|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Aug 21, 2021 15:09:27 GMT -5
I might be out of communication starting tomorrow, we are right near the path of hurricane Henri. We cleaned our gutters and put everything in our garage. Please NPC as needed, see you on the other side. Eric Stay safe Eric! |
|
|
|
Post by Terry Mixon on Aug 21, 2021 17:08:31 GMT -5
I might be out of communication starting tomorrow, we are right near the path of hurricane Henri. We cleaned our gutters and put everything in our garage. Please NPC as needed, see you on the other side. Eric Stay safe! |
|
ateno
Traveler
Posts: 111
|
Post by ateno on Aug 23, 2021 13:53:15 GMT -5
So the Hurricane tracked East and hit the Conn/RI border, we got rain and a bit of wind. 5 houses in my whole county lost power.
|
|
|
|
Post by erisred on Aug 23, 2021 16:51:27 GMT -5
So the Hurricane tracked East and hit the Conn/RI border, we got rain and a bit of wind. 5 houses in my whole county lost power. Good to hear you came through unscathed! |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Aug 26, 2021 2:02:51 GMT -5
Sorry to be out of communication for the past ten days or so. As PD speculated, it was due to health (mine) and work schedule issues. NOT Covid (test came back negative), apparently just really bad allergies.
Headed to the IC thread now!
|
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Aug 26, 2021 3:04:45 GMT -5
Just a quick thought . . . Pulled from the description of The Nine Bells in The Meeting thread: "The dorsal, or upper, turret as twin Plasma Cannon mounted for up close action prior to boarding or in support of ground operations." Shouldn't that description apply to the ventral turret instead? Or is it the intention that the Bells support ground operations while flying inverted?  |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Aug 26, 2021 10:52:26 GMT -5
Sorry to be out of communication for the past ten days or so. As PD speculated, it was due to health (mine) and work schedule issues. NOT Covid (test came back negative), apparently just really bad allergies. Headed to the IC thread now! Great to have you back raikenclw. |
|
|
|
Post by Terry Mixon on Aug 26, 2021 12:00:09 GMT -5
Just a quick thought . . . Pulled from the description of The Nine Bells in The Meeting thread: "The dorsal, or upper, turret as twin Plasma Cannon mounted for up close action prior to boarding or in support of ground operations." Shouldn't that description apply to the ventral turret instead? Or is it the intention that the Bells support ground operations while flying inverted? Looks at Eris.  |
|
|
|
Post by erisred on Aug 26, 2021 15:34:05 GMT -5
Just a quick thought . . . Pulled from the description of The Nine Bells in The Meeting thread: "The dorsal, or upper, turret as twin Plasma Cannon mounted for up close action prior to boarding or in support of ground operations." Shouldn't that description apply to the ventral turret instead? Or is it the intention that the Bells support ground operations while flying inverted? Well, it's dorsal in the description, so I guess the ship is intended to be landed and firing down from the top. OTOH, switching the cannon to the ventral turret and putting the, IIRC, launchers on the dorsal wouldn't be a problem if that's what y'all want. |
|
|
|
Post by erisred on Aug 26, 2021 15:51:54 GMT -5
Sorry to be out of communication for the past ten days or so. As PD speculated, it was due to health (mine) and work schedule issues. NOT Covid (test came back negative), apparently just really bad allergies. Headed to the IC thread now! Glad to see you back. I hope the allergies weren't too bad. I, myself, have been fighting an itchy rash (legs, arms, face,) for the better part of 2 weeks now. I figure it's also allergy related, but the only Medical person I've been able to see just called it a Pruritic rash (which basically means an itchy rash that she couldn't diagnose) and gave me a shot of Solu-Medrol. That worked to releave most of the itching for a few days, but it's coming back now. The soonest I can get a Dermatologist appointment appears to be late OCTOBER! So, until then, or until it gets worse and I *have* to go to Urgent Care again, I'll be using cold compresses, Benadryl tablets, Claritin, Advil, hydrocortisone and anti-itch creams for temporary relief, and hoping it'll clear up on its own. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Aug 27, 2021 0:44:28 GMT -5
