New devices of war (howitzers to razor wire and all between)

chrisd wrote:*quote="Lazalarlives"*Truthfully? I'd love to see steam tractors on treads with likewise equipped wagons. Low ground pressure keeps them from stalling and they only have to go about 8-10 kph. Think all-terrain trains of a sort. They'll also transition nicely to civilian life as tractors.

Add in steel plows and modern-style brush hog assemblies made possible because of steel blades and the already-capable farms can creep closer to their (current) modern equivalents.

After the aforementioned howitzers, of course.

Dave*quote*

Or a steam version of Dr. Porsche's "C-train" artillery tractors.


Or a steam version of Dr. Porsche's C-train?

n7axw wrote:Just for the sake of review, let's look at what the allies have already got: long range angle guns, shorter but portable angles, various types of mines, hand grenades, revolvers with 6 round cylinders, rifles with 10 round magazines, rifled cannon. Breaking over the horizon, but not quite available for use is smokeless powder. Also count steam for the Haarahlds, the riverclads and the cities.

Now think of the difficulties: industrial plant is still too small. They are having difficulty producing enough rifles to comletely equip the armies they have raised. Navy needs more hulls to cope with piracy threat and demand for steam engines far out strips the supply. And while back there was a thread wondering if enough ammumition was going to be available rifles and no one was going to convincingly argue that it would.

The point to all of this is that I think you guys are really talking about weapons for the next war. Poor old Howsmyn needs to allow his assembly lines settle in to produce what is already on tap along with expanding his capacity to the point where he can comfortably produce what it needed in adequate quantity. Continually having to accommodate new ideas works against that.

One thing they might manage without a lot of disruption would be larger magazines for the M96. Why not a 30 round clip rather than a 10? It seems to me that it could be designed to fit in the same hole in the bottom of the rifle without any change in the design of the rifle itself...

Don

Weird Harold wrote:

JeffEngel wrote:I imagine that sort of tactical need may be covered by multiple systems.

Are rifles with magazines or a revolver mechanism near-future weapons for them? How about shotguns?

I'm sure that there will be multiple weapons systems over a wide range of options, I just don't see belt-fed heavy machine guns in the Maxim or Gatling styles as fitting the ICA's demonstrated preference for mobile tactics.

The ICA is already fielding a (detachable) magazine-fed bolt-action battle rifle. Adapting a BAR clone to use the same magazines as the standard issue battle-rifle wouldn't be all that difficult.

Revolver rifles didn't prove to be durable enough to be reliable, hence the move to lever-action and bolt-action battle rifles. Revolver cannon and rotating cannon/heavy caliber multi-barrel rifles were more successful but required crew-service and artillery carriages, limbers and caissons;

JeffEngel wrote:And is there maybe some room for something on the edge between a crew served infantry weapon and the very lightest of field artillery?

Of course there is; that's the role Gatlings, Hotchiss, "Mountain Guns," and heavy machine guns -- like the Browning MA-2 "Ma Duece" -- filled. For the most part, those guns are considered light artillery and require team-work and constant drill to be effective.

JeffEngel wrote:The mortars are made for fairly quick assembly and disassembly, transport, and operation by small crews. Could they build to a similar design something like a Maxim gun - perhaps with the addition of a bipod with an axle and wheels for dragging around assembled, in a hurry or on level ground?

JOAT provided a good video of what is possible with light or medium artillery. There are several others -- including this 23-minute WWII training film -- that show how heavy machine guns are moved around and employed. (NB: in WWII heavy machine guns were used to suppress enemy heavy machine guns and as light anti-aircraft guns. Charis doesn't have that problem. Yet.)

Modern -- Vietnam and later -- tactics rely on SAW (Squad Automatic Weapons) and select fire assault rifles rather than cumbersome heavy machine gun support.

MWadwell wrote:*quote="Weird Harold"*[quote="WeberFan"]Given that the Temple forces will likely attack in large numbers with significant breech-loading, rifled muskets soon, Charis needs a way to push vast amounts of fire downrange at close ranges. Can you even imagine the Temple forces encountering interlocking, final-protective-fires from machine guns? The shock and morale-disrupting effect would be staggering methinks...*quote*

The only problem with the Maxim is that it is a crew-served "heavy" weapon -- heavy both in terms of fire-power and in terms of literal weight. It is best suited to defensive works and trench warfare; it is NOT suited to the offensive needs of the ICA and RSA.

The ICA needs something mobile and and "personal" -- ie not requiring a crew or fixed position to be effective. Something with the fire-power of a "trench broom" and close to the range of a battle rifle but light and magazine fed so it doesn't slow down an assault...

lyonheart wrote:While a LMG or SAW would be great, I think we'll have to wait awhile before we get a Lewis or Bren gun etc, though who knows, Master Mahldyn may already be thinking about something similar.

MWadwell wrote:

n7axw wrote:Actually, while Charis is still struggling to get its steel capacity up so that they have enough to manufacture rifles, cannon and iron clads, I doubt that such things as razor wire will be a very strong priority. They are increasing their industrial base, but as of the end of LAMA, things were still bottlenecked.

That being ssid, I think you have s good idea.

Don

I think that the biggest bottleneck is not the smelting of steel, or the construction of weapons.

The biggest restriction is manpower.

And so (to me) the best "New Device of War", is actually something that will increase manufacturing.


Smaller, more reliable steam engines. Engines able to be mounted in (initially) middle-sized factories (and finally, in small factories) - enabling the use of powered tools.

That would have the effect of releasing a relatively large manpower pool - that can then be used to either further expand the manufacturing sector, or go into the army/navy.


That is going to be the best "weapon" to develop....