| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kraken
Federated Suns
Marshal
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 2755
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 11-Nov-2002 09:51 Post subject: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
  |
|
A few months back, there was a debate concerning how CASE worked. Here's a real-life explanation of how:
The M1 Abrams is designed so that in the event of an ammo explosion, the blast does not kill the crew. How? Simple:
1. The storage for the rounds is seperated from the crew compartment by a blast door which automatically closes after a round is withdrawn.
2. Special panels have been designed into the tank's turret. In an explosion, these panels blast outward, channeling the energy and explosion outwards and to the rear of the turret.
Conclusions?
In Battletech, there shouldn't be too much difference between the CASE as we know it and the blow-out panels on the Abrams. For ground vehicles and quads, it should be the exact same- blow-out panels to send the explosion out the back, and blast doors to keep the crew compartment safe. For regular mechs, however, the physics would require some sort of compensation method to keep the mech aright; based on the rules, I would have to say that the piloting skill roll from damage would represent the pilot having to 'manually' compensate for the force of the blast. And theoretically, this concept of blast panels could be applied easily to aircraft.
Suggested rules changes:
1. CASE should be allowed to be placed in turrets on vehicles; after all, we know it works with the Abrams.
2. Aircraft, reasonably, should be allowed to mount it. Admittedly, the pilot will have an increased difficulty dealing with the kinetics, but this can be reflected by a piloting skill roll.
3. Ammo explosions in a location equipped with CASE should not do damage to any of the other critical slots in that location- as such, the BV charts would have to be updated.
Thoughts?
_________________
"I wish I could write as mysterious as a cat." -Edgar Allen Poe"I knew there was something special about you, but I never realized you were really a cat." Wolfwood to a random cat (Trigun)
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
Hardware
Clan Ghost Bear
Star Colonel
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 605
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 11:02 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
The only reason it works in the Abrams is the amount of armor that is around the perimeter and bottom of the ammo stowage. The blow off panels are brazed or welded on to make them weather and airtight. The force of the explosion breaks the welds.
No tests have been done with an Abrams and a living crew.
Aircraft are far too frail to work such a system. Remember the M1 weighs 60+ tons. Not to mention you'd have the equivalent of a very powerful jet engine strapped to your fuselage at an odd angle, throwing you to God knows what attitude in relation to your momentum. Can you say departing flight?
Maybe for ground and surface vessels, never aircraft or submarines (not because of the hole in the hull, but because water will not compress, it's what makes torpedoes work so well).
_________________
The more I get to know people the more I like my dog.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vampire
Free Worlds League
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 917
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 11:27 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
>No tests have been done with an Abrams and a living crew.
Oh, believe me, the crew would be all right. During the Gulf War, an M1 Abrams was disabled by an enemy shot, following standard procedure the crew was picked up by another tank, and the other tank tried to destroy the inmobilized vehicle by firing a shot into the turret rear, the amunition blew up through the panels.. when the vehicle was later recovered, they were amazed to find out that despite the ammunition explosion there was no damage to the tank, aside from misaligned optics, and it was made operational again very quickly.
In fact, the blow out panels in the M1, work *better* than CASE
[ This Message was edited by: Vampire on 2002-11-11 11:27 ]
_________________
Memento audare semper
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Hurlbut
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Corporal
Joined: 15-Oct-2002 00:00
Posts: 136
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 13:24 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
CASE is same thing, the ammo are put in armored bins, they have blow out panels on the back preventing any more damage from spreading to other locations. However this does damage the rear armor.
_________________
A GREEN Dragon Lies Beneath!
I took the Inner Dragon online quiz and found out I
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vagabond
Mercenary
Mr. Referee
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 5797
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 16:52 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
this is something i've considered for a long time, as i knew about the M1 blow out panels before knowing CASE.
if i operated on the same principle, then only the case and rear armor would really suffer damage.
now, as for the need to alter the rules, nah... just use CASE II. it works very near to what the blow out panels do. 1pt internal [expansion or vibration of the chassie] damage. rear armor stripped. possible crits on all other componets in that location.
_________________
one must work hard to cultivate the mind and body. and one must always cultivate the mind.
//^(^_^)^\\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 17:39 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 11:02, Hardware wrote:
The only reason it works in the Abrams is the amount of armor that is around the perimeter and bottom of the ammo stowage. The blow off panels are brazed or welded on to make them weather and airtight. The force of the explosion breaks the welds.
No tests have been done with an Abrams and a living crew.
Aircraft are far too frail to work such a system. Remember the M1 weighs 60+ tons. Not to mention you'd have the equivalent of a very powerful jet engine strapped to your fuselage at an odd angle, throwing you to God knows what attitude in relation to your momentum. Can you say departing flight?
