--- On Sat, 9/10/11, Onno Meyer <[email protected]> wrote:

> Brandon wrote:
> > As a result, the more men a combat vehicle carried,
> the
> > better the armor it had. The 'Infantry Carrier,
> Tracked, M-1' (as the US
> > designated it) reflected that philosophy, offering
> fairly good (almost tank-like)
> > protection for it's three crew and six dismounts. The
> idea was not
> > well-received by the Allies, who also didn't like the
> weight (21 tons), speed (32
> > mph) or small number of soldiers carried. 
> 
> Would the Atlantean proposal of an assault rifle have gone
> with
> a matching SAW and a smaller infantry squad?

Yes, and I plan for them to make a second offer that will be harder to refuse.
 
> > Things changed after the invasion of Italy in 1943.
> The Martians, fearing
> > the tide was turning too far against the Axis, began
> overtly aiding them
> > (completely abandoning their treaty with the
> Atlanteans and dragging them
> > into the war). this included releasing large stocks of
> their infamous 'black
> > smoke' which were then used as the filler in artillery
> shells and dispersal
> > bombs. Allied infantry, either on foot or in open
> trucks and halftracks,
> > were decimated. Only those soldiers in the sealed
> M-1A1's were fully
> > protected. 
> 
> Was the Martian smoke more deadly than mere human gas?

As at least one of my players is on this list, I'll just say it's worse than 
mustard gas.

> And there were early NBC suits, I think. Rush them into 
> production and general issue?

I'd have to check on chemical suits, but it's possible.

> > This created some friction with the Atlanteans, as
> accusations flew that
> > they knew what the Martians had planned and had
> callously not told Allied
> > command. The Atlanteans claimed that sealing combat
> vehicles was merely
> > standard design practice for them. 
> 
> Learn to trust the Atlaneans, even if you don't understand
> why.
> They know better. They're good. They're God (or Goddess, as
> it 
> may be).

The Allies don't want their survival to be dependent on a group they barely 
know.
 
> > Two standard bazookas are affixed to mounting brackets
> on the right side
> > of the turret but can be removed in a matter of
> seconds. The electrically
> > fired rockets have their leads connected to insulated
> posts on the side of
> > the turret, which allows the commander to fire either
> or both from inside. A
> > total of twelve rockets are carried (two in the
> tubes). The bazookas are
> > really intended for use by the dismounts but are
> carried in a fashion to
> > allow them to also be used as emergency anti-tank
> weapons for the vehicle. It
> > was intended to eventually replace these with
> semi-permanent 57mm recoilless
> > rifles, which were still in development. 
> 
> Was the problem of getting bazookas inside an issue?

The original bazooka tube couldn't be broken down for transport, meaning you 
had to find a place to carry a long tube.

> And
> would an 
> externally mounted RR be effective? How about aiming? 

I assume they would be set to fire at tank-sized objects at 100 yards, the 1/2D 
range for the weapon. Otherwise, though, accuracy would leave something to be 
desired.
 
> > Six
> > troops are carried and exit either via two roof
> hatches or a rear drop ramp.
> > They sit facing each other, in the rear section of the
> vehicle, with the
> > cargo evenly split on the walls behind them.
> 
> No firing ports, then?

No.
 
> > Subassemblies: Sealed Medium Tank chassis +4,
> full-rotation Small AFV
> > turret [Body:T] +3, full-rotation Mini Weapon open
> mount [Tur:T] +0, tracks +3.
> 
> One OM is AWOL.

The bazooka brackets were a last second addition to the design and the changes 
didn't all get included, it seems.

> > Weaponry
> > 37mm Medium Ground AC/M-1 [Turret:F] (120).
> 
> One could argue that the 25mm cannon in the Bradley is
> really
> just a HMG on steroids, to go after the kind of target a
> HMG
> could handle in WWII -- armored cars, cheap APCs, trucks at
> 
> long range, perhaps even aircraft if you could hit them.
> 
> So why go for a 37mm gun, and not a 20mm gun with more
> ammo?

Since the US armored car of the time -- M-8 Greyhound -- used a 37mm tank gun, 
they were not likely to object to a 37mm gun in a recon support vehicle.

As to why the Atlanteans picked a 37mm gun. maybe they do know something they 
aren't telling the Allies ;)
 
> > Ground LMG/M-1919A4 [Tur:F] (2,500).
> > Very Long Ground HMG/M-2HB [OM1:F] (400).
> 
> Would that go with the Atlantean doctrine of staying under
> armor, or was it a human addition?

They knew the humans would ant an AA gun and included one.
 
> > 2x2.36" rocket launchers/M-1 bazookas (OM2:F) (12).
> > 
> > Equipment
> > Body: Fire extinguisher, NBC kit (10-man), medium
> radio receiver and
> > transmitter. Turret: 4 smoke dischargers.
> 
> How about active IR? 

Hadn't actually occurred to me.

> And a second radio? TL7 AFVs tend to have two.

Hmm. Yes, probably a short range for contact with other scout vehicles and a 
longer-ranged one for battalio HQ or artillery batteries.

Brandon
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l

Reply via email to