Mercenary and Military Unit Tactics
- Thread starter BetterThanLife
- Start date
mbrinkhues
SOC-14 1K
Works for me.
Actually in most systems the Astrin and the Empress are the limit in what you can cram into an APC at a reasonable size. And are not "Stock Vehicles" but T4 and MT both have improved versions of Battledress which would serve just as well as building them. Reasonably comparing Apples to Apples you would be comparing G-Carriers and Grav-Belted infantry in either BD or Combat Armor. The cost is about equal (without including what the troops inside the G-Carrier are wearing.) and they are both from the basic book.
However, the practical differences are 1. the range and 2. how many targets can be engaged at once. The Traveller equivalent of these weapons have equal range for the vehicle mounted system and the Infantry system. You can also, in general get infantry a whole lot closer to the target than you can an APC. Further while that is maximum range, practical range in a built area is about equal. The maximum ranges only really count in nice open fields, and in the Desert. In Traveller most of your combat will not be occurring in nice open deserts or fields.
</font>[/QUOTE]The place where combat takes place is IMHO still debateabel as the idea what tainted is remains debatabel. The same with where a merc unit will operate or not.
As is the usefulness of effective range. After all the 120mm guns of NATO have effective ranges out to 4000m (L11) and they where primarily designed for combat in Europe, they just worked well in the Desert
However in all fairness Mortars have really been obsolete since 1947 when the British developed and deployed the first Counterbattery Radar. The mortar has been reduced to a terrorist weapon fired from within civilian population centers. Counterbattery rounds can be on their way before your mortar rounds land. Though they can be used in a situation where you have Air Supremacy and the other guy can't turn on his radars. However they are cheap, easy to use and easy to carry so they will still be around for a while.
</font>[/QUOTE]Sorry but a artillery radar is not that perfect (having seen a Green Archer in action) even IF you have one around (They are not that common) otherwise ANY artillery would have been obsolete for a long time (They work against Howitzers just as well). And even if you have one, you still need artillery to fire on the mortars. I agree that towed units have limited use but vehicle based units can shoot and scoot.
I am not saying that the ADA vehicle can't shoot anything down. I am saying that they are not and have not proven themselves effective on the modern battlefield. They are ineffective against fast movers. They pretty much have to catch a Helicopter by surprise. When they have been used in combat, they haven't given a good accounting of themselves. (And the Iraqis had scores of modernized ZSUs during Desert Storm and happened to find some more between the two conflicts.) You can put it down to bad training if you like, or improper use of terrain, or whatever, but AAA hasn't really been very effective since WWII and in the modern era AAA has been shown to do more collateral damage to the area it is protecting than to enemy aircraft. The US ditched the SGT York, which shared components with the Gepard, because it wasn't a practical weapon system that didn't hold up well in testing, especially for its cost. Whether the Gepard would work under modern combat conditions has never been tested. Personally I think it will have many of the issues that the Sgt York had and certainly wouldn't be easy to keep in ammo. (It carries about 20 seconds of ammo as I recall.)
</font>[/QUOTE]Actually Sgt York shared absolutely NOTHING with Gepard or any other AA tank. Guns where by the same manufacturer but totally different in making and caliber, radar from an F16, hull was a Pattie (M48 or M60) etc.
Average burst size of Gepard is 20-30 rounds and at least in the 1980s they where considered quite effective by NATO forces.
Question: What upgrades did the Iraqui Shilkas get? What version (there are at least 3 used by the WP plus export variants) where they using initially?
Please remember that the Arabs got mostly dumbed down export variants like the T72S (no missile, no thermal) badly upgraded (NVG instead of Thermal)
But so will a 25mm which has a higher rate of fire. In fact so will a 12.7mm. There is no practical difference for that use between the weapons. (With the exception that a 12.7mm will likely only be able to de-track a tank.) And you can carry significantly more 25mm or 12.7mm ammo in the same amount of space.
</font>[/QUOTE]Do you have a source for 12.7mm (or even 25mm) being abel to reliably destroy tracks? And how good are your chances to live that long? How good is Battledress in running and hitting? IMHO not as good as a track in running and shooting
Actually the Iraqis had SA-12s. Got some more between the two conflicts as I recall as well. (The UN inspection team reported a large supply of SA-12 engines which the Iraqis were using to build ballistic missiles.) I have seen the specs on the SA-12 it doesn't impress me in an Air Defense role. In fact the Iraqis, for Desert Storm had some current (at the time) Hawk systems which were used during Desert Storm. So saying they had no modern systems isn't even close. For Desert Storm they had the latest generation of Soviet equipment and managed to pretty much rearm in the 9 years in between.