. . . I guess the ship is intended to be landed and firing down from the top. Well... Given that the dorsal turret is going to be about 10 meters (40 feet) above ground level and is also located in the approximate center of a fairly wide ship, the deadzone around the landed ship where it can't put down any fire is going to be GINORMOUS. On the other hand, putting the cannon in the ventral turret has at least one problem. They won't be able to fire through whatever part of their arc is blocked by lowered ramps/stairs or landing gear. This limitation can be somewhat alleviated by holding such items above the ground until JUST prior to actual exit/boarding (allowing support fire to be directed beneath them). On the gripping hand, the ship could be equipped with mortar tubes and/or antipersonnel defensive charges [basically Claymore mines] emplaced around the outer hull. EDIT: Maybe a couple of pintle mount, pop-down Gauss HMGs? Remember what happens when Leia calls the Falcon a "bucket of bolts" and Han responds with. "She's still got a few surprises left in her."? Starting @ ~2:55 Falcon Defends Herself |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Aug 27, 2021 0:46:55 GMT -5
Sorry to be out of communication for the past ten days or so. As PD speculated, it was due to health (mine) and work schedule issues. NOT Covid (test came back negative), apparently just really bad allergies. Headed to the IC thread now! Great to have you back raikenclw . Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by Terry Mixon on Aug 27, 2021 13:03:52 GMT -5
. . . I guess the ship is intended to be landed and firing down from the top. Well... Given that the dorsal turret is going to be about 10 meters (40 feet) above ground level and is also located in the approximate center of a fairly wide ship, the deadzone around the landed ship where it can't put down any fire is going to be GINORMOUS. On the other hand, putting the cannon in the ventral turret has at least one problem. They won't be able to fire through whatever part of their arc is blocked by lowered ramps/stairs or landing gear. This limitation can be somewhat alleviated by holding such items above the ground until JUST prior to actual exit/boarding (allowing support fire to be directed beneath them). On the gripping hand, the ship could be equipped with mortar tubes and/or antipersonnel defensive charges [basically Claymore mines] emplaced around the outer hull. EDIT: Maybe a couple of pintle mount, pop-down Gauss HMGs? Remember what happens when Leia calls the Falcon a "bucket of bolts" and Han responds with. "She's still got a few surprises left in her."? Starting @ ~2:55 Falcon Defends Herself |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Aug 28, 2021 0:57:54 GMT -5
Maybe the dorsal can be raised enough to fire over the hull. I wouldn't take much for it to have a commanding field of fire without obstruction except for right next to the ship. The ventral would be too obstructed on the ground though it would be good for strafing. Well . . . I couldn't figure out a way to describe it in words, so I drew a picture in Paint: EDIT: Had to cut my sketch in half, as either this site or Photobucket couldn't display the full length in one go.  .jpg?width=285&height=175&crop=fill) As can be imagined from the sketch above, if you were to raise the turret, you would actually INCREASE the size of the dead space (the military term for an area within a direct fire weapon's effective range within which fire can not be placed due to terrain or obstacles). In this specific case, the limit is how low the weapon's barrel can be depressed. In my sketch, I've indicated what I think would be the maximum angle of depression for a plasma cannon. The only way to get a steeper angle of depression would be to mount a laser mirror/gravitic focus arrangement (such as TNE assumes). Even then, you would need a tower at least six (6) meters - 20 feet - high to reduce the outer margin of the dead space to just beyond the edge of the hull. NOTE: In the above sketch, I did not attempt to model the ship's hull cross-section with any real degree of accuracy. Using the actual dimensions would likely make the dead space even larger, especially the portion stretching sternward of the ship. On the other hand, arming the ventral turret with the plasma cannon would leave only the landing gear and any deployed stairs/ramps to block fire. Of course, the plasma cannon could not then provide anti-air protection . . . but that's what missile or Gatlin laser/Gauss HMG armed Close-In Weapon Systems do best. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Aug 28, 2021 1:33:49 GMT -5
Thinking further . . .
