DGP 101 Vehicles

[robject]

1. Why only 40G for armor?
2. Why only one weapon system?
3. Communications capabilities are weak.
4. Sensors are weak.

These are take-aways for my own reference. They make sense: grav tanks and other sorts of helicopter/gunboat-like things should have armor and weaponry and sensors appropriate to their mission. And I assume comms are cheap and light, therefore I can't see why a reasonably typical grav tank wouldn't carry an orbital comm.

 

[Major B]

Redesigned Trepida

I've finally posted a redesigned version of the Trepida in the file library (here).

I shrunk it a bit, making the combined volume of the hull and turret total 10 Td, making it compatable with the Astrin for use in the RDA described in 101 Vehicles.

Improvements address many of the problems I mentioned farther up in this thread. It is faster and has a better communications suite. Sensors are not great but are much improved over the original. It also carries a VRFGG as secondary armament.

Some weaknesses remain, such as the 40G armor rating. It also lacks a point defense weapon system.

However, there are a number of other improvements that were byproducts of some of my design decisions. I increased crew size from two to three which allowed me to reduce the computer from a model 3 to a model 1. That plus a couple of other minor tweaks reduced the overall system cost considerably.

Next will be a similar rework for the Astrin and the Empress designs from 101 Vehicles. Please let me know if I've missed any errors in the Trepida so I don't make the same mistake with the others.

 

[Major B]

Astrin design shortcomings

I didn't realize before taking a close look at both designs side-by-side, but the Astrin design is almost a complete copy of the Trepida... except the Astrin has no weaponry at all.

Even the hull volume is the same, though it shouldn't because the Astrin has no turret. The UCP lists a 10 Td hull but hull damage points are the same as the Trepida which, following Border Reiver's comments above, has a 10 Td hull plus 30% for the turret.

So, the Astrin shares the same weaknesses in communications as the Astrin and has no weaponry at all (making the sensor suite superfluous). The hull damage points are too high for the stated hull volume. Max acceleration is lower than what it should be. And the power plant seems needlessly large since there is no weapon system drawing power.

Given the description of the RDA, a system designed to deliver a mix of Trepida and Astrin vehicles, that the two systems should be designed to complement one another. But this design is only able to deliver infantry to the fight, not to be a participant in the fight.

I can see a vehicle whose purpose is primarily to deliver infantry, but I can't think of any vehicle designed since before WWII purely as an armored personnel carrier that didn't at least mount a suppressive or air defense weapon.

And it would make much better sense to me to have a carrier vehicle that can support other vehicles in the formation during movement and that can support the dismounted infantry while they close. The first role might best be accomplished with a laser coupled to a point defense targeting module and the latter might better be served with a high ROF suppressive weapon or auto GL.

It will be awhile before I can get hard into this, but I thought I'd get my first impressions posted now to hopefully generate some fresh comments before I can get back on line.

 

[shield]

Have a look at the regency vehicles sourebook for TNE if you can, they redid all these vehicles. There are now 3 trepida one with an X gun and VRF Guass gun, and a astrin with a gun (from Archduke Norris who came to the same conclusion as you).

Cheers
Richard

 

[Major B]

Richard,

I've seen the TNE treatment of the Trepida, but not their version of the Astrin.

Unfortunately, I don't own a copy. Any chance you could extract some of the detail and post it here?

 

[shield]

will do, have you seen all three versions of the trepida?

Cheers
Richard

 

[Major B]

will do, have you seen all three versions of the trepida?

I only remember two versions, one base model and one improved version.

 

[Gray Lensman]

Striker version of Trepida

posted here is an old Striker Trepida Version of mine.

Basically same but crew increased, thrust tons improved (along
with speed).

Actually shaved down to 9.5 Dtons including turret.

24mm of Armor all around gives AV of 40 on deck and belly, 44 on moderately sloped sides and rear and AV of 47 on the radically sloped from

use, abuse, deride, ect :rofl:

 

[DonM]

Any solid errata out of this yet? That sloped armor idea sounds like a great step... that's definitely something from Striker that's missing in MT!

 

[Major B]

Any solid errata out of this yet? That sloped armor idea sounds like a great step... that's definitely something from Striker that's missing in MT!

Not exactly solid yet.

The Trepida redesign linked above may be a source of changes to the one in 101 Vehicles, but Jec10 has already provided you with an update. I'd like to get his thoughts before recommending further changes to the errata entry you posted in v 2.18.

The sloped armor is something I'm working on. I'm not sure yet whether the addition of sloped armor is worth the extra calculations. MT simplified things considerably by eliminating the calculations for thickness and toughness and slope in favor of keeping armor value as a constant and varying weight by armor type. I kind of like the rule to vary armor value by facing presented earlier in the thread. If you look at the redesigned Trepida UCP sheet, you'll see the facing values listed as an option.

When I settle on an errata recommendation, I'll post it in the errata thread. I hope your post will generate more discussion on the topic in the meantime.

 

[Major B]

posted here is an old Striker Trepida Version of mine.

I like this version a lot. Much improved sensor and comm suites and extras that make it a better, more versatile design. I wish I'd seen it sooner.

Basically same but crew increased, thrust tons improved (along
with speed).

Actually shaved down to 9.5 Dtons including turret.

All of these make good sense to me. I too look at a crew of three as the minimum for a fighting vehicle. I was surprised when I rebuilt the Trepida in MT that the crew of three actually saved so much in overall cost, as having three HUDs allowed for a computer model 1 rather than a model 3.

