Filling in the Syberian AutoMechs (Open Thread)

[idea weenie]

You just need a more classic look and theme

[RifleMech]

Some questions for you Herb. :)

1) Can Syberian Mechs use any type of armor available, besides converting mechs not using FF Armor? Currently, IndustrialMechs can use any armor type but BattleMechs aren't allowed Commercial. Does that apply to Syberian Mechs too?

2a) Do Syberian Mechs built with Industrial Structures have all the same functions as those built with BattleMech Structures? I know Enviromental Sealing is built in but would an Industrial FighterMech have VTOL capabilities or would that be extra?

2b) If extra, would they add VTOL Equipment they way Conventional Fighters do, or Rotors, or both?

3a)Do Prop FighterMechs include VTOL? My guess would be No since they're using a prop for movement not jet thrust.

3b) If 3a) is a No, can VTOL/VSTOL be added following the answer to 2b) 


Thanks :)

[Giovanni Blasini]

Rumors of my death have been slightly exaggerated.  Slightly due to having been sick with one thing or another since October.  There's nothing as awesome as having your head cold prevent you from getting a chest CT scan because you can't lay down without choking.

Ok, finished Waspinator, kept it more modern looking and left the vee mode mostly alone.  Hoping the paint scheme carries the intent mostly.

That was really cool, as was your Ransack expy.

to be fair a lot of the wookiepedia entries on the technical specs come from that cross section books, which were being written by some of the most ardent "argue and 'win' debates on the internet" types (more), and they tended to inflate the specs to make SW stuff superior to everyone. its where the 'gigaton turbolasers' came from for example. and a lot of their figures are just weird to start with. star destroyers apparently burn more fuel per second in their reactors than they mass as a ship for example.

Holy crap, that's a rabbit hill to fall down...

FighterMechs require 3 Jump Jets. Presumably so they can get into space. Can non space going AirMechs mount fewer Jump Jets? Without having to resort to the Illegal Quirk?
https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/d/d2/ROTFtoy-RansackScout.jpg
http://images.shoutwiki.com/gbwiki/8/8c/GoBotsToyZero.jpg

I seriously want to do a transforming GA bird, now, like a Cessna 172 or one of the crazy Cub-derived STOL birds, or a classic like the Beechcraft Staggerwing.

Still alive so far...

Since we're hitting just about the end of my part of this project, I thought I'd send the final revisions of the other parts as well. NOW with full-color art!

Attached is the latest version of Herb Beas's Technical Readout: Syberia (Part 1: Opening Fiction), as of 6 October 2022.

- Herb

Awesome.  I have so much reading to do now.  :thumbsup:

[RifleMech]

Rumors of my death have been slightly exaggerated.  Slightly due to having been sick with one thing or another since October.  There's nothing as awesome as having your head cold prevent you from getting a chest CT scan because you can't lay down without choking.

I seriously want to do a transforming GA bird, now, like a Cessna 172 or one of the crazy Cub-derived STOL birds, or a classic like the Beechcraft Staggerwing.

That sounds fun.  I'm thinking of building a transforming early style Autogyro. One with wings like the Buhl A-1 or the Kamov A-7.

[HABeas2]

More questions!? Still!?

1) Can Syberian Mechs use any type of armor available, besides converting mechs not using FF Armor? Currently, IndustrialMechs can use any armor type but BattleMechs aren't allowed Commercial. Does that apply to Syberian Mechs too?

Mmmm. Looking over the rules, it seems pretty cut and dry that the armoring rules are based on the underlying structure type, and that the Syberians only have standard and FF armor for military machines, while industrials can only use standard ind., heavy industrial (aka military-grade standard), and commercial armors only. That's the rules.