We could mount the turret on a set of rails that arc across the top (or bottom) of the hull. Perhaps even do this for all turrets? Run the turret to the edge of the hull and the dead space - on that side - mostly disappears.
Of course, disguising such a weapons installation would be problematic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terry Mixon on Aug 28, 2021 14:45:39 GMT -5
Maybe the dorsal can be raised enough to fire over the hull. I wouldn't take much for it to have a commanding field of fire without obstruction except for right next to the ship. The ventral would be too obstructed on the ground though it would be good for strafing. Well . . . I couldn't figure out a way to describe it in words, so I drew a picture in Paint: EDIT: Had to cut my sketch in half, as either this site or Photobucket couldn't display the full length in one go. As can be imagined from the sketch above, if you were to raise the turret, you would actually INCREASE the size of the dead space (the military term for an area within a direct fire weapon's effective range within which fire can not be placed due to terrain or obstacles). In this specific case, the limit is how low the weapon's barrel can be depressed. In my sketch, I've indicated what I think would be the maximum angle of depression for a plasma cannon. The only way to get a steeper angle of depression would be to mount a laser mirror/gravitic focus arrangement (such as TNE assumes). Even then, you would need a tower at least six (6) meters - 20 feet - high to reduce the outer margin of the dead space to just beyond the edge of the hull. NOTE: In the above sketch, I did not attempt to model the ship's hull cross-section with any real degree of accuracy. Using the actual dimensions would likely make the dead space even larger, especially the portion stretching sternward of the ship. On the other hand, arming the ventral turret with the plasma cannon would leave only the landing gear and any deployed stairs/ramps to block fire. Of course, the plasma cannon could not then provide anti-air protection . . . but that's what missile or Gatlin laser/Gauss HMG armed Close-In Weapon Systems do best. OOC: I'm going to disagree. A higher turret would allow more depression of the barrels and be farther up from the curvature of the hull. The dead zone would shrink, but perhaps not all that much. Still, it would. And I think that's acceptable in either case. Once they get within 90 feet, we'd want to deal with them using less destructive weapons anyway. Like Peng with a heavy machinegun. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Sept 1, 2021 18:33:06 GMT -5
OOC: I'm going to disagree. A higher turret would allow more depression of the barrels . . . Sorry, but no. That's why I specified the "emitter dish gravitic focus" LASER as the only way to achieve further depression. A plasma cannon is a *linear* accelerator, requiring a dead-straight barrel length of X for an output of Y. You simply can't bend it in the middle, meaning that you can't depress the barrel lower since the consequent *elevation* of the breech is limited by the top of the turret. Once they get within 90 feet, we'd want to deal with them using less destructive weapons anyway. Like Peng with a heavy machinegun. That's fine, if the incoming threat is unpowered infantry. But what if the threat is an armored vehicle? Or a pop-up emplaced weapon? |
|
|
|
Post by Terry Mixon on Sept 1, 2021 18:41:44 GMT -5
OOC: I'm going to disagree. A higher turret would allow more depression of the barrels . . . Sorry, but no. That's why I specified the "emitter dish gravitic focus" LASER as the only way to achieve further depression. A plasma cannon is a *linear* accelerator, requiring a dead-straight barrel length of X for an output of Y. You simply can't bend it in the middle, meaning that you can't depress the barrel lower since the consequent *elevation* of the breech is limited by the top of the turret. Once they get within 90 feet, we'd want to deal with them using less destructive weapons anyway. Like Peng with a heavy machinegun. That's fine, if the incoming threat is unpowered infantry. But what if the threat is an armored vehicle? Or a pop-up emplaced weapon? Not sure I agree but whatever Eris decides is fine. And if we have that kind of heavy metal within 100 feet, we’ve made a terrible mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Sept 1, 2021 19:14:23 GMT -5
I remember from the Lensman series some pretty heavy handheld weapons powered from the ships power itself for close to the ship ground action. Is that or something similar available?
