Print

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

[tntey]

8.Research Satellites!

[OREOSOME]

8.1: Regarding the lack of a facility to properly train Space-capable combat personnel, the construction of a artificial 'space environment', made with a water filled chamber and mock-ups of various hulls(preferrably to resemble German designs) and the acquisition of diving gear to help train said Combat Personnel, until such time a full combat-ready space suit is developed, upon which that suit will be used for training breaches.

[tntey]

Why 8.1? Satellites and space stations are way different.

[OREOSOME]

Why 8.1? Satellites and space stations are way different.

You already made an 8. My suggestion was a modification for your idea that was vetoed.

[Andres]

7.1. Begin training Space Marines. To start with we should pick a handful of elite soldiers (not best of the best though - this stuff could be dangerous after all) and start educating them on theoretical stuff they'll probably have to learn to be effective Space Marines.
9. Begin prototyping space suits for various animals including mice, dogs, and chimps.
Since Proposal 8 is for satellites and 8.1 has nothing to do with satellites - Earth-based training grounds - I think I'll just make space stations a new proposal.
10. Research space stations.

[10ebbor10]

Spoiler: Irrelevant (click to show/hide)

You fail to grasp just how mindboogling fast space is. A shrapnel bomb launched in the opposite orbital direction would hit that target at about twice it's orbital speed. For LEO that means impacts of around 15 km per second).

And considering kinetic energy is m*v²/2,..., that matters a lot.

A 10 gram object at that speed has the same impact as a modern tank gun firing a 2.2 kg kinetic energy penetrator.

You fail to grasp that at this point people are doing navigation and aiming by eye, pencil, and notepad. Speeds are low, ships are designed with the expectation of damage, and the bombs would be being launched from spacecraft maneuvering so that they can actually hit the target, which means trying to match it in speed, or at the very least not going full speed in the other direction that its going. It is very hard to do space fighting when you are going so fast you only see the other ship for a few seconds, you know?

A cluster bomb would be lucky to actually hit anything with a large fragment, much less come down on someone from dead in front of them coming full speed in the other direction.

1) Speeds can't be low. If speeds are low, you're not in space.

2) You have a vehicle undergoing re-entry at high speed; with several vulnerabilities (bomb bay). A single hit will be sufficient. As said before, each gram of bomb material has a massive energy. As much as 25 grammes of TNT per gram of material. It'll cut straight through any armor, or at the very least damage it sufficiently.

3) The bomb would be launched using it own rocket, no humans allowed. It's the functional equivalent of an anti-aircraft flak shell, no advanced systems required. This allows a greatly increased payload. The single use Mercury rocket weighted 1.4 ton, and had no real orbital

4) You can't match speed with any target intending to bomb the continental United States. See; the target launches from Germany intending to bomb the United states. You can try to intercept it over the Atlantic, but then you'll be going the wrong way. Reversing course mid-flight is physically impossible so that doesn't work. So the only thing you can do is launch after it flies over (so after the bomb is dropped), when the target has either already re-entered to bomb or is just re-entering to land in Germany. In both cases, getting enough speed will be hard, and the encounter will be in atmosphere.

Of course, we can station forces in space to intercept any upcoming craft, but then we would need to have craft over the entire orbit, in range to pounce on an enemy within half an orbit. At that point, the range of a fighter is smaller than the range of our shrapnel cloud.

And when the enemy launches a space station, it's trajectory is predictable, so a shrapnel bomb can take it out. And thanks to the way tech here works, the shrapnel bomb will hit them before they find out they need to evade.

You simply can't beat a kinetic kill vehicle in space.

And also, despite the vastness of space there's a very limited re-entry window that can be used if you want to attack the continental United states. So, calculations are no problem. We know where they're going to be, and they have no option but to pass through that space.

However the current bomber is still sub-orbital and doesn't really reach space, hence, artillery rockets on a B-29.

I will once again note that our current main threat is a sub-orbital vehicle.

[Andres]

Stop arguing with the GM. It never ends well. Maybe we're using Hollywood physics? Rule of Fun perhaps?

[10ebbor10]

There is a reason the spoiler is marked irrelevant, because we're using Hollywood physics. Or at the very least making spectacular explosions while physics is looking the other way.

[Andres]

 

[RAM]

Spoiler: irrelevance for the irreverence god! (click to show/hide)

You fail to grasp just how mindboogling fast space is. A shrapnel bomb launched in the opposite orbital direction would hit that target at about twice it's orbital speed. For LEO that means impacts of around 15 km per second).

