Print

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

Glorious Arstotzka

17 (16%)

Glorious Moskurg

13 (12.3%)

Ingloriously Didn't Play

76 (71.7%)

Total Members Voted: 106

[Kot]

The problem with Boxcar is that we DON'T need small landing craft. The chance we will be unable to make it carry tanks is too high, and for troops, the small landing craft role is dealt with by using Salamanders. We will end up with reduntant piece of shit on most rolls, and underwhelming box on high. With ship revisions we will end up with useless piece of shit on most rolls, and actually working thing on high ones, so, you know.

[Kashyyk]

We have no landing craft at all. Small landing craft which can drop a tank (as mentioned in the design) are just fine and will get enough toys and materiel on't to the beech.  A couple of large landers based off of ships that are not designed to be shot at is just asking for the entire invasion force to get sunk by shore batteries.

[QuakeIV]

I pretty much agree with Kot (oh god why did i have to say that).  Sensei was saying making a whole new landing craft is not going to be a Normal revision, and in general I think we would probably end up with a complex/expensive system either way, so we would hopefully at least have something with high capacity which is therefore able to actually make a big difference (in case of the CV22 retrofit).

Yes, it is steam powered and will be using old technology, but who cares.  Modern aircraft carriers are steam powered, because contrary to popular belief they aren't all that inherently inefficient or terrible.  Even space probe designers are looking into using low-heat ones to harvest energy from their radioisotope generators at much higher effeciency than the thermocouples.  We aren't trying to make an amazing super awesome landing craft, just something that more or less works so we can spend our designs on other things.

[andrea]

the length of the ramp, and I think it may have a bigger draft

[Sensei]

Just a heads-up, I'd probably say no to the Boxcar being a revision, considering it's an entirely new shape and size of boat. Forenian engineers lack the clarity of vision to stop arguing about the fundamental basics of a new design in the time alotted to a revision; the design/revision trade rule works more for edge cases or designs that could have been difficult revisions.

[NUKE9.13]

Yes, it is steam powered and will be using old technology, but who cares.  Modern aircraft carriers are steam powered, because contrary to popular belief they aren't all that inherently inefficient or terrible.

No, no, you misunderstand. I have zero problems with steam-powered ships.

But the CV22 uses LITERAL TRAIN ENGINES, FROM A TRAIN. When it was created, the Arstotzkans took engines from their train and bolted it to a ship. We have better engines now, that could actually make the thing move at a decent lick.

[10ebbor10]

If you want to go insane, you could do what the Germans did, but in reverse.

Pick the Ice giant, remove the engines, and turn it into a combat glider. Removal of the entire Oil and part of the Ore cost will ensure that it's cheap (or at least expensive). Oh, and their missiles won't work anymore, because they don't have a heat source to aim on.

[QuakeIV]

The real point is that revising the whole propulsion system adds difficulty, which we cant afford.  This is barely doable without trying to make it actually good.  We just need something that more or less works...

[Kot]

If you want to go insane, you could do what the Germans did, but in reverse.

Pick the Ice giant, remove the engines, and turn it into a combat glider. Removal of the entire Oil and part of the Ore cost will ensure that it's cheap (or at least expensive). Oh, and their missiles won't work anymore, because they don't have a heat source to aim on.

The problem is it likely won't be able to carry enough heavy equipment, and also that since we want it to assault mountains, it will have really little landing opportunities, which could be solved with adding floats to it or something, but then... yeah.

[Kot]

Support Grenade Launcher model of 1942 "Fire Sword" is a launching system based on Arstotzkan RPG28 A. The tube has been cut down, so was propellant charge, making it have shorter range.

Instead of heavy offensive warheads, it should primarily carry "flare" rounds, modified incendiary grenades that, instead of exploding, slowly burn emiting a lot of heat and light. Another priority  is making the whole system small enough to be mounted externally on airplanes, especially cargo planes and bombers. We hope that enemy heatseeking missiles will pursue those instead of our planes.

Secondary priorities is adapting it to be mounted on tanks and being useable by infantry, and making compatibile smoke rounds. If there is any time left, we should research the possibility of using frag rounds.

(1) UFN-LCU-42 Pattern F 'Wooden Axe': helmacon (contingent on name change)
(0) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword":
(1) F.U.-B.D.S.M.-1942 "Giant Finger": RAM
(1) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword" Pattern M: NUKE9.13
(4) UF-LST22-42 "Wooden Spear": QuakeIV, Andrea, NAV, Piratejoe
(4) UFN-LC-42 'Boxcar': eS, Madman, Kashyyk, McHuman
(0) UF-BS42 "Wooden Hammer":
(1) UFN-LC-42 'Wooden Halberd': Jilladilla
(1) UF-SGL42 "Fire Sword": Kot

salt landers
EDIT:
Oh shit, I didin't even notice I doubleposted.

[stabbymcstabstab]

(1) UFN-LCU-42 Pattern F 'Wooden Axe': helmacon (contingent on name change)
(0) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword":
(1) F.U.-B.D.S.M.-1942 "Giant Finger": RAM
(1) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword" Pattern M: NUKE9.13
(5) UF-LST22-42 "Wooden Spear": QuakeIV, Andrea, NAV, Piratejoe, Stabby
(4) UFN-LC-42 'Boxcar': eS, Madman, Kashyyk, McHuman
(0) UF-BS42 "Wooden Hammer":
(1) UFN-LC-42 'Wooden Halberd': Jilladilla
(1) UF-SGL42 "Fire Sword": Kot

voting for this since we need a lander.


and could we revise the salamander into a cheaper variant for landings id we made it open-top and elongated it we could make it serviceable.

[Sensei]

Without any further votes, I will go on to write up the "Wooden Spear" soon. It's well ahead of the Boxcar, which I'd like to remind you isn't really a viable revision.

[evictedSaint]

Well fuck.

We could just revise flares this turn, then design an actual lander next turn.  At this point it seems like a revised ship will be incredibly complex regardless of how we do it, let alone effective...

[Madman198237]

(1) UFN-LCU-42 Pattern F 'Wooden Axe': helmacon (contingent on name change)
(0) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword":
(1) F.U.-B.D.S.M.-1942 "Giant Finger": RAM
(1) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword" Pattern M: NUKE9.13
(5) UF-LST22-42 "Wooden Spear": QuakeIV, Andrea, NAV, Piratejoe, Stabby
(3) UFN-LC-42 'Boxcar': eS, Kashyyk, McHuman
(0) UF-BS42 "Wooden Hammer":
(1) UFN-LC-42 'Wooden Halberd': Jilladilla
(2) UF-SGL42 "Fire Sword": Kot, Madman

[Jilladilla]

(1) UFN-LCU-42 Pattern F 'Wooden Axe': helmacon (contingent on name change)
(0) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword":
(1) F.U.-B.D.S.M.-1942 "Giant Finger": RAM
(1) UF-LCV42 "Wooden Sword" Pattern M: NUKE9.13
(6) UF-LST22-42 "Wooden Spear": QuakeIV, Andrea, NAV, Piratejoe, Stabby, Jilladilla
(3) UFN-LC-42 'Boxcar': eS, Kashyyk, McHuman
(0) UF-BS42 "Wooden Hammer":
(0) UFN-LC-42 'Wooden Halberd':
(2) UF-SGL42 "Fire Sword": Kot, Madman