</font>[/QUOTE]I'd really like to see a quote for that. The SA-12 used by the east german NVA in 1989 was considered superior to the Patriot of the same time and only the question about spare-part availability kept Germany from ditching Patriot
Same with the HAWK. The original is early 1960s stuff, what version was the Iraq using?
I know that IRAN has HAWK (and used it against the Iraq) and most likely has SA300 (current generation) systems
I seriously doubt anyone would use a SAM engine for a ballistic missile
If you are staying above 5000M you are avoiding shoulder fired SAMs, SA-7, SA-14, Stingers and equivalent. If you have to avoid the bigger stuff you stay on the deck.
</font>[/QUOTE]You also do it to dodge the middle ground like SA-8, Rapier or Roland that have effective heights of 5-6km
Yes it helps, but the loss of turrets and vehicles brewing up on a regular basis under tank fire means that it isn't all that effective. (T-72 and T80 taking M-1 fire, Hellfires and other ordinance.) Challengers, Leopard IIs and M1s might be different, but since M-1s and Challengers that have seen combat don't generally get penetrated in the first place it is difficult to tell how effective that would be. (During Desert Storm the US lost 3 M-1 tanks to enemy action. None due to anti-tank fire.)
And is likely to keep going on. Which was my point. Armor doesn't retain an advantage over the long haul. Anti-Armor weapons vs armor go through cycles where one will do better than the other. And they are generally closely matched. Traveller doesn't maintain this within the rules.
Under what ruleset? Vehicles have never mounted hardpoints to carry starship weapons in any version of Traveller I have seen. (It is one of the definition differences between a small craft and a vehicle.) Further Vehicles don't carry the sensors with the range to detect Starships in Far Orbit and beyond. (The sensor suites have more volume than a Tank.)
</font>[/QUOTE]Doabel in GT and TNE actually. GT has a vehicle that is described as an anti starship vehicle
M113 have never been considered a tank by anyone's standard.
For the "where it is" part you have GPS or INS (the latter works quite well) And for the rest, artillery always was an area weapon not a pinpoint weapon.
Oh and I won't mount a 120mm mortar on a normal truck. The beast has quite a bit of recoil
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
The Hawks were recent versions (In 1991) as they were taken intact from the Kuwaitis.
I did some research and I may have been mistaken about the SA-12 engines. They may have been SA-2 engines. In either event they were imported after the first gulf war.
120mm Mortars have been mounted on Trucks since WWII The British, Germans and Russians all used them during WWII.
Mortars have quite a bit less range and easier to track trajectory than other artillery, making them quite a bit more susceptible to counterbattery fire.
.50 Standard AP ammo will penetrate in excess of 1" of armor plating which is sufficient to cut tracks on armored vehicles. (SLAP is supposed to be more than twice as effective.) (So will any of the LAW style weapons.) As for survivability of such a firing position that would depend on terrain and the actual firing position. (And the ease of locating said firing position.)
You are correct there are newer Guided Mortar shells, I forgot about them as range of mortars has been short enough that ATGM's are more of a concern. Though there is now a 120 mm mortar that does offer a decent range advantage over a Hellfire.
Accuracy of Artillery is actually quite important. While GPS is good, it does require you to sit for a moment to get an accurate reading. (When I was in the Artillery was using 12 digit Grid Coordinates for locating guns, which is within .1 meters or your actual position.) Yes, artillery is an area effect weapon, but you want it to be as accurate as possible after all you don't really want your TOT barrage to miss the crossroads. A minute of an angle is an roughly 3cm at 100m. You are firing several KM away with an artillery barrage.) You may not need to hit the bullseye at that range with artillery but you still need to hit the board. There are lots of measurements involved in firing artillery, Rounding errors already cause issues. Location of the firing unit is one where you have the most control over the measurement.
Battledress troops have stabilized weapons just like armored vehicles do. (In fact in Traveller all troops, not just Battledress troops get the advantage of stabilized weapons, after a certain TL, Rulesystem dependent as to which TL exactly.)
