A Grav Train like on Firefly makes sense IF: - ...the grav technology requires an exterior component to be workable (like MAGLEV) OR - ...a road between two points on the planet's surface makes more sense for some reason than an air route OR - ...the equivalent of a long-range, horizontal elevator is needed (quick transit non-stop to specific points, performed (semi-)automatically)
The exterior component I mentioned could be something like force field tech to protect against ground threats like landslides. These are the things I can think of off the top of my head after the kids have kept me awake all night. On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:22 AM, Onno Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear GURPSnet, > > on the sidelines of my last Traveller game, another player asked if "Grav > Trains" make any sense, and especially armored trains. Someone else > mentioned The Train Job from Firefly. > > Do Grav Trains make any sense? > A grav train would be a grav vehicle consisting of an engine and > several/many carriages, with a flexible connection. In GURPS, the > contragrav unit for lift, the thrusters/propulsion, and the power plant are > separate. It might make sense to have a "tug vehicle" with power and > propulsion and a variable number of "trailers" just with a contragrav unit, > drawing power from the "tug". That way you can use the same "tug vehicle" > with different sets of passenger and cargo "trailers" and make best use of > the investment in an expensive power plant. The rules as written in 3E have > some problems where it comes to tow hitches and pins for trains, but > published precedent is to ignore those problems (e.g. the armored train in > W:MP). > > Wouldn't it make more sense to have unpowered containers on a big grav > flyer? > Probably. One advantage of the train is that an express with just one or > two carriages is faster than a slow train with several dozen, a big flyer > couldn't scale that way. > > What is an Armored Train and why? > Armored trains had their brief days of glory when/where the state of roads > and automobile technology hampered armored cars or tanks, e.g. the Russian > Civil War or the Chinese warlord era. An armored train combined massive > firepower (dozens of MMGs, often tank-level guns and medium or heavy > artillery with plenty of ammo), a company-sized raiding force, and higher > speed than contemporary cars or tanks. They were vulnerable to attacks on > the tracks e.g. by aircraft, so they're pretty much dead these days. > > For a grav AFV with that role, flexible components would more likely use > the articulated body from VXi4. The reason why it is a "grav snake" rather > than a "grav brick" is that the Armored Grav Train is designed to work in > cities with infrastructure for Grav Trains -- that way they can hide in > subway tunnels, etc. The Armored Grav Train would not be a tank-style > direct fire vehicle, it would be armored command/control/medical/resupply > for counterinsurgency. > > Any thoughts? > > Regards, > Onno > _______________________________________________ > GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> > http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l > _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