*tweaks rules*

Okay, I've now added the following paragraph to the Rules Chapter, covering armor:

•   Armor – The need to improvise and make do with scraps taught the human Syberians to allow for unconventional “lower-grade” armor options in all their ’Mech designs. This ability remains available, even after the humans’ demise. As a consequence, all Syberian ’Mechs built using either an available military or industrial structure type (including Improved Industrial Structure), may mount armor types normally reserved for IndustrialMechs and Support Vehicles. The armor types available to the Syberian technology base are shown in the Core Construction Technologies List. Note that the available Industrial, Commercial, and Support Vehicle armor types occupy no slots on the unit’s Critical Hit Table, and thus can be mounted on convertible AutoMechs.

2a) Do Syberian Mechs built with Industrial Structures have all the same functions as those built with BattleMech Structures? I know Enviromental Sealing is built in but would an Industrial FighterMech have VTOL capabilities or would that be extra?

Syberian industrial structure comes in standard and improved formats. Only the improved format has the built-in sealing. The tricky part not considered here, given how the Syberians militarized their industrial chassis, is whether an industrial with a fighter conversion is considered to be an atmospheric or aerospace fighter. I'm going to say (and codify into the rules, of course), that Prop-Flyers lose the VTOL capabilities in Fighter mode, with no work-around that doesn't involve NOT being prop-driven.

2b) If extra, would they add VTOL Equipment they way Conventional Fighters do, or Rotors, or both?

Answered above. Industrial Prop-Flyers have to commit to one form of flight or the other.

3a)Do Prop FighterMechs include VTOL? My guess would be No since they're using a prop for movement not jet thrust.

They do not. VTOLMechs are their own thing.

3b) If 3a) is a No, can VTOL/VSTOL be added following the answer to 2b)

Narp. 

Hope that helps!

- Herb

[glitterboy2098]

i'd run an autogyro-bot as a VTOLmech with some plane visual styling. given that in media the line between helicopter and Autogyro is pretty blurry, i doubt that many people would even notice.

[HABeas2]

i'd run an autogyro-bot as a VTOLmech with some plane visual styling. given that in media the line between helicopter and Autogyro is pretty blurry, i doubt that many people would even notice.

As would I.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

More questions!? Still!?

 ;D I'm sure I'll  think of more.

Mmmm. Looking over the rules, it seems pretty cut and dry that the armoring rules are based on the underlying structure type, and that the Syberians only have standard and FF armor for military machines, while industrials can only use standard ind., heavy industrial (aka military-grade standard), and commercial armors only. That's the rules.

*tweaks rules*

Okay, I've now added the following paragraph to the Rules Chapter, covering armor:

Cool! Thanks! I'd like to see if playing with the armor will improve performance any at the cost of survivability.

Syberian industrial structure comes in standard and improved formats. Only the improved format has the built-in sealing. The tricky part not considered here, given how the Syberians militarized their industrial chassis, is whether an industrial with a fighter conversion is considered to be an atmospheric or aerospace fighter. I'm going to say (and codify into the rules, of course), that Prop-Flyers lose the VTOL capabilities in Fighter mode, with no work-around that doesn't involve NOT being prop-driven.

I'm kind of hoping Industrial FighterMechs will be atmospheric fighters. If the Syberians converted all kinds of other vehicles, why not them? And it makes sense for a FighterMech with a standard Industrial Structure to be atmospheric only since it can't operate in space. The issue is VSTOL abilities. It's built in for ASF but optional for CF. Would VSTOL abilities be built in, optional, or not available for Industrial FighterMechs? Or would it depend on the structure type? Built in for Improved but not for Standard?

Answered above. Industrial Prop-Flyers have to commit to one form of flight or the other.

They do not. VTOLMechs are their own thing.

Narp. 

Hope that helps!

- Herb

So no AutoGyroMechs? At least not built as FighterMechs? Cause I was thinking  about making a couple. The one without wings would be built as a VTOL Mech with a no hovering/VTOL Quirk. The one with wings would built as a Prop FighterMech with a single Rotor for VSTOL. Or would the Rotor just be a quirk for the FighterMech? Or maybe there should just be an AutoGyro Quirk?

i'd run an autogyro-bot as a VTOLmech with some plane visual styling. given that in media the line between helicopter and Autogyro is pretty blurry, i doubt that many people would even notice.