But how do you fit that Grav APC down that 1.5m hallway? (Kind of like the Tiger in Kelly's Heros in the alley. It fit down the alley but couldn't shoot the Sherman behind it because they couldn't rotate the turret.)
I did some research and I may have been mistaken about the SA-12 engines. They may have been SA-2 engines. In either event they were imported after the first gulf war.
120mm Mortars have been mounted on Trucks since WWII The British, Germans and Russians all used them during WWII.
Mortars have quite a bit less range and easier to track trajectory than other artillery, making them quite a bit more susceptible to counterbattery fire.
.50 Standard AP ammo will penetrate in excess of 1" of armor plating which is sufficient to cut tracks on armored vehicles. (SLAP is supposed to be more than twice as effective.) (So will any of the LAW style weapons.) As for survivability of such a firing position that would depend on terrain and the actual firing position. (And the ease of locating said firing position.)
You are correct there are newer Guided Mortar shells, I forgot about them as range of mortars has been short enough that ATGM's are more of a concern. Though there is now a 120 mm mortar that does offer a decent range advantage over a Hellfire.
Accuracy of Artillery is actually quite important. While GPS is good, it does require you to sit for a moment to get an accurate reading. (When I was in the Artillery was using 12 digit Grid Coordinates for locating guns, which is within .1 meters or your actual position.) Yes, artillery is an area effect weapon, but you want it to be as accurate as possible after all you don't really want your TOT barrage to miss the crossroads. A minute of an angle is an roughly 3cm at 100m. You are firing several KM away with an artillery barrage.) You may not need to hit the bullseye at that range with artillery but you still need to hit the board. There are lots of measurements involved in firing artillery, Rounding errors already cause issues. Location of the firing unit is one where you have the most control over the measurement.
Battledress troops have stabilized weapons just like armored vehicles do. (In fact in Traveller all troops, not just Battledress troops get the advantage of stabilized weapons, after a certain TL, Rulesystem dependent as to which TL exactly.)
But how do you fit that Grav APC down that 1.5m hallway? (Kind of like the Tiger in Kelly's Heros in the alley. It fit down the alley but couldn't shoot the Sherman behind it because they couldn't rotate the turret.)
mbrinkhues
SOC-14 1K
I assume "1. Gulf War" is "Desert Shield/Desert Storm" for you, not Iran-Iraq
Thanks for the data on the Hawk. From a quick search the Kuwaities used iHawk without any of the post 1980s refinements (Phase II or better). Basically late 1970s/Early 1980s tech going up against the guys who originally build them
SA-2 Guideline and SA-4 Ganef are quite availabel on the "grey" market nd the SA-4 would indeed make an interesting "cruise missile" with it's Ramjet engines. OTOH that is 1950s or 60s technologies that the US had gone up against in Vietnam and the CIA / INS / NSA / UNCLE / BND / GSD / MI6 / ONI / /<add acronym> had spied out, copied, borrowed and tested for a few decades, not a modern system. The Western equivalent are the Nike-Systems(1)
Towed behind I have seen, mounted in an SdKFz 250/251 "APC" I know at least 81mm. Any pictures from a 120mm firing of a truck? And how did they re-enforce the bedding? Judging by the way a 120mm Brandt dug in it's baseplate I'd say there is quite some stress involved?
That's why I suggested INS as an alternate, the system is continually tracking (but a bit more complex). The beast has a bigger error over time but does not need an alingment. BTW: How long does it take? I have read that modern Self-Propelled Howitzers can do the Stop-6rounds-run number in about 60seconds (PzH 2000)
I once watched the movie with two tankers (one a WWII Panther Commander, one a BW Leopard I commander) and they had some choice comments both on the Tiger as well as on it's commander. Non where nice. It's a movie(2) and SS-Goons are not the same as capabel soldiers.
(1) Nike Ajax - Defending you against nuclear bombers by detonating a nuke! OTOH the Ruskies are quite happy with the idea in missile defence.
(2)A good one ad one of the few WWII in Europe movies (Patton, Navarone/Force 10, Great Escape and BoB are the others) where I do not cheer for the "wrong" side
If vehicles are so useless in urban combat (the basic assumption behind all of your arcology comments), why does the nightly news from Iraq show US patrols as 4 men walking through the city with an armed & armored Humvee driving along side.
