Implications of the Firmpoint to Turret conversion rule

[snrdg121408]

Hi Annatar Giftbringer,

Sounds correct to me!

Also, firmpoint-mounted missile and torpedo launchers have reduced payloads.

Thank you for the reminder, I was undecided on to include the reduced missile/sand/torpedo onboard capacity since that is part of the weapon system detail.

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

You’re right, it doesn’t quite belong in that list since it’s a weapon-specific thing. I just mentioned it as a reminder since it is a firmpoint-related change

 

[snrdg121408]

Hi again Annatar Giftbringer,

You’re right, it doesn’t quite belong in that list since it’s a weapon-specific thing. I just mentioned it as a reminder since it is a firmpoint-related change

Thank you for providing a reason for my indecision about including the on mount/turret missile/canister load out capacity.

 

[Condottiere]

It's not just stowage, it's moving the rounds around.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hi Condottiere,

It's not just stowage, it's moving the rounds around.

A tank turret has not really changed since WW II with the Tank Commander, Gunner, and loader being in the turret. On some tanks the loader position has been taken over by an automatic loader.

A modern naval 5"/54 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5"/54_caliber_Mark_45_gun and 5"/62 http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-62_mk45.php caliber Mk 45 gun does not house the gun crew in the turret. Housed in the gun mount/turret is a 20 round magazine with an automatic loader. The 20 rounds, per the wiki article, can expend the 20 rounds in under 2 minutes. The six-man crew is in a compartment below the gun mount along with a magazine that can be used to refill the magazine in the turret.

I have seen two renderings of a Traveller turret. Unfortunately, the only one I can find in on page 349 of the TNE Core Rulebook and is not the one I remember. The other shows the gunner control station in a compartment adjacent to the turret, now if I can only find which rule set book and page number.

Okay, I'll have to admit that there is a third turret rendering which is found in T4 Naval Architects Manual on page 17. In T4 "Turret guns actually place the gunner outside the ship, in a glasteel bubble. The bubble permits visual targeting should the computer targeting system go down and the operator forced to switch control to manual." The T4 turret does not, in my opinion, match up with the other Traveller rule sets implied or illustrations.

From the information my image of a Traveller turret is more inline with the 5"/54 or 5"/62 Caliber naval guns.

 

[snrdg121408]

Afternoon from the Pacific Northwest,

I've started a topic for Turret questions at http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=89&t=122538#p943137 instead of changing the thread any further.

 

[Condottiere]

Also the reason we now have dogfighting.

 

[snrdg121408]

Afternoon Condottiere from the Pacific Northwest,

Also the reason we now have dogfighting.

Technically when small craft are mixing it up together using the Space Combat rule they are dog fighting.

 

[Condottiere]

If you get close enough, anything can dogfight, even if it handles like a pig.

This is where turrets become incredibly useful.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hi again Condottiere,

If you get close enough, anything can dogfight, even if it handles like a pig.

This is where turrets become incredibly useful.

I wonder what the kill ratio was between WW II bomber top/belly turret gunners and the fighters that attacked them was?

From what I've seen in documentaries on the subject I'm not sure turrets were incredibly useful. Of course I'm fairly sure they would have boosted my morale to some extent and would make me feel a lot better when I actually knocked out a fighter.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

From what I've seen in documentaries on the subject I'm not sure turrets were incredibly useful. Of course I'm fairly sure they would have boosted my morale to some extent and would make me feel a lot better when I actually knocked out a fighter.

From what I vaguely remember reading individual turrets might not have been all that effective, but the sheer weight of fire from multiple turrets from a close formation of heavy bombers made life problematical for attacking fighters.

A lone bomber falling out of formation was much more vulnerable.


I might very well misremember, and I don't think it has any implications for 57th century spacecraft.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hi AnotherDilbert,

From what I've seen in documentaries on the subject I'm not sure turrets were incredibly useful. Of course I'm fairly sure they would have boosted my morale to some extent and would make me feel a lot better when I actually knocked out a fighter.

From what I vaguely remember reading individual turrets might not have been all that effective, but the sheer weight of fire from multiple turrets from a close formation of heavy bombers made life problematical for attacking fighters.

A lone bomber falling out of formation was much more vulnerable.

I might very well misremember, and I don't think it has any implications for 57th century spacecraft.

I have watched many documentaries created by stations like National Geographic, the Smithsonian Channel, and a number of others that indicate that the close formation of bombers suffered heavy casualties from German fighters. Another problem was with flying in formation was from friendly fire.

I don't know what century Star Wars is based on, but they have craft with turret to fight off fighters.

Since small craft are so ineffective against star ships and system ships I suppose you are correct that in the 57th century of the Traveller there is any implications.

 

[Condottiere]

1. Statistical deterrence: all that lead in the air should hit something, the basis of anti aircraft defence prior to effective missiles targetting.

2. In this particular instance, Traveller rules allow pointing turreted guns towards the direction of incoming bandits, with little regard to which angle the spacecraft nose is pointed at.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I have watched many documentaries created by stations like National Geographic, the Smithsonian Channel, and a number of others that indicate that the close formation of bombers suffered heavy casualties from German fighters. Another problem was with flying in formation was from friendly fire.