|
|
oscar
Prospector
Posts: 97 
|
Post by oscar on Sept 2, 2021 0:50:59 GMT -5
Sorry, but no. That's why I specified the "emitter dish gravitic focus" LASER as the only way to achieve further depression. A plasma cannon is a *linear* accelerator, requiring a dead-straight barrel length of X for an output of Y. You simply can't bend it in the middle, meaning that you can't depress the barrel lower since the consequent *elevation* of the breech is limited by the top of the turret. That's fine, if the incoming threat is unpowered infantry. But what if the threat is an armored vehicle? Or a pop-up emplaced weapon? Not sure I agree but whatever Eris decides is fine. And if we have that kind of heavy metal within 100 feet, we’ve made a terrible mistake. Can we use the ventral turret from a low hover? It doesn't seem like parked on the ground is the best place for a space ship in a firefight. We would have to figure out how to get people on the ground back aboard. |
|
ateno
Traveler
Posts: 111
|
Post by ateno on Sept 2, 2021 5:10:37 GMT -5
May I, my apologies, but imo the ship, if we use it in a ground support mission, should be used as a helo or A-10.
Nowhere, here, fire, gone.
With the technology available, the ship can fly at a X axis of 90 degrees and fire straight down if required.
Your thinking of it as a large gun emplacement. Its not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Terry Mixon on Sept 2, 2021 12:57:13 GMT -5
May I, my apologies, but imo the ship, if we use it in a ground support mission, should be used as a helo or A-10. Nowhere, here, fire, gone. With the technology available, the ship can fly at a X axis of 90 degrees and fire straight down if required. Your thinking of it as a large gun emplacement. Its not. If the ship is in motion, a little tilt will solve any issues with the hull. Good point. |
|
|
|
Post by erisred on Sept 2, 2021 13:47:19 GMT -5
May I, my apologies, but imo the ship, if we use it in a ground support mission, should be used as a helo or A-10. Nowhere, here, fire, gone. With the technology available, the ship can fly at a X axis of 90 degrees and fire straight down if required. Your thinking of it as a large gun emplacement. Its not. If the ship is in motion, a little tilt will solve any issues with the hull. Good point. You're all making good points. I'd be okay swapping the ventral and dorsal turrets if you want to, or changing the weapons in them. Some limitations I'm going to impose include: no Battle Dress (you can have Combat Armor, but it isn't comfortable to wear full time, Cloth is comfortable so it could be worn full time); armor does not stack, so protection is only from the armor worn that gives the best protection); nor man-portable fusion/plasma weapons; no H or A bomb warheads. Basically anything up to TL12, but nothing beyond that. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Sept 3, 2021 3:00:37 GMT -5
If the ship is in motion, a little tilt will solve any issues with the hull. Good point. You're all making good points. I'd be okay swapping the ventral and dorsal turrets if you want to, or changing the weapons in them. I think that swapping out the weaponry between dorsal and ventral would be the simplest solution. Next simplest would be installing some Gatlin lasers or Gauss HMGs on remote control pop-down pintle mounts. I'm also in favor of a couple of 60-80mm mortar tube batteries and/or a belt of Claymore-style mines . . . just in case. While it's true that gravitic lift and artificial gravity together would allow the ship to fly at whatever angle allows the best arc of fire, it's also true that THINKING in multiple dimensions at the same time might be prove challenging. Someone used to fighting in empty space might get disorientated when fighting at strange angles in a nap-of-the-earth