On 11/09/2007, David Scheidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/11/07, DataPacRat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/09/2007, Pauli Hakala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > Here's another question. I've come up with two near-identical variants
> > of the Pigeon, differing in that one's powered by a battery, the other
> > by a TL8 hydrogen combustion engine. Both have about 8 hours duration,
> > both have similar top speeds that are good enough for the task... so,
> > from a logistics viewpoint rather than a tactical one, when getting
> > ready to launch a 30,000-strong flock of these things in some random
> > part of the world, do you think it would be better to power them up by
> > plugging them into a charger or filling up all of their 1/3-gallon
> > hydrogen tanks?
>
> Neither.  It's a use once weapon system.  It should be ready to use,
> out of the box.

Heh. I can live with that. (Even if it means I don't really have any
criteria to pick between the two power supplies. I suppose since the
battery isn't air-breathing, it's theoretically able to do slightly
more things than the hydrogen engine, so that's what I'll probably go
with.)

I think I was thinking along the lines of missiles and warheads being
shipped separately, but now that I think on it, the recent news story
that led my mind about that thought was specifically about the care
taken with /nuclear/ warheads being carefully shipped apart from their
delivery platforms, which is somewhat of a different matter.


So, let's see. The current iteration is a little less than ten pounds,
has power enough for 8 hours, can fly at 215 mph (thus a range of
about 1,720 miles), can pull maneuvers of 34 gees (allowing two
90-degree bends, ie a U-turn, in a single turn at full speed), has
minimum takeoff run with no launch-catapult of 24 yards (though an
889-yard strip will let them get up to full speed before takeoff)...
and when it and all its buddies get wherever its going, can merrily
blow itself up for 24d[4d] of damage each, which will ruin any
un-armored infantryman's or guerrilla's day.

Say, are there any special rules for what happens when a dozen
grenades all go off at once right next to each other? Looking at the
sample Main Battle Tank on pV141... tracks only have DR 30, and the
tank's top side only 90 - a few dozen pigeons would seem to be enough
to have a near-enough-to-certain chance to break through that.

I suppose I could scrap the chameleon system (which only offers a -1
spotting penalty when it's moving anyway) and throw on .966 sf of
solar cells instead, for .03 kW, about a quarter of its power
requirement, somewhat extending range on sunny days and letting them
"roost" in-the-field for later re-launch and recovery or re-use. Maybe
have a few "Hawk" models big enough to carry EW gear for the flock as
a whole instead of bombs, or Pigeons with some chemical rounds or
chaff/flares/etc. But I can't think of much else to do to improve the
things.

Anybody care to suggest possible counter-measures against these
Pigeons, either for hi-tech hi-price armies or TL8 insurgents? (Note -
additional weapons systems from the source material that I have yet to
stat out are "Spiders" to enter enclosed caves, buildings, or
underground tunnels that the flying pigeons aren't suited for; and
"Puppets", VR-console remote-controlled infantry robots.)


Thank you for your time,
-- 
DataPacRat         VA3BOS
"You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for
yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain,
and you are responsible for using them." -- Qur'an 17:36, Khalifa
translation.
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l

Reply via email to