(There may actually be more than 4 men in the patrol, but there always seems to be 4 men walking in front of the camera man.)
Why do modern armies deploy vehicles and infantry together in urban environments? The vehicles cannot travel thru alleys or doorways. The weapons on the vehicles are probably available as a 'man portable' squad weapon. Yet there they are. They must serve some purpose.
What is the purpose of a vehicle in modern urban warfare? Why will this purpose be unnecessary in future wars? Please, help me to understand.
(There may actually be more than 4 men in the patrol, but there always seems to be 4 men walking in front of the camera man.)
Why do modern armies deploy vehicles and infantry together in urban environments? The vehicles cannot travel thru alleys or doorways. The weapons on the vehicles are probably available as a 'man portable' squad weapon. Yet there they are. They must serve some purpose.
What is the purpose of a vehicle in modern urban warfare? Why will this purpose be unnecessary in future wars? Please, help me to understand.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I didn't say they were useless in Urban combat. Though they are definitely less useful. They are more vulnerable and they loose most of their advantage. Now put a roof over their heads and their usefulness goes way down.
They serve three purposes in an urban environment. (Notice you see quite a few Hummers but few Bradleys.) (1) They provide rapid transport across the environment. (2) They Provide small arms protection while moving troops across the environment and (3) they provide a crew served weapon as a base of fire for suppression while members of the unit maneuver.
In Traveller at higher tech levels, specifically the tech levels where Grav Belts and Battledress are available. (1) Vehicles are no longer needed to provide rapid transport as the Infantry is just as fast as the vehicle. (2) Battledress, and for that matter Combat Armor, provides equal or better small arms fire protection than a light armored vehicle such as an armored hummer and has the added advantage that heavier weapons will only take out a smaller part of the unit. (3) Gravbelt equipped infantry don't need a vehicle to transport or fire a crew served weapon. (In fact current Infantry don't need the vehicle to mount the Crew Served weapon, they just need it to move it so it can keep up, mounting it is a convenience.) Having the weapon not mounted on the vehicle means you have more flexibility in placing the weapon and if the gunner is WIA/KIA someone else can usually man the weapon. If the vehicle is knocked out then the weapon is more often than not
also disabled. Battledressed troops can, depending on the rule system, even fire most crew served weapons, without a crew on the move.
The Hinterworlds Rambler
SOC-14 5K
For arcology warfare, (and this was an actual part of a recent campaign I was in) I always consider the Judge Dredd "Block War" Model.
In the gigantic high rise arcologies of mega city one, most of the residents are organized into "citi-def" units, loose knit citizen militias (literally Grandma with a grenade launcher in some cases) that peiodically break out into "block mania" where even small precieved slights between arcologies can escalate to open warfare between blocks. In these comics, the Judges (an analog to perhaps Battledress troops) rarely engage these outbreaks inside the blocks, but stick to controlling the area around the arcologies until stuff dies down.
The use of small groups of superiorly armed mobile troops with "H-Wagon" (grav vehicles, essentially) backup seems to serve this process well. I would think that unleashing tanks or guys with FGMPs in tow inside such a structure would lead to some pretty severe structural damage to a multi billion credit investment such as an arcology.
I also have been prone to present arcology life similar in many ways to ancient Hellenistic "City State" life, where each arcology is an enclosed independent entity, replete with its own customs and defenses. In less cosmopolitan societies, such a setup could definitely lead to civil conflict.
In the gigantic high rise arcologies of mega city one, most of the residents are organized into "citi-def" units, loose knit citizen militias (literally Grandma with a grenade launcher in some cases) that peiodically break out into "block mania" where even small precieved slights between arcologies can escalate to open warfare between blocks. In these comics, the Judges (an analog to perhaps Battledress troops) rarely engage these outbreaks inside the blocks, but stick to controlling the area around the arcologies until stuff dies down.
The use of small groups of superiorly armed mobile troops with "H-Wagon" (grav vehicles, essentially) backup seems to serve this process well. I would think that unleashing tanks or guys with FGMPs in tow inside such a structure would lead to some pretty severe structural damage to a multi billion credit investment such as an arcology.
