]

I think comparing credits and 2011 dollars is not a good one-to-one.

The CrImp and the 1977 US $ are about 1977$1:Cr1; this puts it about 2011$4.5:Cr1 to 2011$5:Cr1....

 

[Dragoner]

Most mines are really meant to be obstacles rather than casualty-producing: they hit a minefield, and they stop. When they stop, you have fixed them, for a while, in time and space and they become easier to hit with your most important casualty-producing weapons, artillery.

Ha! Yes, this mirrors a convo I was having in pm with someone concerning mines--

Originally Posted by Dragoner
However, in a greater tactical sense, mines only kill the stupid, what they actually do is to channelize an attack.

Just a snipet that was replied to, more was on preregistered fires and such.

In assymetrical warfare, the mine (manufacured or improvised) gives the less-capable insurgent a method of annoying and bleeding. This is why I believe the Imperium would be little interested in mines, as they are primarily defensive in nature, used for holding ground. Directional mines, however, are useful for ambushes as are other mines to a lesser extent.

The players are most likely to be an insurgent type force as not, at least in character for combat, not an actual unit. The Gauss mine helps them take on superior forces without being armed to the teeth. Also it speaks against them being reusable so as to not be turned.

I can imagine all sorts of mines; the best way probably to play them, however, is just as area denial. "Harry lost a foot, and you can't go there!"

If we have an RPG, though, the chrome is useful.

You must have compliant players, do that without a roll, it would be an argument usually. The Gauss mine does make for chrome, otherwise it's a normal type weapon, and at >50m one does get the evading roll, reducing the hit chance of the mine to 11+.

The we used Montagnard crossbowmen with effect in Vietnam, at reduced but not negligible efficiency.

How much of that is hollywood? Montagnards were shipped surplus US ww2 weapons, which replaced largely French muskets.

I remain unconvinced that 4cm is a long enough barrel to accelerate and stabilize a needle enough, I think all of our designs were overly optomistic on hit probability.

All it has to do is throw out the needle with enough velocity to penetrate armor at 100m, less than one tenth the range of the gauss rifle, and do it only once. As per hit probability, at +50m there is the evading modifier.

 

[samuelvss]

How much of that is hollywood? Montagnards were shipped surplus US ww2 weapons, which replaced largely French muskets.

It was a niche weapon, they had used for hunting, and it had uses on Raids and such that our SF advisors saw. Like many anachronistic holdovers, its utility was different from when used at its original tech level. The 'yards had been using these for decades, and the semi-auto stuff was pretty new. A few sentries were taken out, with a little less noise, and nobody told the Vatican.....

As per hit probability, at +50m there is the evading modifier.

Well, I'm just thinking the original M18A1 claymore has 700-some balls and had a 50% hit probability at 50m. The hit probability is going to be based strictly off of geometry: with less than half projectiles going into the same space, it's hard to get a similar hit probability.

 

[Dragoner]

Well, I'm just thinking the original M18A1 claymore has 700-some balls and had a 50% hit probability at 50m. The hit probability is going to be based strictly off of geometry: with less than half projectiles going into the same space, it's hard to get a similar hit probability.

As it stands, the hit probability at 8+ is 5 in 12, somewhat less than 50% and at 11+ it's 1 in 6, far below 50%. I did suggest a tripod that it could self aim for better hits, but there isn't a real way to figure it into the rules other than +/- 1 this or that which seems clumsy to me.