Print

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

[10ebbor10]

We only need to limit the minimum airspeed of the aircraft, not it's maximum airspeed. (Though a great difference between the two would mean interesting aerodynamic challenges).

And I wasn't really aiming for any diameter. Just going for a cheap, fairly portable rocket.

[3_14159]

In respect to the rockets, I think both of you want basically the same thing. How would you both like something like that?

Cricket-M: This cricket variant eschews the armoured back compartment usually mounted, keeping only the forward driver's cabin. It instead mounts several missile racks to launch a barrage of missiles.
Try mounting the maximum amount of rockets on there, and concentrate on cheapness.

As for the rockets, I'd really like to see ranges in excess of 6-10km. Counter-Battery fire should be avoidable due to them being mobile. Of course, you need more than two people to reload them, but they have to return to a depot, then.

[10ebbor10]

I don't like it. The armour around the cabin is useless (because gunpowder rockets tend to explode when under fire, and it's armour is by far not strong enough to take it), and I don't see why we should force it into the cricket design.

It's better to just design the Missile launcher, as that means that we get
a) A vehicle mountable missile launcher
b) A standalone missile launcher unit
c) A turretmountable missile launcher unit

[RAM]

Fair enough... Care to make it 80mm? The advantage to combining it with the cricket is that we get a whole working vehicle and we are already producing most of the parts.

[10ebbor10]

Fair enough... Care to make it 80mm? The advantage to combining it with the cricket is that we get a whole working vehicle and we are already producing most of the parts.

Better to make it a standalone turret that can be mounted onto things, like for example the truck.

Advantages:
-Missile launcher is not part of the truck (Ie, can be removed and remounted when needed)
-Truck is faster
-Truck has 3 times loading capactiy.
-No need for a seperate production chain (You're changing a significant part of the cricket's structure )

[3_14159]

Ah, I see. I was completely forgetting about the truck. Mounting the rockets on the truck should provide better performance, true. However, that will pretty much require longer range due to higher vulnerability.
For the diameter, how about 150-200mm?

And, lastly though not relevant anymore, I actually don't think it'd be too difficult to adapt the cricket. After all, it'd have been just not bolting on the back compartment's armour and bolting on a rocket launcher turret similar to your design.

[10ebbor10]

The armor is mostly an nonissue. In both Cricket and truck the rockets sit exposed, and a single hit will obliterate both.

150 mm is a bit large actually. ((Also, I removed that remark because originally, I forgot to look at Allied forces, who almost uniquely used 78mm rockets))

[3_14159]

The armor is mostly an nonissue. In both Cricket and truck the rockets sit exposed, and a single hit will obliterate both.

True. I was thinking more along the lines of escaping counter-artillery fire.

150 mm is a bit large actually. ((Also, I removed that remark because originally, I forgot to look at Allied forces, who almost uniquely used 78mm rockets))

I think, though, that rockets of that calibre were deployed primarily from aircraft, while the dedicated ground-to-ground rockets nearly all were bigger.
Still, I definitely agree on the need to produce MRLs.

[10ebbor10]

Rocket artillery focusses on speed to get away. By the time the shells land, our truck should be back in HQ Though yes, 4 km is a bit short.

About wwII rockets, as said before, the allied forces used 78 mm rockets, Stalin's organ used 138 mm rockets, and I believe the germans used something in between. Mostly, rockets tend to be increased in length rather than caliber,due to the way they work.

[RAM]

The cricket should be a military vehicle made to military specifications, the truck should be, well, a truck... The cricket probably has better off-road performance and, if it doesn't, then I think that I might produce a redesign of the cricket...

[10ebbor10]

The cricket should be a military vehicle made to military specifications, the truck should be, well, a truck... The cricket probably has better off-road performance and, if it doesn't, then I think that I might produce a redesign of the cricket...

The truck is a military truck and it's based on the cricket design. It'll do great.

Rocket artillery relies on saturation bombardement (untill we get guidance, that is), so the ability to launch as much rockets as possible in a short amount of time is a must.

[Brood]

I dunno about weaponry yet but I have these ideas for next turn.

A campaign back home detailing our mens heroic victories and and the glory of war to encourage people to join the army.

A special division of our best men be created combining armour, infantry and aircraft into a first division of sorts, until ww1 it was fairly common to have special units of famous men, special forces can't do it because they have to act in secret a lot.

The best of the best across the armed forces, every army needs idles to follow and for an army that's the men who've fought the most and won so making them public encourages the rest of the army and gives them a standard to rally on. As long as the core of an army holds the army will fight to the death. We need a good standard for our men to encourage that, we have the best kit, now we need to make sure our men fight the hardest.

[tryrar]

BTW, why in the world are we assuming we have gunpowder rockets? I never saw any note that that's what they were....

[Nadaka]

The cricket should be a military vehicle made to military specifications, the truck should be, well, a truck... The cricket probably has better off-road performance and, if it doesn't, then I think that I might produce a redesign of the cricket...

The truck is a military truck and it's based on the cricket design. It'll do great.

Rocket artillery relies on saturation bombardement (untill we get guidance, that is), so the ability to launch as much rockets as possible in a short amount of time is a must.

The cricket weighs more, but has a half track on back.

For off road, I expect the cricket would get stuck less, but be a bit slower. But I don't really account for that in any practical way.

[Taricus]

Damn, the Ratel is SMALLER than the K-1? I'm impressed! O.O