I'm definitely leaning towards VTOLmech for the wingless autogyros even though they're supposed to fly more like airplanes. They do look more like helicopters though. They also have tilting rotors like helicopters. Plus some helicopters even have propellers blurring things even more. So I think wingless autogyros would work as VTOLmechs.

The earlier autogyros with wings definitely flew more like airplanes though as they didn't have tilting rotors. They depended on ailerons, rudders and elevators to change direction. That's why I was thinking autogyros could be either VTOLmech or FighterMech depending on the presence of wings or not.

[HABeas2]

I'm kind of hoping Industrial FighterMechs will be atmospheric fighters. If the Syberians converted all kinds of other vehicles, why not them? And it makes sense for a FighterMech with a standard Industrial Structure to be atmospheric only since it can't operate in space. The issue is VSTOL abilities. It's built in for ASF but optional for CF. Would VSTOL abilities be built in, optional, or not available for Industrial FighterMechs? Or would it depend on the structure type? Built in for Improved but not for Standard?

Conventional Fighters are only the way they are because they are made to be air-breathers and are thus reliant on the presence of air for at least some of their reaction mass. The Syberians were using fusion everywhere and wanted AutoMechs that could be deployed damned near everywhere, so they simply didn't make FighterMechs that weren't aerospace unless they were also prop-driven.

So no AutoGyroMechs? At least not built as FighterMechs? Cause I was thinking  about making a couple. The one without wings would be built as a VTOL Mech with a no hovering/VTOL Quirk. The one with wings would built as a Prop FighterMech with a single Rotor for VSTOL. Or would the Rotor just be a quirk for the FighterMech? Or maybe there should just be an AutoGyro Quirk?

I did some quirk research on autogyros and have come to realize that they really do straddle a line between VTOLs and prop-planes. I could see arguments for building an autogyro using either approach, with faster autogyros built as FighterMechs using the Prop-Flyer Quirk, and slower ones built simply as VTOLMechs. Given the rulings I've made, that would mean the faster "AutoGyroMechs" would lose VTOL capabilities as a consequence.

I'm definitely leaning towards VTOLmech for the wingless autogyros even though they're supposed to fly more like airplanes. They do look more like helicopters though. They also have tilting rotors like helicopters. Plus some helicopters even have propellers blurring things even more. So I think wingless autogyros would work as VTOLmechs.

Not gonna stop you either way.

- Herb

[Wrangler]

Herb, did you update the current PDF with these amendments?

[HABeas2]

Herb, did you update the current PDF with these amendments?

Not yet. Because I suspect more to come, and because I found some issues in the text and layout along the way that I hadn't noticed before.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

Conventional Fighters are only the way they are because they are made to be air-breathers and are thus reliant on the presence of air for at least some of their reaction mass. The Syberians were using fusion everywhere and wanted AutoMechs that could be deployed damned near everywhere, so they simply didn't make FighterMechs that weren't aerospace unless they were also prop-driven.

So treat them all as ASF and hope those with Standard Industrial Structures don't suffer a breach while in space?

I did some quirk research on autogyros and have come to realize that they really do straddle a line between VTOLs and prop-planes. I could see arguments for building an autogyro using either approach, with faster autogyros built as FighterMechs using the Prop-Flyer Quirk, and slower ones built simply as VTOLMechs. Given the rulings I've made, that would mean the faster "AutoGyroMechs" would lose VTOL capabilities as a consequence.

Not gonna stop you either way.

- Herb

They do straddle that line, which is why I was thinking of making two. One a VTOLMech and the other a FighterMech. I didn't think the faster AutoGyroMechs would have VTOL capabilities. They're more STOL aircraft. Plus the Rotor wouldn't provide enough Thrust points to VTOL or hover.  But would their rotor be equipment or a quirk? I want to lean towards equipment since it's not something they'd want to loose or be damaged.

