RW Battledress FY08
- Thread starter Uncle Bob
- Start date
Border Reiver
SOC-14 1K
Being ex artillery myself I remember our FDC organising airburst by setting a timed fuse on a simple mechanical timer. The CP would calculate the fuse times for each gun (when I started we used a slide rule for this) and the fuse was set manually. Not beyond the realms of WW1 gunners. Agreed though any kind of fuse beyond the basic quick/delay setting is difficult to design but I'm sure they had mechanical timed fuses in the Boer War. I'll need to check with Woolwich but I think the British siege artillery used cut fuses on cannon shells to create airbursts during the Peninsular War.
"Reliable" fuzes to detonate a warhead has been the holy grail of people who understood artillery ever since the first guy figured out that you could put something inside a projectile.
Timed fuzes are easy to make, just put a quick match inside the cork used to stopper a shell. Cut the match properly and the shell will detonate over the enemy lines. Check out the work of a British gentleman by the name of Shrapnel.
WWII bomb fuzes and modern mechanical fuzes use a delay element to cause detonation a set thousands of a second after penetrating a roof.
Now, projectile fuzes being tested will cause detonation after passing through a wall.
As battle field personnal armor becomes more realistic, expect homing minimissiles capable of defeating that armor. ECM to defeat the minimissiles. ECCM to defeat that adnauseum. The easiest parallel would be modern navies and the way the electronics suite of the ships have become so predominate.
The biggest problem with battledress is at what point will battle dress become more combat efficient than aircraft? An F-15E can come in on the deck at mach.99, drop his load of 24 MK-82 500lb bombs miles from the target and turn away, and expect 24 separate targets to be eliminated at very little risk to himself or his aircraft. It will be tough for a guy in battledress to match that in effciency.
By the way, who or what is "Woolwich"?
Timed fuzes are easy to make, just put a quick match inside the cork used to stopper a shell. Cut the match properly and the shell will detonate over the enemy lines. Check out the work of a British gentleman by the name of Shrapnel.
WWII bomb fuzes and modern mechanical fuzes use a delay element to cause detonation a set thousands of a second after penetrating a roof.
Now, projectile fuzes being tested will cause detonation after passing through a wall.
As battle field personnal armor becomes more realistic, expect homing minimissiles capable of defeating that armor. ECM to defeat the minimissiles. ECCM to defeat that adnauseum. The easiest parallel would be modern navies and the way the electronics suite of the ships have become so predominate.
The biggest problem with battledress is at what point will battle dress become more combat efficient than aircraft? An F-15E can come in on the deck at mach.99, drop his load of 24 MK-82 500lb bombs miles from the target and turn away, and expect 24 separate targets to be eliminated at very little risk to himself or his aircraft. It will be tough for a guy in battledress to match that in effciency.
By the way, who or what is "Woolwich"?
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
The Royal Artillery Regiment's museum.
Hits to the shoulder from frontal or downward can send bone fragments into the brachial artery and the cardiopulmonary cavity. From th side, into the neck (and the carotid and jugular), cause wind-pipe bleeds (drowning in inspired blood) into the brachial, and even into the cardiopulmonary cavity.
The likely hood isn't terribly high for a given round, but it is a major threat issue.
Any major weakness will be exploitable. a spot with that much important stuff nearby and in reasonable shatter patterns is a major weakness.
The likely hood isn't terribly high for a given round, but it is a major threat issue.
Any major weakness will be exploitable. a spot with that much important stuff nearby and in reasonable shatter patterns is a major weakness.
P
Pickles
Guest
But the F-15E equivalent (gravitic gunship)will probably be a lot more expensive than the Traveller battledress, so the two are a bit difficult to compare. Different missions, different numbers.
The question becomes:
How effective in the four prime footman roles (Infantry, MP, Commando, and scout/recon) will BD be, vs the same money spent upon unassisted infantry. Mind you, each of those roles has sub-roles, and various overlaps. But, Either they are anti-military forces (Infantry), Civilian and Base security (MP), sneek and Peek (Scout/Recon), or sneak and kill (commando).
That an F-15E Strike Eagle or AGS outfitted FA-18 or F-14 can wipe out an entire company in one pass under the right situation is unimportant... No infantry is expected to survive dedicated air-ground assault. Any that do are a bonus.
Thus the question is, is a BD trooper more likely to survive and/or accomplish the mission than an unarmored man.
Oh, and Aircraft can't do most of the MP stuff.
How effective in the four prime footman roles (Infantry, MP, Commando, and scout/recon) will BD be, vs the same money spent upon unassisted infantry. Mind you, each of those roles has sub-roles, and various overlaps. But, Either they are anti-military forces (Infantry), Civilian and Base security (MP), sneek and Peek (Scout/Recon), or sneak and kill (commando).
That an F-15E Strike Eagle or AGS outfitted FA-18 or F-14 can wipe out an entire company in one pass under the right situation is unimportant... No infantry is expected to survive dedicated air-ground assault. Any that do are a bonus.
Thus the question is, is a BD trooper more likely to survive and/or accomplish the mission than an unarmored man.
Oh, and Aircraft can't do most of the MP stuff.
Also, aircraft are an easy target for a sophisticated army. A handful of Stingers eliminated Soviet CAS twenty years ago. And powerful lasers will make everything above the horizon a targfet, so only droned snd RPVs will be risked, and they will be less effective.
Besides, a tank's main gun will take out bsttledress, too.
Besides, a tank's main gun will take out bsttledress, too.
As time goes by, expect the roles of the individual weapon systems to shift.
Aircraft will hold the high ground, out to orbit.
Tanks will replace aircraft as grav flight comes into play. They must be able to survive battle field lasers.
Infantry will be armored in Battledress, replacing tanks. They will have the aditional role of being able go under cover, into buildings, and underground.
Towed artillery will be a target only. Expect it only on fast mobile transports, or possibly in armored fortifications operated by remote control.
Aircraft will hold the high ground, out to orbit.
Tanks will replace aircraft as grav flight comes into play. They must be able to survive battle field lasers.
Infantry will be armored in Battledress, replacing tanks. They will have the aditional role of being able go under cover, into buildings, and underground.
Towed artillery will be a target only. Expect it only on fast mobile transports, or possibly in armored fortifications operated by remote control.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
Or in orbit!
Ortillery, replacing the traditional role of the wet navy.
Basic problem are first the long request/response time for anything other than beam weapons, second processing the requests from every 2nd Lt with enemy contact and a working radio.
Projectiles from orbit are fine for a prepatory bombardment against heavy fixed fortifications, but beams would be required against anything that could move.
A 2nd Lt reqesting support artillery from orbit may be less inclined to assk for appropriate levels than if he had organic arty.
Basic problem are first the long request/response time for anything other than beam weapons, second processing the requests from every 2nd Lt with enemy contact and a working radio.
Projectiles from orbit are fine for a prepatory bombardment against heavy fixed fortifications, but beams would be required against anything that could move.
A 2nd Lt reqesting support artillery from orbit may be less inclined to assk for appropriate levels than if he had organic arty.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
Good point, vegascat. Though, I would say the delay is minimal due to comm lags. What would be the actual flight time of a rock from on high (low orbit)? I would think it not too different from an Army Tactical Missile (ATACM) or Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM). Though these are used primarily for pre-planned targets, that doesn't necessarily mean stationary.
