Citizens of the Imperium

Citizens of the Imperium (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/index.php)
-   Imperial Research Station (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/forumdisplay.php?f=54)
-   -   Pgmp-12 (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=26137)

Meteoric Assault February 27th, 2012 10:26 PM

Pgmp-12
 
So I am diddling away at my Sword Worlder military TOEs and I am theorizing about how the baseline TL 11 and TL 12 units deploying the PGMP-12 weapon system. I can see it as a squad support weapon with limitations. First I see the ROF and limited "ammo" ( Plasma bolts) as a limitation. Also the range of 750m. Suddenly I am fascinated with the weapon to be honest....its like a flame thrower (albeit a tiny sun flare) XM-25 support weapon hybrid. Thus you can imagine the theoretical hard on! :oo: What I mean is given my RL experience " Taliban 500 m behind those rocks ... zap [rock explodes (plasma)] fried Taliban with rock splinters." get my drift?

Now in order for the weapon to be truly effective the Gunner is going to need an A/G (assistant Gunner in other parlance a ammo bearer and protector or "donkey") I can see a tactical engagement with the Squad leader identifying targets and the PGMP-12 gunner blasting away.... then in a protracted engagement what happens if the gunner goes black on the fuel cell .... :confused:. The A/G saves the day! ... the donkey slaps in the new 6000 gram fuel cell ... shazam 40 more bolts of death, destruction and cosmic mayhem...

I see it being a necessity for such weapons systems to be employed with a mounted type unit with fusion power plants.. ie Mechanized Units and Armored Cavalry for the sake of recharging the fuel cells. Always pay to to be good friends with your local tanker;)

Now my question is mainly aimed at the veterans / military history nuts who happen to be on the forums. What is the effectiveness against bunkers?, MOUNT combat dynamics (ie Buildings)?, what is its true anti-armor potential? like its bigger cousins the A, B & C guns does it have a blast radius?

Now coming full circle to the beginning of my post the trickle down effect of the new advances in equipment. I can see the TL-11 units especially elite armored units getting a few, but and here is my moment of brilliance (and no I haven't been drinking:oo:) I can see it being used by Pioneers ( Combat Engineers) like a flame thrower to clear strong points and built up defenses... my example is the German Reserve Guards Pioneer Regiment of the First World War (totenkopf sleeve symbols and all) they were pardon the pun " the fire brigade" of the western front because the specialized in flame thrower attacks!

Anyway ... will somebody on the forums with a higher cerebral capability care to comment or answer my questions?

Below from CT Book 4-

The first light energy weapon (other than lasers), the weapon consists of a power pack carried on the firer's back, the weapon itself, and a flexible power link. The power pack powers a laser ignition system in the weapon itself which heats hydrogen fuel to a plasma state. The plasma is contained in the ignition chamber briefly and then released through a magnetically focused field along the weapon's barrel. The high initial velocity plasma jet is 2 cm in diameter but begins to dissipate immediately. Each power pack has sufficient energy to discharge 40 plasma bolts before recharging is necessary. Each pull of the trigger discharges one plasma bolt. Because of the considerable recoil, the PGMP-12 may only be fired every other combat round. Recharging requires four
hours connected to a high energy source (such as a ship's power unit).
Length: 800 mm. Weight of weapon: 6000 grams. Weight of power pack: 3000 grams.

Enoki February 27th, 2012 10:38 PM

Depends I suppose. If the operator had either a grav belt or jet pack (or equivalent) he could act more as a pop up helicopter might. That is he gets targetting data from another unit (squad or platoon) member and then executes a pop up from behind cover lets the target get smothered in a plasma burst and disappears behind cover again.
The "donkey" you mention could carry a targetting and surveillance system on a stalk too. That might allow him to assist in targetting from cover. When a target is found a pop up is executed and the target smothered in a plasma burst.

That would be more effective than direct fire. Firing directly on a target would be like being a flamethrower operator. You would do little after the first shot but attract every firing weapon in range on your position.... "backblast" is a real mother.....

It could act as a substitute flamethrower with limited effect. The defender couldn't have say armored shutters on the bunker and it would have to be close range for fire (plasma expands as it comes out).