Thanks :) I just don't want to overdo the Illegal Quirk.


Would it be fair to say that a mixed propulsion FighterMech, with turbo props and jets, like the Ryan_FR_Fireball, would follow the rules for PropFighterMechs but movement in trace/no atmosphere and under water would be limited to the number of which type of engines they have?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_FR_Fireball

Thanks :)

[HABeas2]

So treat them all as ASF and hope those with Standard Industrial Structures don't suffer a breach while in space?

Basically, yeah. But considering the fact that even fusion-powered BattleMechs with military structures break down from vacuum-voiding in space, well... Let's just say it's a funny rules area. (But remember that prop aircraft can't even rise higher than 18km above the surface in gameplay; Prop-Flyer FighterMechs are stuck in the same limits while in fighter mode.)

They do straddle that line, which is why I was thinking of making two. One a VTOLMech and the other a FighterMech. I didn't think the faster AutoGyroMechs would have VTOL capabilities. They're more STOL aircraft. Plus the Rotor wouldn't provide enough Thrust points to VTOL or hover.  But would their rotor be equipment or a quirk? I want to lean towards equipment since it's not something they'd want to loose or be damaged.

Prop-Flyer FighterMechs can be built with a Safe Thrust as low as 1. And remember that Prop-Flyers substitute propellers for jet systems, which means even their jump MP is prop-driven (which is why Prop-Flyer FighterMechs can't use Jump MP in vacuum/trace atmospheres, either). No Rotor equipment required, because the jump jets are rotors--albeit rotors incapable of sustained hovering in 'Mech mode).

If you want alt-mode VTOL capabilities with a convertible Syberian AutoMech, you thus need to build them as standard (non-Prop) FighterMechs, or as VTOLMechs. If you want Mech-mode VTOL with a convertible Syberian AutoMech, your only option is a VTOLMech. And if you want propeller-based convertible FighterMechs that work using fighter speeds and fighter rules instead of VTOL rules, your only option is a FighterMech with the Prop-Flyer Quirk. The Syberians didn't develop much finer gradation than that, I'm afraid.

Thanks :) I just don't want to overdo the Illegal Quirk.

If you're determined to keep bending even these rather broad and flexible rules, you may as well go in for a penny, in for a metric ton of pennies...

Would it be fair to say that a mixed propulsion FighterMech, with turbo props and jets, like the Ryan_FR_Fireball, would follow the rules for PropFighterMechs but movement in trace/no atmosphere and under water would be limited to the number of which type of engines they have?

I wouldn't even try it. Hell, reading up on that plane, it was basically a failure, even if they did build about 75 of them. The dual power system arrangement was fraught with problems that affected everything from landing gear to structural integrity. No, I'd make a transforming Ryan Fireball up as a FighterMech with the Prop-Flyer Quirk and stick with Prop-Flyer rules.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

Basically, yeah. But considering the fact that even fusion-powered BattleMechs with military structures break down from vacuum-voiding in space, well... Let's just say it's a funny rules area. (But remember that prop aircraft can't even rise higher than 18km above the surface in gameplay; Prop-Flyer FighterMechs are stuck in the same limits while in fighter mode.)

 :thumbsup:

Prop-Flyer FighterMechs can be built with a Safe Thrust as low as 1. And remember that Prop-Flyers substitute propellers for jet systems, which means even their jump MP is prop-driven (which is why Prop-Flyer FighterMechs can't use Jump MP in vacuum/trace atmospheres, either). No Rotor equipment required, because the jump jets are rotors--albeit rotors incapable of sustained hovering in 'Mech mode).

If you want alt-mode VTOL capabilities with a convertible Syberian AutoMech, you thus need to build them as standard (non-Prop) FighterMechs, or as VTOLMechs. If you want Mech-mode VTOL with a convertible Syberian AutoMech, your only option is a VTOLMech. And if you want propeller-based convertible FighterMechs that work using fighter speeds and fighter rules instead of VTOL rules, your only option is a FighterMech with the Prop-Flyer Quirk. The Syberians didn't develop much finer gradation than that, I'm afraid.