I also have been prone to present arcology life similar in many ways to ancient Hellenistic "City State" life, where each arcology is an enclosed independent entity, replete with its own customs and defenses. In less cosmopolitan societies, such a setup could definitely lead to civil conflict.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
What part of that is debatable? The requirement of a filter mask for survival, means just that, you can't breath the air and survive. Further it also means things like plants and other things that live in that environment will be toxic. If an apple orchard got sprayed with a chemical agent, could you safely eat an apple from it?
You served in the army, how comfortable is wearing a filter mask (aka. Gas Mask, or NBC Mask) over long periods of time? You can't really eat in that environment, drinking is a royal pain. Just walking is annoying.
Most activities in this environment will be indoors. (With full airlocks to get there and decontamination.) Your communities will be enclosed where possible and especially where tech level allows it. All your agriculture will be indoors. The soil used for it will be carefully decontaminated or imported.
Much of that changed after the fall of the Soviet Union. Everything was for sale. The information I had, at the time, was that they had the latest upgrades to the ZSU-23-4 for many of them, especially those in key positions and serving with the Republican Guard. Sadam was concerned about the USAF and the IAF, and took steps to build, what he thought was the best air defense that he could buy. The tanks in the Iraqi inventory varied from old T-54 export version, through the T-80 with all the bells and whistles.
Further the information I had on the Kuwaiti Hawks were that they had the mid 80's upgrades. (Since this happened in 1990, then they might not have been the absolute latest but they were close.) I don't think they survived the first air raid though, so it doesn't really matter.
Now the information I had on Iraqi forces in 1990-91 (Desert Shield/Desert Storm) was current at the time and not Internet searches. Could some of it been faulty, sure, most of it was proven not to be. Since I stopped serving in the Army in 1993 and when serving in the Indiana Army National Guard it wasn't in the Intelligence field, and that ended before 2001. So my information on Iraqi military before the recent US invasion of Iraq is mostly reading what is publicly available and knowing how to read it.
As for truck mounted mortars. while I no longer have the books, I recall thinking, when I saw them, that it looked like an unstable combination and it was definitely field modifications. (Life Magazine compilations of WWII.) I remember seeing it in use by both the Russians and the Germans. I am not saying it worked well, or it was good for the truck, but it was done.
And I never said that the Tiger commander in Kelly's Heroes, was any good. I never said that the movie was realistic in any respect. (I don't think it was even ever intended to be.) I said that the concept of using a Grav Vehicle in an enclosed environment squeezing down corridors reminded me of that scene. (And someone trying to squeeze a Grav IFV down a corridor like that would earn the same comments from those same tankers in terms of competence of the IFV commander.)
Again, using Adventure 7 as a canon example, it takes place entirely on a planet with a tainted atmosphere. The village the PC's attack in the first scenario is described as a fairly typical terran village -- dispersed structures, not an archology. Open-topped Air/Rafts are used by both the rebel forces and the mercenaries (though the latter are in combat armor). One of the scenarios involves a multi-day hike from the village to the starbase.
Perhaps that is not realistic, but it is a canon source.
I get the sense that filter masks are much less bothersome than gas masks. Based on Adventure 7, my sense of life on a planet with a tainted atmosphere is a bit like living in northern Alaska -- you don't go outside without proper gear, but locals have grown used to the threat and are quite comfortable with it.
Youre comment about what the heck you would eat is well-taken. I have no idea. A planet of hundreds of millions can't expect to import all its food from off-planet. I've got to assume that there are some edible plants that can survive the tainted atmosphere and provide non-poisonous nutrition.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
This is the same canon source that lands an unstreamlined ship on a planet with an atmosphere, and uses a Jump-1 Strike Cruiser in the opening days of the war that had to pass through Imperial Military installations to get there.
Remember that your eyes breathe as well as through your mouth and nose. Goggles would also be required. And if you can't breathe it you can't eat anything else that breathes it. I know, that kind of detail isn't in Adventure 7. But, while I like Adventure 7, it definitely has some issues.
Remember that your eyes breathe as well as through your mouth and nose. Goggles would also be required. And if you can't breathe it you can't eat anything else that breathes it. I know, that kind of detail isn't in Adventure 7. But, while I like Adventure 7, it definitely has some issues.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that you can't have free standing houses in a Tainted atmosphere. You certainly can. (And domed farms.) However would they be normal when everything has airlocks and decon chambers, or would putting it in enclosed cities make more sense and be more normal?