And considering kinetic energy is m*v²/2,..., that matters a lot.

A 10 gram object at that speed has the same impact as a modern tank gun firing a 2.2 kg kinetic energy penetrator.

You fail to grasp that at this point people are doing navigation and aiming by eye, pencil, and notepad. Speeds are low, ships are designed with the expectation of damage, and the bombs would be being launched from spacecraft maneuvering so that they can actually hit the target, which means trying to match it in speed, or at the very least not going full speed in the other direction that its going. It is very hard to do space fighting when you are going so fast you only see the other ship for a few seconds, you know?

A cluster bomb would be lucky to actually hit anything with a large fragment, much less come down on someone from dead in front of them coming full speed in the other direction.

1) Speeds can't be low. If speeds are low, you're not in space.
Which is why shrapnel is sort of fragile, the quantity of shrapnel that actually enters a stable orbit is pretty small, so you are dealing with a pretty brief effect or very small odds. And whole actually stopping something is sort of hopeless, if you are making some extremely favourable assumptions about the practicality of getting armour into space, some sort of deflection design(remember that you only need to protect against a fairly narrow range of angles), possibly with reactive armour, could probably survive an impact with smaller objects. Of course, if you can get that much armour up, then you can presumably get some very large scatter bombs, but still, you are basically looking at something that works similarly to a 40mm armour-piercing shotgun. Very scary, but not completely futile to resist and very difficult to actually get into a useful position...

2) You have a vehicle undergoing re-entry at high speed; with several vulnerabilities (bomb bay). A single hit will be sufficient. As said before, each gram of bomb material has a massive energy. As much as 25 grammes of TNT per gram of material. It'll cut straight through any armor, or at the very least damage it sufficiently.
A rear-mounted bomb-bay would be largely irrelevant, and sensors could all be externally mounted. It would make the vehicle prone to blindness, and the early models will likely have exposed windows and such for landing, but long-term you don't really need holes in your armour to protect against things that are using your own velocity against you.

3) The bomb would be launched using it own rocket, no humans allowed. It's the functional equivalent of an anti-aircraft flak shell, no advanced systems required. This allows a greatly increased payload. The single use Mercury rocket weighted 1.4 ton, and had no real orbital.
I suspect that our automated systems are extremely primitive, probably all mechanical. So they cannot reasonably be expected to react at all to the enemy, so you need to accurately predict your enemies. Your vehicle will pretty much need to be manned until it is in space... Nothing stopping us from prioritising automation though, but it'll be a big project...

4) You can't match speed with any target intending to bomb the continental United States. See; the target launches from Germany intending to bomb the United states. You can try to intercept it over the Atlantic, but then you'll be going the wrong way. Reversing course mid-flight is physically impossible so that doesn't work. So the only thing you can do is launch after it flies over (so after the bomb is dropped), when the target has either already re-entered to bomb or is just re-entering to land in Germany. In both cases, getting enough speed will be hard, and the encounter will be in atmosphere.
You can go around the long way...

Of course, we can station forces in space to intercept any upcoming craft, but then we would need to have craft over the entire orbit, in range to pounce on an enemy within half an orbit. At that point, the range of a fighter is smaller than the range of our shrapnel cloud.
Well that is all dependent upon communication and detection.

And when the enemy launches a space station, it's trajectory is predictable, so a shrapnel bomb can take it out. And thanks to the way tech here works, the shrapnel bomb will hit them before they find out they need to evade.
Rockets are kind of obvious, especially if you know where they are coming from. And assuming that getting mass into orbit is easier in the game, you can pack a decent supply of manoeuvring fuel and regularly reposition...
You simply can't beat a kinetic kill vehicle in space.
Kinetics are way too obvious and slow, you need L.A.S.E.R.s... Well, that or fighter craft, well, okay, unmanned fighter craft, but something with more autonomy than the average missile and you will almost certainly want submunitions...

And also, despite the vastness of space there's a very limited re-entry window that can be used if you want to attack the continental United states. So, calculations are no problem. We know where they're going to be, and they have no option but to pass through that space.
Of course, kinetics may be a bit slow for long-ranged extra-terrestrial engagements, but for ground bombardment, they are the bomb! And once you are willing to ignore things such as keeping the contents from being roasted or crushed, you get a bit more freedom. Not to mention that they can come from pretty much any angle they like if they don't mind taking their time over it...

However the current bomber is still sub-orbital and doesn't really reach space, hence, artillery rockets on a B-29.

