Print

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

[QuakeIV]

I support the grenade launcher idea, that would be a good way to beat up their armor guys.

[Aseaheru]

 Right, here I am. And here is my proposial: The AS-GLu35

Spoiler: AS-GLu35 (click to show/hide)

 The Grenade Launcher (under) model of 1935 is, well, a 40mm caseless grenade launcher (using the finest rocketry experience from our proud engineers) designed to be mounted under the barrel of the AS-AR34, allowing a soldier to be more effective against armored targets at longer ranges, and with better accuracy, than with normal grenades. The entire system consists of a short barrel (just longenough for the grenade) with a short foregrip, a simple adjustable sighting system (going out to 300m at the most), and hardware to mount it to the rifle.

 If there is time enough, and the weapon is safe enough, engineers should work on a number of rounds for it, including flare, smoke, buckshot, AP (using magnesium-based steel) and HEAT. This is, of course, in addition to the normal HE rounds.

[Andres]

Right, here I am. And here is my proposial: The AS-GLu35

Spoiler: AS-GLu35 (click to show/hide)

 The Grenade Launcher (under) model of 1935 is, well, a 40mm caseless grenade launcher (using the finest rocketry experience from our proud engineers) designed to be mounted under the barrel of the AS-AR34, allowing a soldier to be more effective against armored targets at longer ranges, and with better accuracy, than with normal grenades. The entire system consists of a short barrel (just longenough for the grenade) with a short foregrip, a simple adjustable sighting system (going out to 300m at the most), and hardware to mount it to the rifle.

 If there is time enough, and the weapon is safe enough, engineers should work on a number of rounds for it, including flare, smoke, buckshot, AP (using magnesium-based steel) and HEAT. This is, of course, in addition to the normal HE rounds.

+1, but with some edits. It should be designed to be mounted on accessory rails, rather than the AR34A specifically. HEAT and buckshot should be the highest priority alternate ammo. Also, the AP alternate ammo should have a manganese core rather than a flammable magnesium core.

Glory to Arstotzka.

[Aseaheru]

 Why not both? Future proof ourselves and make immediate use.
 Also, I just dump-listed alternate loads, so...

[Andres]

Why not both? Future proof ourselves and make immediate use.

The AR34A already comes with an accessory rail.

Glory to Arstotzka.

[10ebbor10]

I quite like that design.

On a side note, the steel we have is Manganese based steel, not magnesium based steel. The latter is not bad either, though the fact that magnesium is highly flammable isn't optimal.

[andrea]

Spoiler: AS-V35 (click to show/hide)

This is a solid rocket missile , with a slender exterior designed to reduce atmospheric drag. Its engine is powerful enough and carries enough fuel to propel it far outside the breathable atmosphere, from where it falls down to hit targets on a ballistic trajectory at hypersonic velocity, making detection hard. It uses fins and a gyroscopic system to stabilyze its flight. It carries a 500 kg warhead.

I am voting for this, silly as it might be.

If any of you design planes, keep in mind that to extend range we can use the drop tanks we developed. It should make range extension easier.

[Andres]

If any of you design planes, keep in mind that to extend range we can use the drop tanks we developed. It should make range extension easier.

The drop tanks require Oil to use, so it's ultimately impractical.

Glory to Arstotzka.

[andrea]

extended range will also cost oil. If we must spend it, at least lets make it easy to develope.

[10ebbor10]

We can't do anything about our planes' range due to our lack of Oil. Unless we make an aircraft carrier, that's a handicap we just have to live with.

But the aircraft carrier can't you know, get their, due to the arrangement of the bays.

Wait a moment, I have a cunning plan ! Multiple ones in fact.

Spoiler: Sane Plan (click to show/hide)

Build Coal to oil facilities. High quality fuels from something we have lying around here in great volume.

Spoiler: Game Mechanics based Plan (click to show/hide)

Fit our bomber with Diesel engines and droppods. Drop pods give range, diesel engines reduce the increased fuel consumption. Probably have to add systems to allow towing on launch due to the extra take-off weight

Spoiler: Less Sane Plan (click to show/hide)

Disposable bombers. A large glider, towed into the air by multiple planes. The planes ditch the bomber when they get on their halfway point. Bomber continues on it's own, delivers it's payload, then returns with the crew crash-landing or ditching it above friendly lines.

Actually, given that it is so light, we can probably introduce a few parachutes and land it right there.

Spoiler: Silly Plan (click to show/hide)

Airborne Aircraft Carrier

[10ebbor10]

Anyway, another nice idea. Some of these might be more practical than others.

Spoiler: AS-BSL-35 (click to show/hide)

A variant on the T-25, this tank has had it's turret replaced with a modified turret which has a thin slit, through which a very, very powerful carbon arc searchlight shines. The beam of light blinds all those who look at it, and due to the thin slit, sniping it isn't possible. It is unarmed safe for the co-axial machine gun, though it is fitted with a dummy barrel. Also, utilizes a diesel engine to reduce cost.

[Andres]

But the aircraft carrier can't you know, get their, due to the arrangement of the bays.

The obvious solution is to make an overground aircraft carrier!

Glory to Arstotzka.

[andrea]

An Airborne aircraft carrier to carry bombers? that is even sillyer than my rocket.

speaking about that, to show how serious I am...

+1 to AS-V35

however, while I am going to stick with this vote, I must say I like the ore to oil conversion plan.

edit: Overground aircraft carrier? HAHA. Make a design for the uber-landkreuzer and I might actually switch my vote.

[10ebbor10]

The problem is that our bomber isn't exactly a thing which can easily take of from aircraft carriers.

[andrea]

It is a ground aircraft carrie. It already is ridiculous. at this point, enlarging it to host bombers as well doesn't icnrease the ridiculousness, we already maxed that.

more sensible may be building an actual air field in the desert.