As an example for non-smokers. (Smokers tend not to notice this, and for them, sorry I can't think of an equivalent example.) If you have a friend that is a smoker but people don't smoke in your house, if your friend goes outside to smoke, then comes back inside can you tell the difference?
Again if you are a non-smoker and dated a smoker, does their hair clothing and even skin smell and/or taste like cigarettes?
Take the same concept and make it a gas that is quite a bit worse. (For those that served in the military CS doesn't even equal something you couldn't eventually get used to, at least short term.)
As an example for non-smokers. (Smokers tend not to notice this, and for them, sorry I can't think of an equivalent example.) If you have a friend that is a smoker but people don't smoke in your house, if your friend goes outside to smoke, then comes back inside can you tell the difference?
Again if you are a non-smoker and dated a smoker, does their hair clothing and even skin smell and/or taste like cigarettes?
Take the same concept and make it a gas that is quite a bit worse. (For those that served in the military CS doesn't even equal something you couldn't eventually get used to, at least short term.)
still quite a range there. maybe the air is immediatly toxic - breath it once and fall over dead. maybe the air is toxic over time - breath it continuously for ten years and get lung cancer. airlocks and sealed face masks won't always be necessary, simple overpressurization using filtered air would often be sufficient.
doesn't necessarily follow at all. say for example the atmospheric "taint" is simply a presence of 4% carbon dioxide. humans can't live in that, but they could eat any terran food grown in it.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
still quite a range there. maybe the air is immediatly toxic - breath it once and fall over dead. maybe the air is toxic over time - breath it continuously for ten years and get lung cancer. airlocks and sealed face masks won't always be necessary, simple overpressurization using filtered air would often be sufficient.</font>[/QUOTE]Actually in that situation Filter Masks wouldn't be required for survival, just medical attention. Since Filter Masks are required for survival that says to me that, at a minimum after a few minutes of exposure you are at least going to get sick.
Decon might be nothing more than simply getting hosed off, but the stuff will get in exposed skin, and clothing so some decontamination and an airlock would be required.
doesn't necessarily follow at all. say for example the atmospheric "taint" is simply a presence of 4% carbon dioxide. humans can't live in that, but they could eat any terran food grown in it. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually a high concentration of CO2 or CO for that matter would qualify as Exotic not Tainted. Filter masks can't block Carbon Dioxide or Carbon Monoxide, or they would also block air. In that atmosphere you would have to actually carry Air. (Which is the requirement for Exotic Atmosphere.) Granted you could eat food grown outdoors in that, but you would definitely need something other than a filter mask.
epicenter00
SOC-13
I think you're reading way too much into this, but since you insist ...
if one generously assumes that "tainted" often means "deadly" this still means that half of the worlds in the imperium have walk-around atmospheres requiring no or only minor precautions. lots of room there for overland military actions.
the lines you quoted earlier don't say that. they say that unspecified equipments are generally necessary for survival and protection. they then go on to specify by name that vacc suits and compressors are for survival in thin or zero atmospheres - one immediately understands why - but about filter masks they only say they're "required". they don't say how immediately or exactly why or what "taint" is or, even, if "taint" is deadly. surely there are gradations and kinds of "taint"? of course one may insist that no, "tainted" necessarily means immediately deadly in all cases, but there is no need or requirement that it be so, and certainly no basis.
(well at least sometimes the food is edible now.) for CO2, no, rebreathers or CO2 scrubbers would suffice. surely these would qualify as "filter masks"? and as a matter of fact, yes, there are CO filter masks.
if one generously assumes that "tainted" often means "deadly" this still means that half of the worlds in the imperium have walk-around atmospheres requiring no or only minor precautions. lots of room there for overland military actions.
mbrinkhues
SOC-14 1K
The problem is that "filter mask" is a VERY broad term. This includes the various NBC masks but also includes the stuff a lot of Chinese/Japanese wear in the larger cities during Smog days. Or the stuff I wear when spray-painting something.