My source was not TV documentaries, but mathematical models of historical aircraft survivability that I read as background while doing some work for the JAS Gripen project.

Since small craft are so ineffective against star ships and system ships I suppose you are correct that in the 57th century of the Traveller there is any implications.

In MgT2 fighters can be very effective and can easily kill battleships. The key is the dogfighting system.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello Condottiere,

1. Statistical deterrence: all that lead in the air should hit something, the basis of anti aircraft defence prior to effective missiles targetting.

Yes, the lead should hit something though what gets hit may be one of your own aircraft.

2. In this particular instance, Traveller rules allow pointing turreted guns towards the direction of incoming bandits, with little regard to which angle the spacecraft nose is pointed at.

Being able to point weapons on targets in a number of directions and angles from the vessels line of travel is what turrets do today.

 

[snrdg121408]

Evening AnotherDilbert from Roy, WA.

I have watched many documentaries created by stations like National Geographic, the Smithsonian Channel, and a number of others that indicate that the close formation of bombers suffered heavy casualties from German fighters. Another problem was with flying in formation was from friendly fire.

My source was not TV documentaries, but mathematical models of historical aircraft survivability that I read as background while doing some work for the JAS Gripen project.

Mathematical modeling, like any data source even documentaries or material they are based on, can be manipulated to show whatever is desired. No matter how good they are there are factors that can not be factored. In theory the Boeing 737 Max was tested using modeling programs unfortunately the data was clearly not good that was used.

Since small craft are so ineffective against star ships and system ships I suppose you are correct that in the 57th century of the Traveller there is any implications.

In MgT2 fighters can be very effective and can easily kill battleships. The key is the dogfighting system.

The reason why MgT 2e fighters, as far as I can tell to be very effective is that the entire squadron is considered to be a single ship when they are attacking. Further all the fighter pilots are performing the same maneuver. When fighters are being attacked by a single ship that ship is not firing on a single.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Mathematical modeling, like any data source even documentaries or material they are based on, can be manipulated to show whatever is desired.

Certainly, but I would take a professional study based on plenty of data as source over TV entertainment any day...

The reason why MgT 2e fighters, as far as I can tell to be very effective is that the entire squadron is considered to be a single ship when they are attacking.

Squadrons mostly make the fighters easier to kill, hence weaker. Since they cannot add Effect to damage, at least laser fighters are at a massive disadvantage. Avoid in basic combat!

Squadrons works better in fleet combat, but then fighters are not very effective.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hi AnotherDilbert,

Mathematical modeling, like any data source even documentaries or material they are based on, can be manipulated to show whatever is desired.

Certainly, but I would take a professional study based on plenty of data as source over TV entertainment any day...

Most of documentaries I watch are published by National Geographic and Smithsonian which I would hope are based on professional studies. If the documentary is produced by the same organization that airs shows like Survivor I would not put much stock in the material either.

You have, unless you entered the data, no idea how much of the total data was actually used to create the model.

I've read a number of books concerning Baron Manfred von Richthofen and who should have the credit for ending his life. There are two claimants to the deed an unknown Australian machine gunner on the ground or the RAF pilot Captain A. Roy Brown.

One of the maligned documentaries I watched tried to answer the question based on an eye-witness account that had been discovered. The sponsors of the documentary went to two professional flight simulator designers who are also certified pilots to program the aerial portion with all the data available. They then ran the simulation a number of times under computer and each pilot flying Capt. Brown's aircraft. They were not able to get a kill that matched the medical report's wounds.

The team doing the investigation contracted several professionals and experts to replicate the positions and the machine guns that had the best chance to hit the Red Baron's low flying plane. They had historians that researched available documents to determine the most probable 3 or 4, I can't remember the exact number, Australian machine gunners that might be able to to claim the credit for ending the Red Baron's career.

To simulate the machine gun used the investigators used a laser linked to a computer running a program created with consultation of a weapons expert. They hired a private small plane about the same size as the Red Baron's tri-plane. The weapons expert tried a number of times and eventually scored a hit that could have resulted in a kill shot. The account claimed a Sgt. probably got the kill shot, the teams conclusion suggests that another gunner was the one who probably should be credited with the kill.

In my opinion that documentary for TV entertainment is just as valid as professional study based on plenty of data.

The reason why MgT 2e fighters, as far as I can tell to be very effective is that the entire squadron is considered to be a single ship when they are attacking.

Squadrons mostly make the fighters easier to kill, hence weaker. Since they cannot add Effect to damage, at least laser fighters are at a massive disadvantage. Avoid in basic combat!

Squadrons works better in fleet combat, but then fighters are not very effective.

MgT Fighters versus Fighters/Small Craft in MgT appear to be effective combatants. MgT Fighters versus star ships , system ships, or larger opponents under fleet combat are not very effective.

Fighters are pretty much only effective when restricted to fighting each other. When attacking other larger opponents their effectiveness is about the same as in other rule sets.

 

[Condottiere]

Quantity has a quality all its own.