Print

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

[andrea]

it is a target. The chance of overshooting exists. If our engineers decide we can't reasonably meet specifications without a very complex design, we will still get very expensive.

However, by aimin at very extensive, they will beging working on more complex features. If some turn out to be more complex, we may outright fail or get a national effort.

If anything, aiming at expensive means telling our engineers to not be too ambitious and only try to get features they think they can design without excessive trouble.

edit: I think we are operating on different definitions of what aiming for a cost means. We are going for the interpretation of ' keep it simple, so unforeseen problems mean we can still hope to field it' while you interpret it as 'spend as much time making it cheaper'

[Kot]

I don't think we can get a proper RPG by revising our mortar. Not to the degree of effectiveness we want. For similar reasons to why we had to use different design actions for different guns: while the way they function is similar, the designs are different enough that a revision doesn't cut it.

We need to design a new solid propellant that can be used for controlled burns, we need to figure out how to do controlled burns, we have to stabilise the rocket using fins, we've got to figure out how exactly the RPG is reloaded, we need to design the basic shape of the RPG (including how we trigger the rocket to start rocketing), and we have to determine how the shape of the warhead will affect aerodynamics. This is not something we can do in a mere Revision phase.

Because truly, shoving an AT grenade on a rocket with fins and placing it in a tube is VERY hard. We have everything we need, we have the solid propellant (mortar), we proably know what fins are, considering that even regular mortar shells have them, figuring out how to reload something isin't really a problem (and even if, we don't even have to reload them), we know the basic shape from our mortar (explosive - rocket - fins), and if we don't know what aerodynamics are, how the hell we're making useful ammunition or planes?

I apologise for changing my opinion whenever new facts and points of view appear. Truly I am the worst person and an utter hypocrite.

It's just amazing that one day you're ferociously fighting against one thing and next day you consider it being a good idea, without batting an eye.

A successful RPG prototype was made in 1918. The project was only stopped because the war ended 5 days after the successful RPG prototype was made. We're not ahead of our time.

It was a recoilless rifle, not a rocket launcher. Unless we're talking about different things.
There's a difference, you know.

HOLY GOD EMPEROR PEOPLE STOP POSTING I WANT TO POST TOO WITHOUT ALL THOSE WARNINGS

[10ebbor10]

Because truly, shoving an AT grenade on a rocket with fins and placing it in a tube is VERY hard.

It is, actually.

Revisions are designed to make small adaptions to designs. You propose to go from a system which is designed for indirect fire against infantery to a design that uses direct fire against enemy tanks. Literally nothing similar.

[tryrar]

Well, I have an idea for revision. I propose we do a general engine revision to at least include fuel injection on all our engines, and attempt to get turbochargers cheap. If for some reason we can't get cheap turbos, then simply replace turbos with roots type superchargers(which has been around since the 1860s)

[andrea]

a mortar and an RPG have quite different operational profiles, Kot. Projectiles must be different, they fly different, they are made for different purposes. the tube is also different due to that and the trigger must be as well ( right now we light the fuse and shove the shell in, while an RPG could benefit from a proper trigger allowing aiming.). Sure, we have all the pieces, but overall it is a different weapon. With reasoning such as your, we could have gotten several of our guns as revisions from the mosin nagant or its semi-auto successor.

We have barrels, we have triggers, we have ammunition. why do we need a new design?

well, because the needs of the new weapon mean redesigning most, if not all, components, which takes time.

[Andres]

I apologise for changing my opinion whenever new facts and points of view appear. Truly I am the worst person and an utter hypocrite.

It's just amazing that one day you're ferociously fighting against one thing and next day you consider it being a good idea, without batting an eye.

If I have every reason to believe in something, I'll believe in it and I'll try to make others believe too. If I then lose those reasons (whether by me figuring something out or someone else presenting new evidence), I won't blindly continue believing. I'll just pack up my things and move on. It's a much more productive way to do things. The alternative is me continuing about how turbochargers are inferior despite evidence to the contrary.

It was a recoilless rifle, not a rocket launcher. Unless we're talking about different things.
There's a difference, you know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazooka

[Dr. Robert H. Goddard] and his co-worker, Dr. Clarence N. Hickman, successfully demonstrated his rocket to the US Army Signal Corps at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, on November 6, 1918, but as the Compiègne Armistice was signed only five days later, further development was discontinued.

HOLY GOD EMPEROR PEOPLE STOP POSTING I WANT TO POST TOO WITHOUT ALL THOSE WARNINGS

I know, right? It gets freaking insane.

3 NEW POSTS FUCKIT

[Kot]

Because guns are quite precise and taping things together doesn't work. (Actually it does, proved by Talibans or whatever middle-east guys, but ssshhh.)
In case of RPGs, it does, as proved by Talibans or whatever middle-east guys did it. But we're not Moskurgians, so we have actual workshops so that let us tape them stronger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazooka

I've had no idea honestly.

[10ebbor10]

That Taliban weaponry is not a taped over mortar. It's old soviet surplus, but the soviets were quite good at developing various weapons.

[tryrar]

One slight mod after reading the bazooka article: The rocket should be electrically triggered using a magneto sparker incorporated into the trigger(with the appropriate safety included), and forgo batteries entirely.

[Kot]

That Taliban weaponry is not a taped over mortar. It's old soviet surplus, but the soviets were quite good at developing various weapons.

Some of it is.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[/img]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-the-syrian-rebels/s34_54492504/main_900.jpg?GE2DEMBVGEYDONJUFYYA====[/img]

I could find better pictures I've saw sometime before, but my internet sucks too much.

[Aseaheru]

 Thats... a RPG hat... What...


 Also, once you know how exactly something works, making it gets a hell of alot easier.

[Kot]

Thats... a RPG hat... What...


 Also, once you know how exactly something works, making it gets a hell of alot easier.

Yeah, true.
But we know that our mortars can kill their tanks if hit directly. We want a mortar that one soldier can hold and shoot without recoil. We put an AT grenade on our downscaled rocket mortar with a trigger. Boom, we have an RPG.

[andrea]

ok. That is an improvised RPG launcher.

Where is the improvised RPG? it requires a lot of testing to get a rocket grenade flying right, we need to experiment on the exact mixture to get the right sped and range and size. test several aerodinamic shapes, the effects on tank armor ( glancing, etc). the tube itself is not much. we can use a revision to get a mortar more or less capable to aim horizzontally. But an RPG it is not.

and even without all this: I don't think the GM will allow the use of a simple revision to go from an ancient mortar(artillery) to a whole new, advanced piece of direct fire AT portable weapon.
And what aseaheru said. After you know how something is supposed to work, even just generally, replicating it is a lot easier, since you can scrap all the limitless dead ends in developement.

by the way
enlist the help of the rocket club in designing this new weapon
they likely have some more experience than us already and we might as well take advantage of our civilian sector.

[Kot]

Argh, whatever. I still think that design phase could be used better.
So...
Man portable shoulder-fired rocket launcher, with primary loadout being our new shaped charge (grenade technology) for use against enemy tanks and secondary being anti-infantry sharpnel charge (landmines technology), maybe incendiary too, should be reliable, accurate and have decent range, also lightweight thanks to use of aluminium (I don't consider pure-aluminium tube a good idea, maybe something akin to a aluminium tube with steel reinforcements) It should be also expensive. Proably firing 50mm rockets. All under very original name of AS-RPG28. Eh.

[andrea]

Well. What is your proposal for the design then? I think you suggested a sniper rifle?