IMHO the Smog-filled air of 1950s/60s Ruhr-Valley before CDU/SPD did the "Clear Sky over the Ruhr" program would easily qualify as tainted. Miners working for the RAG in the Ruhr Valley died earlier/suffered more breath-related illnesses than Workers for the PAG mines in Westfalia or RAG mine in Ahlen, their children had a higher chance to get breath-related illnesses etc. You could not dry washing outside during smok days and plant-life was affected. This would also explain low tech (below TL9) worlds with decend populations and tainted athmosphere
But an army could still operate there for a considerabel length of time with minor problems and without NBC gear. And you can operate under NBC gear for extended time. It is tiring but doabel
As for vehicles in an arcology: Depends on the building style of the arcology. "Huge dome over normal housing" can be used by vehicles, "Renraku Arcologie" super-skyscrapers can not. OTOH "Renraku Arcology" is as close to FIBUA/MOUT (Fighting in Build Up Areas/Military Operations in Urban Combat) as you will come. And the Military HATES that due to immens losses when going up against organised military defenders(1).
And IMHO if you fight IN an Arcology that is necessary due to non-longterm breathabel athmosphere, you just broke the Imperial Acts of War due to the HIGH civilian casualties since the civies can't run
(1) Think Stalingrad/Arnheim/Berlin
IMHO the Smog-filled air of 1950s/60s Ruhr-Valley before CDU/SPD did the "Clear Sky over the Ruhr" program would easily qualify as tainted. Miners working for the RAG in the Ruhr Valley died earlier/suffered more breath-related illnesses than Workers for the PAG mines in Westfalia or RAG mine in Ahlen, their children had a higher chance to get breath-related illnesses etc. You could not dry washing outside during smok days and plant-life was affected. This would also explain low tech (below TL9) worlds with decend populations and tainted athmosphere
But an army could still operate there for a considerabel length of time with minor problems and without NBC gear. And you can operate under NBC gear for extended time. It is tiring but doabel
As for vehicles in an arcology: Depends on the building style of the arcology. "Huge dome over normal housing" can be used by vehicles, "Renraku Arcologie" super-skyscrapers can not. OTOH "Renraku Arcology" is as close to FIBUA/MOUT (Fighting in Build Up Areas/Military Operations in Urban Combat) as you will come. And the Military HATES that due to immens losses when going up against organised military defenders(1).
And IMHO if you fight IN an Arcology that is necessary due to non-longterm breathabel athmosphere, you just broke the Imperial Acts of War due to the HIGH civilian casualties since the civies can't run
(1) Think Stalingrad/Arnheim/Berlin
Yep, that was what I have in mind for Earth in my next (non-OTU) near-future ATU attempt. Technically breathable for the short term, and you could possily breath it for several decades without suffocating, but it's so polluted that, if you live outside of the arcologies or domes (and if you don't use a filter-mask outside), you'll have a high chance of suffering from respiratory illnesses and a high probability of cancer. In other words, it's like smoking several large packets of cigarettes a day for your whole life. Atmosphere 7, making Earth Industrial - which, in that ATU, it is: largest workforce in known space and massive industrial infrastructure.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
There are only 2 filter masks in the equipment list. A Filter Mask and a Combination Compressor/Filter Mask. There aren't a broad range. (On this planet I need a full Gas Mask but on this one I might need a hankerchief over my nose.) And it does state that equipment is required for survival, not for comfort, not to relieve a bad smell, or not to avoid something medical science can correct when it starts to affect me. It doesn't state that equipment is required for survival if you are spending more than a day there. A bad smog day doesn't require a mask for survival and would fall under standard atmosphere. Standard Atmosphere also covers a broad range. As long as it doesn't require any breathing equipment for survival it is a standard atmosphere.
The key phrase is the heading in the paragraph before it talks about the individual types.
But, hey, in your TU, do what you want.
In any event more people would prefer to not step out and breathe the air on those worlds. So you are still going to be dealing with fully enclosed communities and any target worth worrying about is going to be indoors.
The key phrase is the heading in the paragraph before it talks about the individual types.
So a tainted atmosphere by definition requires a filter mask. In some standard atmospheres it might be nice to have a filter mask, but it isn't required.
But, hey, in your TU, do what you want.
In any event more people would prefer to not step out and breathe the air on those worlds. So you are still going to be dealing with fully enclosed communities and any target worth worrying about is going to be indoors.
Similar threads
OTU Only:
Fleshing out the Extolay system (SM1711)
