Author Topic: Stragetic Transport: Spackle  (Read 2425 times)

VanVelding

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 548
    • Powered by Indifference, Focused by Caffeine
Stragetic Transport: Spackle
« on: 06 April 2014, 09:56:18 »
So, there's been some discussion over here about moving units around a planet in response to an invader or raider.

I made the QuickSpackle as a test-bed for that role. Rail would probably be better for stuff like this, but I don't have TacOps.

Code: [Select]
[code]QuickSpackle Strategic Transport
Large WiGE Support Vehicle
Total Mass: 240 tons
Rating: D

Type:     Spackle
Chassis:  Large WiGE
Weight:   240 tons
Equipment Rating:  D

Equipment
Chassis/Controls                                                   41 tons
Engine:                      Fusion                                42 tons
          Cruise:      5
          Flank:       8
Armor: (Bar 6)                                                      4 tons
Front 44
Front Sides 38/38
Rear Sides 38/38
Rear 44
Structural Cost:        1,313,750 C-Bills

Weapons & Equipment
Quarters x 3                                                       21 tons
Infantry Bay            Rear Left                                   5 tons
Lift Hoist x 2          Rear Left / Rear Right                      3 tons
Cargo            Rear                                      121 tons
Weapon & Equipment Cost:  160,000 C-Bills

Total Cost:            14,148,000 C-Bills
[/code]

A dedicated unit would need to redeploy significant military units across a world within a few days (Using aerospace fighters as that force would save everyone a lot of time, yes). As a militia unit, it should be affordable with a moderate tech rating. A dedicated 'mech/vehicle bay would be nice.

So if you're not going to use fighters or a Lysander, let's talk about the QuickSpackle. Quarters seem appropriate for a unit designed to fly for days straight.

The original Spackle did carry a 150 ton 'mech bay and moved at 3/5. Dropping the bay allowed an engine upgrade and gained the flexibility of using cargo space for transport. I was concerned about deployment time, the time required to "unpack" a 'mech hauled as cargo is far less than the time gained by a 67% upgrade in speed.

The lift hoists and cargo give it 361 tons of cargo space. 241 if you want to want to run at top speed. Both are more than enough to carry an average-sized lance. In-combat offload times from TW are irrelevant because offloaded units still have to start up. Given a 28-person infantry bay that carries 4 mechwarriors, 14 astechs, and 10 cargo crew, a QuickSpackle can get two externally carried 'mechs up and started in approximately 15 minutes.

If those 'mechs are, say two Quickdraws with hand actuators, then you can use them to unload another two Quickdraws in 25 minutes. The cargo crew can get 2.4 tons of them out in those 15 minutes, but the time savings are negligible (but then, I'm not the one pulling in time-and-a-half with combat pay).

So the total "unpacking" time is about 55 minutes (15 + 25 + 15), which seems advantageous.

Also, StratOps applies a 10.8 multiplier to Cruising MP for strategic movement. As a matter of opinion, is the use of Cruising MP something decided with ground movement in mind, using cruising speed as an average of running/flanking MP and getting around obstacles or does it represent a limit to all units' sustained maximum speed? I'm in the former group and would be happy to use Flanking MP as a base for naval/air units or creating an additional multiplier for Battlemechs, rail units, naval units, air units, etc.
« Last Edit: 06 April 2014, 15:05:34 by VanVelding »
Co-host of 17 to 01 and The Beige and The Bold. I also have a dusty old blog about whatever comes to mind vanvelding.blogspot.

NullVoid

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 145
Re: Stragetic Transport: Spackle
« Reply #1 on: 10 April 2014, 12:01:32 »
The 5/8 profile does give the operator a bit of breathing room when carrying external loads, since WiGEs suffer from a minimum movement requirement in order to achieve proper WiGE movement.  Three quarters are certainly a nice idea, and the crew will appreciate it. This design's main weakness is when a drop on hilly/mountainous/forested areas is necessary, though for intercontinental transportation it is certainly practical.  Finally, the hour required to drop a lance means that it has to unload at least an hour away from the combat site, since a vehicle unloading cargo is a sitting duck and any passing opponents will get the -4 bonus to hit an immobile target.

 

Register