Maybe for ground and surface vessels, never aircraft or submarines (not because of the hole in the hull, but because water will not compress, it's what makes torpedoes work so well).
|
|
Actually there was a hit on an Abrams in the Gulf War that set off the ammo rack and the crew was able to get out do the CASE doing it's job, this is mention in the book Tank vs Tank.
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ruger
Lyran Alliance
Hauptmann General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 2110
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 17:42 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 17:39, Karagin wrote:
Actually there was a hit on an Abrams in the Gulf War that set off the ammo rack and the crew was able to get out do the CASE doing it's job, this is mention in the book Tank vs Tank.
|
|
And, IIRC, it was discussed on a show about the Abrams last night on the History channel...
Ruger
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 20:29 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 17:42, Ruger wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 17:39, Karagin wrote:
Actually there was a hit on an Abrams in the Gulf War that set off the ammo rack and the crew was able to get out do the CASE doing it's job, this is mention in the book Tank vs Tank.
|
|
And, IIRC, it was discussed on a show about the Abrams last night on the History channel...
Ruger
|
|
I think it has come up from time to time on that channel...
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Slythis
Federated Suns
Colonel
Joined: 09-Aug-2002 00:00
Posts: 712
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 20:40 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
How can you refer to the history channel as "that channel" *fakes disdust* lol
Anyway as far as putting a CASE onto a jet, I don't think it would work unless the blast was dispersed perfectly centered, both up and down. other wise the blast would send it spirling to the ground.
_________________
"It is pleasant, when the winds are high and the seas are rough to watch the stuggles of another from the shore."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 20:46 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 20:40, Slythis wrote:
How can you refer to the history channel as "that channel" *fakes disdust* lol
Anyway as far as putting a CASE onto a jet, I don't think it would work unless the blast was dispersed perfectly centered, both up and down. other wise the blast would send it spirling to the ground.
|
|
All channels are that channel from time to time...
CASE on a jet I would think would vent it to the rear of the craft...but then again it could simple be something that jetisons the ammo bay out of the craft if it is hit...
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Kraken
Federated Suns
Marshal
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 2755
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 20:57 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 20:46, Karagin wrote:
CASE on a jet I would think would vent it to the rear of the craft...but then again it could simple be something that jetisons the ammo bay out of the craft if it is hit...
|
|
That's actually how I was envisioning it.
_________________
"I wish I could write as mysterious as a cat." -Edgar Allen Poe"I knew there was something special about you, but I never realized you were really a cat." Wolfwood to a random cat (Trigun)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Hardware
Clan Ghost Bear
Star Colonel
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 605
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 22:37 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 17:39, Karagin wrote:
Actually there was a hit on an Abrams in the Gulf War that set off the ammo rack and the crew was able to get out do the CASE doing it's job, this is mention in the book Tank vs Tank.
|
|
There's a difference between being able to abandon a vehicle and being able to continue fighting. You can have soldiers in the field beyond 45 days, but almost all schools of thought say they will be combat ineffective. Was that M1 crew awake, alert, uninjured and able to manuever their vehicle to a position of safety or did they just survive?
_________________
The more I get to know people the more I like my dog.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 11-Nov-2002 23:53 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 22:37, Hardware wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 17:39, Karagin wrote:
Actually there was a hit on an Abrams in the Gulf War that set off the ammo rack and the crew was able to get out do the CASE doing it's job, this is mention in the book Tank vs Tank.
|
|
There's a difference between being able to abandon a vehicle and being able to continue fighting. You can have soldiers in the field beyond 45 days, but almost all schools of thought say they will be combat ineffective. Was that M1 crew awake, alert, uninjured and able to manuever their vehicle to a position of safety or did they just survive?
|
|
They all lived...the tank was repairable thus able to be put back into the fight.
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8081
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 12-Nov-2002 06:19 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 23:53, Karagin wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 22:37, Hardware wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2002-11-11 17:39, Karagin wrote:
Actually there was a hit on an Abrams in the Gulf War that set off the ammo rack and the crew was able to get out do the CASE doing it's job, this is mention in the book Tank vs Tank.
|
|
There's a difference between being able to abandon a vehicle and being able to continue fighting. You can have soldiers in the field beyond 45 days, but almost all schools of thought say they will be combat ineffective. Was that M1 crew awake, alert, uninjured and able to manuever their vehicle to a position of safety or did they just survive?
|
|
They all lived...the tank was repairable thus able to be put back into the fight.
|
|
I think he's asking did they continue to fight from the point of "escape", in which the answer to that is a resounding "no".
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ares
Clan Jade Falcon
Star Colonel
Joined: 20-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 737
|
| Posted: 12-Nov-2002 07:31 Post subject: RE: Functional Design Theorems for CASE |
|
|
RL is based more on one-hit kills though, so CASE's level of protection against something that would eliminate the vechicle in one shot has to be taken into account.
_________________
I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say will undoubtedly incriminate me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
