Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[tryrar]

Yup. Fear not, we agreed for someone to be sent in for naval engineering for better ships

Also, we agreed to get a prototype of the Gunship for testing up

[kingfisher1112]

wait, we can sent engineers to university every turn?

Yes.

[tryrar]

As for Points:

LBA-280
Damage: 25
Accuracy: 20
Perks:
Smoke Shells: 8 Points
Concrete Piercers: 10 Points
Heavy HE: 7 Points

Pigeon
Speed: 53 km/h ( 3 km/h per point)
Armour: None.
Armament: 1 TP-1
Perks:
Strong Winch: 8 points.
Nimble: 12 points.
Large Ammo Capacity: 13 points.
Ultralight Frame: 12 points

TX-1
Damage: 6
Accuracy: 18
Perks:
Stealthy: 2 points

Wasp
Size: 2
Armour: 1
Speed: 45 Knots ( 1 point for one knot.)
Armament: Two T-1s, 4 torpedo mounts.
Perks:
Speedy: 6 points.
Quick-Turning: 5 points

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Pigeon
I prefer nimble and max speed, let's give it a chance dodging AA fire\ Enemy fighters

Agree with all other point spread

[tryrar]

Also, MAX capacity on the factories to churn out Badgers, in case we need to repel more incursions


Given we need anti-shipping at the moment, I'm modding my proposed monoplane from a fighter to a torpedo bomber
IOP-1 Tigershark(ВГД-1 Tigershark)
Engineers:10
Workspace:10
What it is:2 man monoplane torpedo bomber

Cruising speed:322 k/ph
Max Speed:370 k/ph
Operational Ceiling:10,000ft(3,048m)
Armament:1x TP-1 mounted in the nose(connected to an interrupter gear), 1x bomb bay(able to load 2x 500 lb. bombs, 1x 1000 lb bombs, or one TX-1 torpedo(henceforth called a Whitefish(сиг) torpedo)), 1x rear-facing pintle-mounted TP-1(used by the bombadier for defense)


Also:
Name:RTX-1 Turret
Engineers:3+metallurgist&naval engineer
Workspace:10
What it is:Turret designed to mount 2 LBA-280s on the Gunship at the cost of 2 AA mounts
Armor:2'(51mm) reinforced steel plate

I'm proposing to also rename the Gunship to the Alexi Class Cruiser(Алекси крейсер)

[Ukrainian Ranger]

My unrefined projects

Shark
What it is:
Minisubmarine, armed with two torpedo tubes.
Team: 1 Metallurgy specialist, 1 Navy specialist, 8 novice engineers

Feather
What it is
Light wooden biplane armed with two TP-1s, nimble dogfighter. Should be cheap, very nimble, easy to learn to fly, trainer and last resort, glass-cannon interceptor
10 novice engineers

Misc:

1) Send one engineer to the university, to get knowledge about engines

2) build anything at he shipyard at last!

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Here's my first post again:

Okay, question(s):
So, is our budget/unmentioned resources unlimited? Just how far ahead can we reasonably expect success? 2 years? 5? 10? Where does the roll kick in? Do we have to be concerned about protecting our developments/security or is that outside our scope? Would suck to develop an abrams and have it be stolen by the commies damn yanks. Also, is inventing ideas in warfare under our perview or should we stay out of designing weapons/vehicles that haven't been requested? (cough, paratrooper transport)

On MGs: don't even bother developing around water-cooled, just focus on developing a quick-change barrel system that's compatible with our vehicles.
-snip-

Also: we should really, REALLY look into developing radar & 2-way in-vehicle radio.
Also: we should send some factory workers to get trained in assembly line stuff- rip off the yanks.
Also: we should train one of our engis as an electronics specialist.
Also: GET THE DAMN SHIPYARD IN GEAR.

I still can't believe we didn't line up that 420mm.
Keeping it real is about as much fun as sticking a potato peeler up one's nose and proceeding to grind it around in there.
RAILGUNS FTW. USE MAGNETS.

Also: >disapproving look at KF for not reading his own thread

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Tryrar, you torpedo bomber looks too advanced for that Era, it's better than most WW2 torpedo bombers... And designing it without metallurgist and zero experience in aircraft building is a bad idea

Metal monoplanes are hard to make, that's a large jump in techs

[tryrar]

Eh we have some decent naval projects for now(just need better weaponry on the Alexi)

What I say we do is get aviation in gear. I'm partial to my bomber design, but I'll admit UR's biplane is probably more practical at this time.

So  as a compromise:

Name:RTX-1 Turret
Engineers:8+metallurgist&naval engineer
Workspace:10
What it is:Turret designed to mount 2 LBA-280s on the Alexi-class Cruiser(the gunship) at the cost of 2 AA mounts
Armor:2'(51mm) reinforced steel plate

Feather
What it is:Light wooden biplane armed with two TP-1s, nimble dogfighter. Should be cheap, very nimble, easy to learn to fly, trainer and last resort, glass-cannon interceptor
10 novice engineers
Workspace:10

Cruising speed:175mph(281kph)
Max Speed:214mph(334kph)
Operational Ceiling:15,000ft(4,572m)
Armament:2x TP-1 mounted in the nose(connected to an interrupter gear)

[Doomblade187]

Also, can we still improve the weapons we've already designed and are producing, or do we need to create a whole new weapon?