Against armored targets it might be effective but, only with limited success. Without a sustained mass of plasma hitting thick or really heat resistant armor it would have limited effect.... think trying to cut through with a giant plasma or acetylene torch....

In support as a pop up weapon using something close to area fire it would be acting more like a rocket barrage or spraying of machinegun fire from a strafing aircraft. That could cause significant random damage to the target as well as suppress it very efficently.

In Traveller you cannot think two dimensionally on a three dimensional battlefield that extends down to squad level.

Meteoric Assault February 27th, 2012 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoki (Post 390147)
Depends I suppose. If the operator had either a grav belt or jet pack (or equivalent) he could act more as a pop up helicopter might. That is he gets targetting data from another unit (squad or platoon) member and then executes a pop up from behind cover lets the target get smothered in a plasma burst and disappears behind cover again.
The "donkey" you mention could carry a targetting and surveillance system on a stalk too. That might allow him to assist in targetting from cover. When a target is found a pop up is executed and the target smothered in a plasma burst.

That would be more effective than direct fire. Firing directly on a target would be like being a flamethrower operator. You would do little after the first shot but attract every firing weapon in range on your position.... "backblast" is a real mother.....

It could act as a substitute flamethrower with limited effect. The defender couldn't have say armored shutters on the bunker and it would have to be close range for fire (plasma expands as it comes out).

Against armored targets it might be effective but, only with limited success. Without a sustained mass of plasma hitting thick or really heat resistant armor it would have limited effect.... think trying to cut through with a giant plasma or acetylene torch....

In support as a pop up weapon using something close to area fire it would be acting more like a rocket barrage or spraying of machinegun fire from a strafing aircraft. That could cause significant random damage to the target as well as suppress it very efficently.

I frankly see the squad or team leader calling the targets for the gunner ... he has enough on his mind ... ( I think the small fusion reaction on my back would make my hair stand up)

I know certain materials will explode when heated to extreme temperatures... thus the question of effectiveness against bunkers and buildings... Light armored vehicles are an easy defeat...

Further I see the squad also ensuring the defense of the gunner ... suppressing fire etc..

Honestly I am still trying to get my head wrapped around its "Beaten area affect"?

Enoki February 28th, 2012 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meteoric Assault (Post 390148)
I frankly see the squad or team leader calling the targets for the gunner ... he has enough on his mind ... ( I think the small fusion reaction on my back would make my hair stand up)

I know certain materials will explode when heated to extreme temperatures... thus the question of effectiveness against bunkers and buildings... Light armored vehicles are an easy defeat...

Further I see the squad also ensuring the defense of the gunner ... suppressing fire etc..

Honestly I am still trying to get my head wrapped around its "Beaten area affect"?

I've worked with alot of plasma torches in various applications from metal cutting to industrial plating to other applications. I've made many using induction heating methods etc., too.

I can tell you you have to apply more than just a near instantaneous burst on even a relatively thin plate of metal to cut through it. Splashing a "blob" of plasma against even a lightly armored vehicle for less than a second will do next to nothing.
There is simply too little heat mass there to transfer into the armor to sufficently heat it to its melting point. Think of it like a HEAT round dispersing its jet over a square meter with the same total energy applied. Instead of melting a hole it makes the armor warm.

Now, you have men in say cloth armor or other light personal armor and you splash a big blob of heated plasma on them giving first and second degree burns over every square millimeter of exposed skin. Some have their equipment and clothing smoldering or set on fire.

A pop up on say, entrenched defenders where you spray down into their trenches / fighting holes from above with a plasma weapon would be devastating.
Better, the firer disappears out of sight before anyone can retaliate.

The same goes for urban fighting. You pop up over a building and spray the one across the street where the bad guys are. The interior is set on fire, splash through the windows and open doors does the same thing to defending troops.

Here even heavier armor wouldn't be a good defense. The building ignites on he inside and you are now in a burning structurially questionable building. Even if you personally are not harmed you risk being crushed when the building collapses. The fire and smoke play havoc with things like thermal imagers and IR sensors.

You have to think of this weapon as a potential light grenade launcher, indirect fire machinegun, or light mortar. Used in combination with an ability to pop up it could be made fairly devasating.

Its other uses would include being used as a defense against low flying unarmored or lightly armored targets. Here you fire a burst creating a plasma cloud the aircraft flies into. Not good sucked into air breathing engines.
Another is to use ti to create a local EMP effect of charged particles for electronic cover.

Meteoric Assault February 28th, 2012 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoki (Post 390164)
I've worked with alot of plasma torches in various applications from metal cutting to industrial plating to other applications. I've made many using induction heating methods etc., too.

I can tell you you have to apply more than just a near instantaneous burst on even a relatively thin plate of metal to cut through it. Splashing a "blob" of plasma against even a lightly armored vehicle for less than a second will do next to nothing.
There is simply too little heat mass there to transfer into the armor to sufficently heat it to its melting point. Think of it like a HEAT round dispersing its jet over a square meter with the same total energy applied. Instead of melting a hole it makes the armor warm.

Now, you have men in say cloth armor or other light personal armor and you splash a big blob of heated plasma on them giving first and second degree burns over every square millimeter of exposed skin. Some have their equipment and clothing smoldering or set on fire.

A pop up on say, entrenched defenders where you spray down into their trenches / fighting holes from above with a plasma weapon would be devastating.
Better, the firer disappears out of sight before anyone can retaliate.

The same goes for urban fighting. You pop up over a building and spray the one across the street where the bad guys are. The interior is set on fire, splash through the windows and open doors does the same thing to defending troops.

Here even heavier armor wouldn't be a good defense. The building ignites on he inside and you are now in a burning structurially questionable building. Even if you personally are not harmed you risk being crushed when the building collapses. The fire and smoke play havoc with things like thermal imagers and IR sensors.

You have to think of this weapon as a potential light grenade launcher, indirect fire machinegun, or light mortar. Used in combination with an ability to pop up it could be made fairly devasating.

Its other uses would include being used as a defense against low flying unarmored or lightly armored targets. Here you fire a burst creating a plasma cloud the aircraft flies into. Not good sucked into air breathing engines.
Another is to use ti to create a local EMP effect of charged particles for electronic cover.

I coincide your expertise on plasma but wouldn't the plasma from a Fusion reaction be "more devastating"? 2cm bolt that can hit the extreme range of 750m?

The EMP local affect now that is novel! I hadn't even thought about that?

Dragoner February 28th, 2012 12:42 AM

I have always gone by this description for the PGMP-12:

Tech Level 12: The PGMP-12 is introduced as a high energy squad support weapon, in many units replacing the grenade launcher. Most other support is provided by gunships integrated at the squad and platoon level.

Bk4, pg 44.

I do think of it as a high-tech flamethrower as well.

Meteoric Assault February 28th, 2012 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoner (Post 390168)
I have always gone by this description for the PGMP-12:

Tech Level 12: The PGMP-12 is introduced as a high energy squad support weapon, in many units replacing the grenade launcher. Most other support is provided by gunships integrated at the squad and platoon level.

Bk4, pg 44.

I do think of it as a high-tech flamethrower as well.

Having seen 1st hand the "effectiveness of 40mm long and short Gs I have to say it is more powerful... certainly more than a 60mm mortar round. and I don't see it as a IDF weapon.... sure it punches through "dead space".... but I am leaning to the notion that it has the punch/penetration of the 58mm Anti-Armor Rifle Grenade or RPG.

Seriously I will eat my words if I have too... but a PGMP should have more umph in it than 40mm. That being said most light armor vehicles are defeated by 14.5mm that is why I had earlier said the PGMP-12 is an [overmatch] for light armor.

looking to hear more

post script I found this

Plasma weapons use hydrogen fuel, either from a source tank or injected as self-contained pellets, heated near-instantaneously to a plasma state by lasers within a magnetic bottle inside the weapon. The magnetic bottle then collapses and compresses the plasma into a thin stream which is simultaneously ejected from the nozzle of the gun via magnetic funnel. The plasma stream reaches temperatures in excess of 10,000 degrees C and is ejected at speeds of up to 8000 meters per second from the nozzle. In a standard, earth-like atmosphere, the weapon has an effective range of up to several thousand meters. The extreme temperature of its plasma bolt combined with the physical force of the streamís impact make these truly formidable and terrifying weapons.

Plasma weapons are made all the more horrific by their "splash" effect. The plasma stream hitting a target, though it looks much like an energy beam, is actually a very physical object. If the leading edge of the stream doesnít penetrate all the way through a target, a good portion of its mass bounces back, interfering with the rest of the incoming streamís coherence and "splashing" the remaining plasma over a large portion of the targetís surface.

This splash effect makes these weapons very dangerous to use at close quarters, as a plasma "splash back" can kill the operator just as surely as the target. An operator would do well to make sure he has at least several meters (hopefully much more) of clearance between himself and the target.

Obviously, the weapon needs a powerful energy source for even a single shot, making a compact enough battery or generator potent enough to power the weapon through multiple shots problematic. Ideally, the power source should be integrated into a modular hydrogen fuel source to simplify reloading. Good candidate technology for this includes advanced conventional batteries (probably carried in backpack form), monopolar generators, chemical explosive power generators (particularly a good choice, as these one-use devices could be integrated along with the hydrogen fuel into a plasma-weapon "bullet", which in turn can be integrated into magazines,) superconductor loops and crystals, and for very advanced models, SF exotica such as antimatter.

Because of the extreme temperatures reached both within the weaponís magnetic bottle ignition chamber and in the barrel directing the plasma stream, an efficient cooling system for this weapon is a must. Coolant may be supplied in tandem with the hydrogen fuel for the system, the freon (or whatever) being pumped throughout the ignition chamber and barrel system simultaneously with the hydrogen fuel being pumped into the ignition chamber, then vented after the plasma stream is fired. Even with an active cooling system, however, the chances are this weapon is going to become very hot after only a few shots and would probably require special protection in the form of insulated armor for the operator.

These weapons would have a hideous recoil for their size. A plasma gun the size of a medium pistol would kick like a conventional 10 gauge shotgun. Recoil compensation of some sort, either internal to the weapon and/or an external stabilizer, would have to be integrated into the weapon.

Plasma guns would also have a very pronounced firing signature. The plasma stream breaking the sound barrier, the crack of waste gasses escaping, the bright light and IR signature, and the puff of a small cloud of venting coolant all add to this.

Needless to say, these are very powerful and devastating firearms. A typical plasma rifle from the Traveller RPG universe could readily take out a modern-day tank with a single shot.


I know what I want for Christmas Now!!!!!!!:devil:

Hyphen February 28th, 2012 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meteoric Assault (Post 390148)
Honestly I am still trying to get my head wrapped around its "Beaten area affect"?

3.5m danger space (2 and a bit squares radius).

http://members.tip.net.au/~davidjw/t...Energy Weapons

Spinward Scout February 28th, 2012 07:02 AM

8000 meters per second is about Mach 25 (give or take) - about 5 miles per second. Gone in the blink of an eye. So basically, you're shooting a 2 cm (0.8 inch) projectile (bigger than most bullets) at the same speed that the Space Shuttle orbits the planet Earth - and the Shuttle circles the Earth about every 90 minutes. Hideous Recoil is an understatement. Gravitic compensators/inertial dampners would definitely be required for handheld use.

I couldn't see a PGMP/FGMP being used without computer controlled targeting either.

Because, well, what if you miss...?

Meteoric Assault February 28th, 2012 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinward Scout (Post 390181)
8000 meters per second is about Mach 25 (give or take) - about 5 miles per second. Gone in the blink of an eye. So basically, you're shooting a 2 cm (0.8 inch) projectile (bigger than most bullets) at the same speed that the Space Shuttle orbits the planet Earth - and the Shuttle circles the Earth about every 90 minutes. Hideous Recoil is an understatement. Gravitic compensators/inertial dampners would definitely be required for handheld use.

I couldn't see a PGMP/FGMP being used without computer controlled targeting either.

Because, well, what if you miss...?

I think in the Ironmongery section it is discussed some of the very points you have mentioned. But in a table that was recommended above the PGMP-12 & PGMP-14 are able to be fired by non-battledress wearing troops.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:52 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.