24mm of Armor all around gives AV of 40 on deck and belly, 44 on moderately sloped sides and rear and AV of 47 on the radically sloped from

This is very interesting. I need to dig out my Striker design books and play around with this. I want to see if there is a relatively easy way to convert the individual facings and slope calculations into the MT design sequence. The hard part is to figure out how to do it while retaining the hull configurations implemented in MT, rather then building it by dimensions as Striker requires. It may be workable with a table converting each configuration and overall tonnage into given values.

 

[shield]

Here are the TNE stats for the astrin and armed astrin

Armed Astrin

TL14, 10dtns, Mass approx 200tns, Armour as Trepida (front 252, sides deck belly 129)
Power is 6MW fusion, fuel is 20527L enough for 18 hours.
Speed: 867/650/180 kph (top / cruise / NOE)
Controls: hololinked, with 3 flight computers, IGS nav system and TL10+ flight avionics, TL14 terrain following avionics
Commo: 3000km radio, 2 x 3km masers
Sensors: 30km PEMS, 3000km PEMS, 3km AEMS + two crew goggles (WSV)
ECM: ECM masking + 4 decoy launchers (each with 20 decoys)
Other: Extended lifesupport, artifical gravity and inertial compensators, airlock
Crew = 2, pass = 10 crampt seats, cargo = 2000kg
Weapon is a rapid pulse fusion gun (3MJ) in a remote turret. Weapon is full stablised, with EMS rangefinder and TL14 point defence fire control

The unarmed version is the same except 9.4dtns, no fire control, weapon or stablisation equipment. Speed increases to 953/715/180.

Cheers
Richard

 

[Major B]

Armour as Trepida (front 252, sides deck belly 129)

Shield, thanks for posting this.

I'm not familiar with TNE so can you give an idea on how this compares with the AV 40 design in 101V?

fuel is 20527L enough for 18 hours.

I think that in MT, 20.5 kl of fuel would give a much longer operating range. This must be computed using full power.

Speed: 867/650/180 kph (top / cruise / NOE)

This design appears to be faster than the 101V design, but my books still haven't caught up with me so I'm not positive.

Commo: 3000km radio, 2 x 3km masers

I would increase the range on the masers if it were my design. Radio is cheap but allows the enemy to target you whenever you transmit. The ranges on these systems should be reversed, but at least this design has redundant commo so it is an improvement on the 101V design.

4 decoy launchers (each with 20 decoys)

Another omission in the port from Striker to MT. I have to look at incorporating decoys into the Astrin design and if I can come up with something I like, I'll add it to the Trepida.

Weapon is a rapid pulse fusion gun (3MJ) in a remote turret. Weapon is full stablised, with EMS rangefinder and TL14 point defence fire control

Is this the same weapon carried by the Trepida? I like the inclusion of a point defense system as it makes this vehicle complement the Trepida in action.

The unarmed version is the same except 9.4dtns, no fire control, weapon or stablisation equipment. Speed increases to 953/715/180.

Maybe there is utility for an unarmed version to be used for law enforcement or something similar, but I wouldn't put any unarmed vehicle in the inventory IMTU. Even a system designed purely for law enforcement would have mounts for a suppressive weapon system that could be removed when not needed.

 

[shield]

Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
Armour as Trepida (front 252, sides deck belly 129)

I'm not familiar with TNE so can you give an idea on how this compares with the AV 40 design in 101V?

##Armour same as Trepida which is 40 in MT terms


Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
fuel is 20527L enough for 18 hours.

I think that in MT, 20.5 kl of fuel would give a much longer operating range. This must be computed using full power.

## I assume so


Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
Speed: 867/650/180 kph (top / cruise / NOE)

This design appears to be faster than the 101V design, but my books still haven't caught up with me so I'm not positive.

## Yes, I think the 101V version went at about 600kph from memory.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
Commo: 3000km radio, 2 x 3km masers

I would increase the range on the masers if it were my design. Radio is cheap but allows the enemy to target you whenever you transmit. The ranges on these systems should be reversed, but at least this design has redundant commo so it is an improvement on the 101V design.

## agree with you there, comms are poor. You might also want a laser to talk to civilian and lower tech vechicles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
4 decoy launchers (each with 20 decoys)

Another omission in the port from Striker to MT. I have to look at incorporating decoys into the Astrin design and if I can come up with something I like, I'll add it to the Trepida.

### From the TNE rules this seems to be smoke and prismatic aerosols.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
Weapon is a rapid pulse fusion gun (3MJ) in a remote turret. Weapon is full stablised, with EMS rangefinder and TL14 point defence fire control

Is this the same weapon carried by the Trepida? I like the inclusion of a point defense system as it makes this vehicle complement the Trepida in action.

### No. The Trepida Fuson X gun is about 125MJ. This weapons seems to have the firepower of a FGMP-14 but with some rapid pulse features (max number of targets is about 4) and probably better range. In MT terms its' input power is say 5-10MW at a guess.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shield
The unarmed version is the same except 9.4dtns, no fire control, weapon or stablisation equipment. Speed increases to 953/715/180.

Maybe there is utility for an unarmed version to be used for law enforcement or something similar, but I wouldn't put any unarmed vehicle in the inventory IMTU. Even a system designed purely for law enforcement would have mounts for a suppressive weapon system that could be removed when not needed.

### again, no complaints from me, I would like a weapon on my APC. The only time you might expect this vehicle to be weapon free is if it has been de-militarised and sold on to commercial concerns as a cheap grav vehicle. In which case most of the electronics will have gone as well.

Cheers
Richard

 

[shield]

My mistake, the speed of the unarmed Astrin as shown in 101V is 1000kph, pretty much in agreement with the TNE speed stats.

Cheers
Richard