I'm not looking to give an AutoGyroMechs with wings VTOL capabilities though. I'm looking for a reason to explain the rotor on what looks like a prop airplane. The rotor is required for the autogyro to fly but they don't hover or take off and land vertically. It's a non MP Rotor. It provides lift but no MP on it's own. The AutoGyroMech would still require a Prop and a runway to take off and land. They just need less space to do so making them STOL aircraft. Not VTOL.

Since autogyros need the rotor to function I would think that would be a crit that could be damaged. Destroy it and the autogyro will crash. Would would that be an automatic crit like wheels or tracks or one that has weight like Props and Rotors? I'm leaning toward weight like props. And if a helicopter can have a propeller as part of it's motive system (Warrior H-7), why can't a propeller plane have a rotor as part of it's motive system?

This is what I was thinking.
20 ton winged AutoGyroMech   
Internal                            2
Conversion System  Aero   3
Engine         SFE   80        2.5
   Walking          4
   Running          6
   Sprinting         8
   Jumping          1
   Safe Thrust     1
   Max Thrust     2
Heat Sinks    Single    10
Gyro             Compact       1.5
Fuel             NA
Cockpit       Drone             3
Armor      Commercial  69  3
                  IS     AV
HD               3     9
CT                6    9/3
R/LT             5    8/2
R/LA             3    6
R/LL             4    8

Fixed Equipment
Avionics          1 HD, 1RT, 1LT   -
Landing Gear   1 CT, 1RT, 1 LT   -
Turbo-Prop "JJ"          1 CT       .5
Non MP Rotor "JJ"      1 CT       .5

Recon Configuration
Recon Camera         1 CT          .5
Remote Sensor Dispenser  1 CT .5
Machine Gun Ammo  1 RT         .5
Machine Gun            1 RT         .5
Machine Gun            1 LT         .5
Machine Gun Ammo  1 LT         .5
Small Laser              1 RA        .5
Small Laser              1 LA        .5


Quirks
Illegal (Syberian Robotics AI, Turbo-Prop “Jump Jet”, Non Powered Rotor "Jump Jet"), Atmospheric Flyer,
Notes
This FighterMech is STOL Aircraft requiring runway to take off and land. No VTOL or hovering.
Non Powered Rotor "Jump Jet" provides no Jump MP or Cruising MP.
Destruction of the NP Rotor Crit will cause the Mech to crash.
Destruction of the Prop will cause the AutoGyroMech to descend with a +2? modifier to land safely. All other STOL Landing rules apply.

Something like that. Then with non winged AutoGyroMechs,

20 ton wingless AutoGyroMech   
Internal                            2
Conversion System  VTOL   3
Engine         SFE   60         1.5
   Walking           3
   Running          5
   Sprinting         6
   Jumping         3
   Cruising          5
   Flank              8
Heat Sinks    Single    10
Gyro            Compact       1.5
Fuel             NA
Cockpit       Drone             3
Armor      Commercial  69  3
                  IS     AV
HD               3     9
CT                6    9/3
R/LT             5    8/2
R/LA             3    6
R/LL             4    8

Fixed Equipment
3x Rotors                  3 CT      3

Recon Configuration
Recon Camera           1 CT        .5
Machine Gun Ammo  1 CT         .5
Machine Gun            1 RT         .5
Machine Gun            1 RT         .5
Small Laser              1 RA        .5
Small Laser              1 LA        .5

Quirks
Illegal (Syberian Robotics AI), Rotor Arrangement "AutoGyro"

Note
Rotor Arrangement "AutoGyro" (This VTOLMech's vehicle form is a STOL Aircraft. As such it can not hover and requires equal number of hexes to take off as Cruising MP. Landing require half as many hexes, round up.)