I will once again note that our current main threat is a sub-orbital vehicle.
Fair enough, they are currently very limited with their approaches. Probably... Maybe we can figure out where they are landing...

8. I propose we create a zero gravity room if we currently don't have one to train space marines

9. I propose we research better and more long lasting fuel

8.Research Satellites!

11.Research Satellites!

8.1: Regarding the lack of a facility to properly train Space-capable combat personnel, the construction of a artificial 'space environment', made with a water filled chamber and mock-ups of various hulls(preferrably to resemble German designs) and the acquisition of diving gear to help train said Combat Personnel, until such time a full combat-ready space suit is developed, upon which that suit will be used for training breaches.

8.1.1 If we are going to be training in aquariums anyway, lets just train sharks. We will need to design some basic thrusters to replicate a shark's swimming motion in low gravity environs and some basic breathing apparatus, but once we have that in place, the sharks should be well equipped to operate in close quarters in a three dimensional environment and chemically inducing the required levels of aggression should not be too difficult...

[Happerry]

I am going to confirm that current computers are basically vacuum tube type giant installations, and you are highly unlikely to be able to fit any on a single or two man craft at this point.

As well, for some of the recent proposals, I would like to remind people of a few rules...

3. All proposals must be marked as a Large, Medium or Small project.
4. Design proposals begin at 1, for each year
5. Production proposals begin at A, for each year.
6. Other proposals, like reorganization of the team or political war plan suggestions will be marked using the Greek alphabet
8. Each proposal that doesn't follow these rules will be terminated with extreme prejudice.

(Eyes proposals that use the wrong designation and aren't marked for what size they are.)

Also, RAM, I'm not sure why you just created a ditto proposal, but if you were under the impression that that was how you voted, no no it isn't.

(Points at the format for votes rules and the Proposal Tracker. Reference the other games using these rules if you need an example.)

[Andres]

1.4. A small project to design space blowtorches that will be used to cut open and board enemy ship.
1.5 A small project to design low-penetration guns that work in space. So that our guys can board the Germans and kill/capture them with decreased chance of breaking the valuable insides.
α.7.1 A small project to train Space Marines. To start with we should pick a handful of elite soldiers (not best of the best though - this stuff could be dangerous after all) and start educating them on theoretical stuff they'll probably have to learn to be effective Space Marines.
1.9 A small (medium?) project to design space suits for various animals including mice, dogs, and chimps.
1.10 A large project to design a space station that can be used to train Space Marines.

Like that?

[Happerry]

I'm not sure why everything is one point something, but other then that it looks good...

[Andres]

Most start with 1. because they're design projects. How was I supposed to handle them?

[Happerry]

I've gone through every post and tried my best to use the right format to put them on the Proposal Tracker for everyone as a proper example. To vote, copy paste the latest version of this, and put your name in brackets behind what you want to vote for. Like this. 'Universal machine gun (Player 1, Player 2)'

Spoiler: Proposal tracker (click to show/hide)

1. I propose a medium project of developing pressure chambers and heat-resistant flaps to redirect the flow of propellants so as to use our main thrust for steering.
2. I propose the small project of converting a Single Person Test Vehicle into a self-propelled projectile. This will be primarily a research project to determine the difficulties present in maintaining predictable flight-patterns in unmanned vehicles.
3. I propose a medium effort be directed towards researching new fuels to enhance the efficiency of delivering vehicles to space.
4. I propose a small project to make blowtorches that work in space.
5. I propose a small project to make low-penetration guns that work in space.
6.  Large project : B-42 Stratospheric Denial Platform
7. I propose we research better and more long lasting fuel
8. Research Satellites!
9. Begin prototyping space suits for various animals including mice, dogs, and chimps.
10. Research space stations.


A: I propose we create a zero gravity room if we currently don't have one to train space marines.
  A.1: Regarding the lack of a facility to properly train Space-capable combat personnel, the construction of a artificial 'space environment', made with a water filled chamber and mock-ups of various hulls(preferrably to resemble German designs) and the acquisition of diving gear to help train said Combat Personnel, until such time a full combat-ready space suit is developed, upon which that suit will be used for training breaches.
B:
C:
D:
E:
F:


Alpha: Train Space Marines
Beta: If we are going to be training in aquariums anyway, lets just train sharks. We will need to design some basic thrusters to replicate a shark's swimming motion in low gravity environs and some basic breathing apparatus, but once we have that in place, the sharks should be well equipped to operate in close quarters in a three dimensional environment and chemically inducing the required levels of aggression should not be too difficult..
Gamma:
Delta:
Epsilon:
Zeta: