Powered Armor Requires Little If Any Skill

[redwalker]

One of the big deals of the Traveller universe is that powered armor is very useful, very hard to get, and requires training.

In real life, powered exoskeletons appear to require little training:

http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200705240097.html

 

[far-trader]

The exoskeleton itself is not what requires the training. It is the use of certain heavy weapons and the sealed suit integrity systems that require special knowledge and training.

Hence the need to have at least Vacc-suit skill to use BattleDress (and BattleDress skill equalling Vacc-suit skill) and the need to have BattleDress skill to use the heavy weapons specifically designed for it. In CT anyway per the rules in Book 4.

But yes BattleDress is still going to be very hard to get, however...

IMTU simple powered exoskeletons are not rare at all. They look and work much like the one Ripley used in Aliens at the lower TLs (which do require a Vehicle: Walker skill but most anyone can stumble around in one like a drunken giant with skill-0 default). Some are smaller at higher TLs for "lighter" work and would be much like the suit linked. Not sure why I hadn't thought of all the rehabilitation and geriatric applications, but my TU just got a bit more interesting Thanks!

Then there are the hazardous environ and exploration suits common on some ships, like the IISS survey ships and some lab ships. Very much like BD but not weaponized, so no BD skill requirement, just Vacc-suit for sealed ops.

 

[Valarian]

To use it, as in movement that resembles a drunk, probably wouldn't take much skill. TO use it effectively in combat, firing weapons, dodging fire, and moving as if the suit is an extension of yourself would take a great deal of skill.

Go in to combat untrained, and you are turn a very expensive suit in to scrap metal, and the occupant in to something resembling strawberry jam, or ash - depending on the weapon being used against the suit.

 

[Pickles]

There is a case to be made for advanced technology being easier to use. Look at the time taken to train a pilot to fly an F4 compared to an F16. So, battledress at higher TLs might get easier to use. A TL15 battledress might require training not so much in the use of the suit but to get the wearer to emember he's wearing it.

Bit tricky to model in the Traveller rules, though.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Hmmm, Bromgrev, that might be one contributing factor to why the F16 is known as the "Lawn Dart"....

 

[BlackBat242]

Indeed... the F-16 is so easy to fly that the pilots tend to focus all of their attention on their targets... and to forget they are in an airplane that takes time and distance to change vectors!

This is called "target fixation", and is the leading cause of CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain) crashes for the F-16 ... which is in turn one of the leading causes of military crashes for ground-attack-capable aircraft like the F-16.

In the old, lower-tech, harder to fly aircraft like the F-4, the pilot had to always devote enough attention to flying the aircraft and operating its systems that CFIT was a rarity... even when A>G missions were the primary focus of training and operational missions.

Mechanical failure was the primary CFIT source for earlier-generation combat aircraft, and low visibility due to weather causes most transport CFITs.


Sometimes a system can be too easy to operate!

 

[Vargas]

In the F-16 vs. F-4 example, the former's computers and other control systems make it easier to fly the plane but they still require a lot of space to operate in. Contrast this with fighting in PA in an urban environment or aboard ship, where things are much more confined, and I don't think the aircraft analogy holds up so well. PA would require finesse to limit collateral damage and allow the operator to carry a child or rip off a bulkhead door equally well.

 

[redwalker]

Contrast this with fighting in PA in an urban environment or aboard ship, where things are much more confined, and I don't think the aircraft analogy holds up so well. PA would require finesse to limit collateral damage and allow the operator to carry a child or rip off a bulkhead door equally well.

I guess a lot of it might depend on one's interpretation of the Traveller universe. Somehow I had never envisioned anyone using powered armor to carry a child before now.

 

[far-trader]

I guess a lot of it might depend on one's interpretation of the Traveller universe. Somehow I had never envisioned anyone using powered armor to carry a child before now.

It makes a great rescue suit. Think of it...

Able to lift great weights, invulnerable to most injury, heightened senses and sensors, able to fly. You'd be freaking Superman, without the worry about Kryptonite.

 

[The Thing]

Just my .02 C here, but in some ways advancing technology and advanced, more complex devices make things easier for the end user, not harder.

For an example, may I point out the difference between the standard infantry weapon circa 1800 and standard infantry weapon circa 2000?

Ask yourself which is more complex, a flintlock or an AK-47? Ok, no brainer there.

Now, ask yourself which is easier for the soldier to use effectively? I'll admit that when a Kalashnikov jams, which happens about once in a blue moon, it can be a little tricky to clear, but asides from that isn't the assault rifle much easier to use than a flintlock? I had to research the procedure for using a flintlock for a product I wrote once and man, it was a process to load one of those bedamned things for one shot.

Now, how hard it it to reload an AK? Not nearly as hard.

Sure, the Ak is vastly more complex than the flintlock and requires a vastly higher tech/industrial base to support it, true. But in the end it's much easier for a soldier to use an AK than a flintlock.

So, maybe powerarmor will be similar. Complex, yes. Likely far more so than any fighter jet today, but in the end possibly easier for the soldier to use.

More complex doesn't mean harder to use or learn to use. A lot of modern computers are more complex than those poor dinosaurs from the early 80's, for easier to learn and use.

 

[Gadrin]

To use it, as in movement that resembles a drunk, probably wouldn't take much skill. TO use it effectively in combat, firing weapons, dodging fire, and moving as if the suit is an extension of yourself would take a great deal of skill.

Go in to combat untrained, and you are turn a very expensive suit in to scrap metal, and the occupant in to something resembling strawberry jam, or ash - depending on the weapon being used against the suit.

I agree.

Most PCs won't use it to stack boxes or just walk from point A to point B.

They'll want to do moves like the Tachikomas in GHost in the Shell.

"Ok, I jump up from the ground to the 2nd story crosswalk between buildings using the suit's Power Jump, then get my rocketlauncher; hoist myself up and begin shooting at the targets while I do a cartwheel..." :file_21:

not

"I spent 250,000CR to stack boxes in the cargo hold !"