Print

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

[Kashyyk]

AT mines shouldn't that hard to make, if we really wanted something AT and defensive for urban warfare.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

My proposal

Mosquito
Narrow, small and nimble aluminium-wooden or full aluminium biplane (fit in 2 ore)  Light enough to consume 2 oil and have adequate speed. Armed with 2 Sorraria machineguns and special universal mount under fuselage. This mount should be able to use(in order of importance) Stallion, Light bomb, single shot preloaded Hippo, cargo container(ideally with a parachute), float pontoon(s) or nothing for increased speed and manoeuvrability. Failing make it universal, attach a single Stallion. Optimized for operating on low attitudes and maneuver between mountains houses in city

It is light fighter\ground attack\utility aircraft  with modular design in mind. If we will succeed with pontoons we will get some air support in jungles. Hippo variant will have only one shot, but hit from above should kill any armor, stallion variant can allow it to handle heavier enemies and empty will allow to handle manoeuvrable enemies.

Biplane is chosen because it is nimbler 

[LordSlowpoke]

haha, holy shit

basically a stunt plane with guns

that's hella moskurg, but there's only this much you can do with wood (our earlier wooden monoplane had stability problems at top speed) so let me double up on your idea

BUTTERFLY
small, nimble biplane made out of aluminum tubes and fiberglass cloth fit with a supercharged v8 engine in a pusher configuration
fitted with a modular weapons mount in front, for usage with hippo, stallion and (in the future) rocket systems
optimized for low-altitude flight and maneuverability

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Our earlier plane had problems because it was our earlier plane. Wood is not that bad material for aircrafts. WW2 have seen a full wooden fighter-bomber built for speed.

[Elfeater]

Wood might not be that bad, but we need something that will last for a while so we can focus on other things.

[LordSlowpoke]

the proposal i'm bringing, other than fixing the issue of stability, makes the craft a lot lighter (it's basically a bunch of hollow tubes welded together with strong cloth on top), 1 ore more expensive, and considering you'd likely want to use the same engine in your model the oil price shouldn't change

so what we're left is with getting more experience in fiberglass, a faster plane than a wooden one would be, and a modular weapons mount for whatever we need these for later (meaning it can be useful even in the 40s if we play our cards right)

[Kashyyk]

Do you reckon we've got the need/experience to build a heavy bomber? Say, a twin engine plane with a bomb bay and multiple crew members? We could do some serious carpet bombing of the enemy with one.

Re. fiberglass: When di that become a thing? I thought it was quite recent?

[LordSlowpoke]

in the 1930s, so we should be par for the course

carbon fibers are quite recent though, might be thinking of those

Do you reckon we've got the need/experience to build a heavy bomber? Say, a twin engine plane with a bomb bay and multiple crew members? We could do some serious carpet bombing of the enemy with one.

when we've got some free time, perhaps next year if we're lucky

i have vested interest in strategic bombing, for obvious reasons

[Elfeater]

Bombing supply convoys in the desert would cripple any attempts to take our cities. But for now we need an air superiority fighter.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

It is better long term but short term it may inflate the cost, while we need it cheap. I think that both cargo container and float pontoon can be somewhat useful and bomb will be definitely useful. Modular mount is the key of my design.

If I'll some support to half-wooden, I switch to it. I am wary that fiberglass thing will either fail or add +1 to the cost

Fiberglass, 1932 tech is a risky attempt and I prefer to not try it together with modular mount.


As for bombers... we have no ore to make full metal ones and it makes it an awful investment

[LordSlowpoke]

we have an expense credit, ur

even if it turns out to be more expensive than expected, we can afford to deploy it right now and work out the kinks later

we kind of have to think forward if we are to have any advantage in this, the reason we have arstotzkans knocking on our towns is because we were too busy countering them to think a year ahead

[Baffler]

Fighting in the homeland is very bad for us, we need to roll something out to help us gain ground in the desert or we risk losing access to the rest of our oil. I like the butterfly, but it's simply too expensive for us to deploy in the numbers we need, I think. +1 to Mosquito.

For our revision, I think we should try to improve our logistics. Right now we have 2 ore and 2 oil, which again is far too small for comfort. We could try to revise our trains to run on diesel, it requires a smaller labor pool and will let our trains run faster and carry more freight. Or we could introduce the intermodal container, which would speed loading from the trains out of the mountains to our trucks.

[LordSlowpoke]

I like the butterfly, but it's simply too expensive for us to deploy in the numbers we need, I think.

didn't i explain how it wouldn't be particularly expensive at all..?

[Baffler]

I like the butterfly, but it's simply too expensive for us to deploy in the numbers we need, I think.

didn't i explain how it wouldn't be particularly expensive at all..?

Yeah, but that's only next year. When the expense credit expires, we'll be stuck in the same place we are now where our equipment is on par with Arsetotzka's but we can't field enough of it to make a difference.

[LordSlowpoke]

that was an if. if it turns out to be expensive

i'm not the gm, i can't tell you whenever the mosquito or butterfly is more expensive, but from the best i can tell you is that there will be a 1 ore difference between the two tops