One as a Prop FighterMech and one as a VTOLMech. What do you think?

If you're determined to keep bending even these rather broad and flexible rules, you may as well go in for a penny, in for a metric ton of pennies...

A metric ton of pennies... is a lot of pennies. I suppose I could just slap Illegal on everything but that takes away some of the fun. Besides the regular (Syberian AI) I'd rather save it for special things. Like a TIE FighterMech, complete with Laser Cannons.  ;D :))

I wouldn't even try it. Hell, reading up on that plane, it was basically a failure, even if they did build about 75 of them. The dual power system arrangement was fraught with problems that affected everything from landing gear to structural integrity. No, I'd make a transforming Ryan Fireball up as a FighterMech with the Prop-Flyer Quirk and stick with Prop-Flyer rules.

- Herb

Yeah. That plane had issues but it was just one example. There are other more successful dual power aircraft. Like the KC-97 Stratofreighter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-97_Stratofreighter   The jets would let the PlaneMech fly higher but I think using both engine types at the same time would risk pushing the plane past Velocity 7.

[Daryk]

Props don't handle the sound barrier very well...  8)

[idea weenie]

Props don't handle the sound barrier very well...  8)

The props could add extra thrust for subsonic maneuvers?  Enough prop thrust and you basically have a VTOL.   ;)

[Daryk]

Which is why VTOLMechs are probably more appropriate than Fighter or ASF frames for this.

[HABeas2]

And we've come all the way back to VTOLMechs.

:)

- Herb

[Daryk]

Glad to have helped square the circle!  :D

[HABeas2]

Glad to have helped square the circle!  :D

All these squares make a circle...
All these squares make a circle...
All these squares make a circle...

 :D

- Herb

[Daryk]

:toofunny:

[RifleMech]

The props could add extra thrust for subsonic maneuvers?  Enough prop thrust and you basically have a VTOL.   ;)

They did make a few prop planes that were VTOL like the Convair Pogo.  ;D

The props could add extra thrust for subsonic maneuvers?  Enough prop thrust and you basically have a VTOL.   ;)

I have thought that VTOLs with props should get a speed bonus. The whole point of putting propellers on them, or converting rotors to propellers is to gain extra speed.

Which is why VTOLMechs are probably more appropriate than Fighter or ASF frames for this.

I agree with using VTOLs for wingless AutoGyros. They are closer to VTOLs with their tilting rotors providing some directional control. The ones with wings though, are more like airplanes as they use control surfaces in the wings. That's why I did one of each. Although, I suppose since wings do work for WiGEs they'd work for a VTOL chassis too, with a quirk like above, but I was hoping for something a little faster.  Maybe a +1 or +2 to cruising for VTOLs that fly like airplanes but require they move forward X number of hexes like WiGEs?  So instead of a 5/8 Cruise/Flank the AutoGyro (or tilt rotor) would move 6/9 or 7/11? A little faster than a regular VTOL but it can't climb vertically or hover.


 

All these squares make a circle...
All these squares make a circle...
All these squares make a circle...

 :D

- Herb

 ;D

[HABeas2]

So, I kind of got into a coloring kick with MS Paint again, and decided to produce a kind of color guide to the twenty named Seekers on the DemoCon side that are listed in my Syberia TRO...

Here's the first ten...

- Herb

[HABeas2]

And here's the other ten...

- Herb

[Wrangler]

Supercool, that being MS Paint, that must have taken awhile.

[RifleMech]

Vey Cool!  :thumbsup: :beer:

[HABeas2]

And a more radical Seeker refit, fielded by the AutoBoPs:

Here's Air Blade's model and scheme!

- Herb

[RifleMech]

Very cool!  :thumbsup: :beer:

[Luciora]

I gotta say, making the seeker Jets are some of my favorite mods.

[HABeas2]

I gotta say, making the seeker Jets are some of my favorite mods.

They are amazingly fun, aren't they?

- Herb