NationStates

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 8:57 am**

Hrstrovokia wrote:
The Akasha Colony wrote:
Why wouldn't it? It's not like the hangar deck/flight deck disappear if the well deck is in use, or vice versa.

These are generally not separate things, anyway. Any amphibious landing is going to require significant helicopter support.

I just assumed that, although they've have the space for the helicopters in the hanger, on the deck, and the vehicles in the well, they wouldn't necessarily be able to support large aircrew component and large ground crew/troops together at the same time, so that a decision has to be made over which mission it undertakes.

This is more a matter of duration than anything else. Ship berthing is quite flexible because you can literally have people sleep almost anywhere. It's not desirable for long periods, but fine in the shorter term.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:00 am**

Here's a question - how do you fight against fallout power armor? I'm pretty heavily outgunned here.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:05 am**

Nootka Coast wrote:Here's a question - how do you fight against fallout power armor? I'm pretty heavily outgunned here.

Rotary grenade launcher

Or run them over with a car. They're still human and shock absorbers can only do so much.

Ooh, or nailing them in the same location a few times with a high-caliber machine gun. .50 cal or above after a few hits should cave the armor straight into their chest, or just get penetrated.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:34 am**

Nootka Coast wrote:Here's a question - how do you fight against fallout power armor? I'm pretty heavily outgunned here.

M249 mod, rechamber to 7.62x51mm and use one of the damage modifiers. Maxing out COMMANDO won't hurt

Minces everything from high level legendary deathclaws and swamp crawlers all the way through to power armour.

If you mean realistically then the usual way you fight light armour ie rockets, grenades, machines gun and anti material rifles.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 9:40 am**

Nootka Coast wrote:Here's a question - how do you fight against fallout power armor? I'm pretty heavily outgunned here.

Blast it with an RPG. Seriously, can't imagine it standing up well to modern HEAT rounds.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:02 am**

XM-29/XM-25 style grenade launchers firing heat. 20mm HEAT should cut through literally anything a human sized shape can carry and not sink into the soil as if it was made of lead like it wasn't there.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:21 am**

Nootka Coast wrote:Here's a question - how do you fight against fallout power armor? I'm pretty heavily outgunned here.

Rocket launcher firing HEAT rounds, large bore armor piercing rifle, laser weapon, or just nuke it.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:47 pm**

Flood the fields with water and bog it down, then shell it with mortars ala Taliban style.

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2020 10:18 pm**

Nootka Coast wrote:Here's a question - how do you fight against fallout power armor? I'm pretty heavily outgunned here.

Use Bigger power armor.I'm bigger, I'm stronger,Waaaagh!

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 2:25 am**

Where there is a real standalone powered armor... there should be an efficient energy source to power this..

This can be your ultimate power armor remover. an anti-material railgun.

192mm of penetration at 2000 m with tungsten shell while DU allows 235mm, even steel can do 84mm.

Nothing more stylish.

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 4:34 am**

I am dubious as to if an unaugmented human could carry or fire such a weapon. Same with some of the other proposals such as using HMG's. So it would pretty much be a power armor weapon for fighting other power armor.
My proposal meanwhile is to issue everyman with an XM-29 style weapon which you should by the time PA comes along be able to perfect. 20mm of HEAT should be enough to go through any power armor you encounter.

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 12:44 pm**

does that say 1,200 km/s

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 1:21 pm**

.3% the speed of light should crack just about anything we make in the next hundred or so years, so yeah. I'd assume it's about right. Nevermind the massive amount of heat radiation that would come off of it.

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 3:05 pm**

I am not quite sure those calculations are correct. I mean, a basic kinetic energy calculation gives me numbers in the tens of TJ range. At those energies I do not think that the penetrator would penetrate as much as it would explode on impact. And that's even before we get into the question of how the materials them self would behave at those velocities. Like I would not be surprised if the thing basically acted like a HEAT jet as opposed to following any sort of regular kinetic impact rules. And that's if it did not just burn up in flight which at those speeds is not a given. Hell, I would not be surprised if the friction in the barrel made the weapon it self burn up catastrophically.

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 3:40 pm**

it's obviously 1,200 m/s

odermatt equation probably breaks faster than 3-4 km/s tbh

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2020 4:31 pm**

Welcome to Italian style of comma

.

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 2:41 am**

Kassaran wrote:Flood the fields with water and bog it down, then shell it with mortars ala Taliban style.

Ah yes, the Azincourt gambit.

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 2:43 am**

Do Army Intelligence personnel often get moved to desk jobs as a reward for bravery in the field?

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 3:06 am**

New Vihenia wrote:Welcome to Italian style of comma .

Even if we drop 10³ from the speed that still leaves a weapon that's in the same order of magnitude as an early WW2 AT gun. I am NOT volunteering to shoulder fire that.

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:29 am**

Purpelia wrote: from the speed that still leaves a weapon that's in the same order of magnitude as an early WW2 AT gun. I am NOT volunteering to shoulder fire that.

Well it's pretty much an Anti-tank rifle except this one is an EM Railgun. There is a Bipod there, should help mitigate recoil.

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:36 am**

Purpelia wrote:
New Vihenia wrote:Welcome to Italian style of comma 8).

Even if we drop 10³ from the speed that still leaves a weapon that's in the same order of magnitude as an early WW2 AT gun. I am NOT volunteering to shoulder fire that.

Got t'em

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:45 am**

Clearly however. the Glowtusk can use of some improvement on recoil system.

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 4:48 am**

New Vihenia wrote:
Purpelia wrote: from the speed that still leaves a weapon that's in the same order of magnitude as an early WW2 AT gun. I am NOT volunteering to shoulder fire that.

Well it's pretty much an Anti-tank rifle except this one is an EM Railgun. There is a Bipod there, should help mitigate recoil.

I guess. It's still going to be nasty on the shoulder though. Than again if your enemy is fielding PA no reason why you shouldn't too. Still I'd rather have some sort of HEAT capable rifle that I can issue to everyman soldier for melting PA.

This all being said killing PA is really not so much of an interesting question if you ask me. There are many ways to do it even before we get into future tech the sort of which is implied by the existence of PA it self. Rather, what I find more interesting is the other question of PA. How do you use them? What role do these tankettes in human form have in warfare? Do we assume everyone gets one? Or are they more limited? Are they specialist equipment? Do you have special variants? Etc. Etc.

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:00 am**

Obviously physical defense in power armor is secondary to environmental protection, pseudo-adaptive camouflage and virtual intelligence assisted communications&electronic warfare suite power part of power armor allows every frontline infantry soldier to wield. *nods*

Posted: **Sun Jul 26, 2020 5:16 am**

And i find existence of PA means that there would already be a small power source to power it. Thus why an EM Railgun would be in realm of possibility there.

NationStates

NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Vol. 11.0