situation, where "down" isn't the same direction for everyone involved. Some limitations I'm going to impose include: no Battle Dress (you can have Combat Armor, but it isn't comfortable to wear full time, Cloth is comfortable so it could be worn full time); armor does not stack, so protection is only from the armor worn that gives the best protection); nor man-portable fusion/plasma weapons; no H or A bomb warheads. Basically anything up to TL12, but nothing beyond that. So no handheld energy weapons powered by cable from the ship, I guess? |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Sept 3, 2021 3:09:16 GMT -5
armor does not stack, so protection is only from the armor worn that gives the best protection) IIRC, in CT, armor reduced the chance that a hit delivered effective damage (which is why it applied a negative DM to hit, rather than to damage). I always took this to be due to deflecting the hit, which in turn meant that only the outermost layer of armor could ever count. The exception was reflec; it had to be worn as the outermost layer but only affected laser hits, with whatever was worn under it affecting everything else. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Sept 14, 2021 20:36:45 GMT -5
Not sure I agree but whatever Eris decides is fine. And if we have that kind of heavy metal within 100 feet, we’ve made a terrible mistake. An excellent point to be sure. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Sept 14, 2021 20:38:17 GMT -5
While it's true that gravitic lift and artificial gravity together would allow the ship to fly at whatever angle allows the best arc of fire, it's also true that THINKING in multiple dimensions at the same time might be prove challenging. Someone used to fighting in empty space might get disorientated when fighting at strange angles in a nap-of-the-earth situation, where "down" isn't the same direction for everyone involved. While we want to avoid fighting under those conditions, if push comes to shove, we do have a highly skilled and experienced pilot. |
|
|
|
Post by erisred on Sept 21, 2021 3:11:13 GMT -5
I'm going to need a list of dramatis personae, right soon now. I need to know who the Player Characters are and in what roles, so I can fill in NPC's as needed. Some might be spear carriers, but others like Joe Hinkle could have major supporting character roles.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Sept 21, 2021 10:18:06 GMT -5
I'm going to need a list of dramatis personae, right soon now. I need to know who the Player Characters are and in what roles, so I can fill in NPC's as needed. Some might be spear carriers, but others like Joe Hinkle could have major supporting character roles. Captain, Sir Adam, de Graff, 676BAB, 46; Merchant-7(2); Gambling-1, Bribery-2, BladeCbt-1, Pilot-4, GunCmbt-1, Streetwise-2, Admin-3, Nav-1; 1 Ship Share (Corsair), 2 Low; Cutlass, Revolver; 120 Kcr. Colonel Otto Heinrich Wolfgang Berger, B98AA7, 48; Pirate-1(0), Army-7(2); Brawling-2, PoleCbt-1, BladeCbt-2, Vacc Suit-1, Zero G Cbt-1, GunCbt-5, Gambling-1, Tactics-2, Leader-2; Shotgun, Revolver; 70 Kcr. Troop Commander of the Away Team. |
|
ateno
Traveler
Posts: 111
|
Post by ateno on Sept 21, 2021 15:55:43 GMT -5
Herman "Jack" Abelein Jr. 675BBC 49 yo Navy(7) Engineering-2, Computer-1, Vacc Suit-2, Gunnery-2, Ships Boat-1. Jack-o-T-4
Cr 7140, Retiree pay 6000 yr, TAS, High Passage, Cloth armor with reflec, Combat Armor, Sword, Spear, Submachine Gun with
4 clips and electronic sights Ship Engineer Flunky
Ekhunoz Girskhaen - Vargr – 38 yo – Police(2), Corsair(2), 9B6995, Lasers – 1, Bolo – 1, Infighting-1, Fwd Obs - 1
Grav Vechicle -2, Vacc Suit - 1, Zero G Combat -1, Ships Boat - 1, Computer – 1, Electronics-1, Liaison -1, Gambling -1
Bribery - 1 No items Boarding Team Engineer
|
|