Also, we developing wireless radio, if possible, would be huge.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Fine for me, submarines can wait

So

Eh we have some decent naval projects for now(just need better weaponry on the Alexi)

What I say we do is get aviation in gear. I'm partial to my bomber design, but I'll admit UR's biplane is probably more practical at this time.

So  as a compromise:

Name:RTX-1 Turret
Engineers:8+metallurgist&naval engineer
Workspace:10
What it is:Turret designed to mount 2 LBA-280s on the Alexi-class Cruiser(the gunship) at the cost of 2 AA mounts
Armor:2'(51mm) reinforced steel plate

Feather
What it is:Light wooden biplane armed with two TP-1s, nimble dogfighter. Should be cheap, very nimble, easy to learn to fly, trainer and last resort, glass-cannon interceptor
10 novice engineers
Workspace:10

Cruising speed:175mph(281kph)
Max Speed:214mph(334kph)
Operational Ceiling:15,000ft(4,572m)
Armament:2x TP-1 mounted in the nose(connected to an interrupter gear)

+

As for Points:

LBA-280
Damage: 25
Accuracy: 20
Perks:
Smoke Shells: 8 Points
Concrete Piercers: 10 Points
Heavy HE: 7 Points

Pigeon
Speed: 53 km/h ( 3 km/h per point)
Armour: None.
Armament: 1 TP-1
Perks:
Strong Winch: 8 points.
Nimble: 12 points.
Large Ammo Capacity: 13 points.
Ultralight Frame: 12 points

TX-1
Damage: 6
Accuracy: 18
Perks:
Stealthy: 2 points

Wasp
Size: 2
Armour: 1
Speed: 45 Knots ( 1 point for one knot.)
Armament: Two T-1s, 4 torpedo mounts.
Perks:
Speedy: 6 points.
Quick-Turning: 5 points

+

As for Points:

LBA-280
Damage: 25
Accuracy: 20
Perks:
Smoke Shells: 8 Points
Concrete Piercers: 10 Points
Heavy HE: 7 Points

Pigeon
Speed: 53 km/h ( 3 km/h per point)
Armour: None.
Armament: 1 TP-1
Perks:
Strong Winch: 8 points.
Nimble: 12 points.
Large Ammo Capacity: 13 points.
Ultralight Frame: 12 points

TX-1
Damage: 6
Accuracy: 18
Perks:
Stealthy: 2 points

Wasp
Size: 2
Armour: 1
Speed: 45 Knots ( 1 point for one knot.)
Armament: Two T-1s, 4 torpedo mounts.
Perks:
Speedy: 6 points.
Quick-Turning: 5 points

+

a) all production to build Badgers (60 I think)
b) Send one novice engineer to university to become engine specialist
c) Build damned prototypes of ships (I'd rather see the gunship retconed, I am sure we wanted to build it evry turn and I am quite confused with  that...)


As for radio, I think it's too micromanagery, next step is to design boots for infantry

[tryrar]

Yeah, unless KF notes otherwise I think we'll assume we have appropriate radios for our ships and tanks, though we MIGHT need to design a radio light enough to be carried in a plane(not sure, up to OP)

[Doomblade187]

Actually, developing synthetic rubber would be handy, aside from the fact that it's not a priority. There are many possible gains from it.

[kingfisher1112]

Here's my first post again:

Okay, question(s):
So, is our budget/unmentioned resources unlimited? Just how far ahead can we reasonably expect success? 2 years? 5? 10? Where does the roll kick in? Do we have to be concerned about protecting our developments/security or is that outside our scope? Would suck to develop an abrams and have it be stolen by the commies damn yanks. Also, is inventing ideas in warfare under our perview or should we stay out of designing weapons/vehicles that haven't been requested? (cough, paratrooper transport)

On MGs: don't even bother developing around water-cooled, just focus on developing a quick-change barrel system that's compatible with our vehicles.
-snip-

Also: we should really, REALLY look into developing radar & 2-way in-vehicle radio.
Also: we should send some factory workers to get trained in assembly line stuff- rip off the yanks.
Also: we should train one of our engis as an electronics specialist.
Also: GET THE DAMN SHIPYARD IN GEAR.

I still can't believe we didn't line up that 420mm.
Keeping it real is about as much fun as sticking a potato peeler up one's nose and proceeding to grind it around in there.
RAILGUNS FTW. USE MAGNETS.

Also: >disapproving look at KF for not reading his own thread

Rail guns? Rail guns? Are you even fucking paying attention? SERIOUSLY. I CAN UNDERSTAND SOME THINGS, BUT RAILGUNS IN THE 20's? NO. JUST NO.
And you are just designing shit for the army to use. They may have requests sometimes, but other than that free reign.
Yes, your budget is flexible to a point. Small amounts of tungsten rounds? Yeah sure. FUCKING RAILGUNS? No.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

FUCKING RAILGUNS? No.

ROLL FOR IT BABY!

As for radio, I think it's too micromanagery, next step is to design boots for infantry

Micromanagy or a development that probably won the allies the war? (though really, in the long run, woulda won anyway). Radar should be maximum priority, and small, light radios are a game-changer.
Also: ROCKET BOOTS!