According to Martin Caidin's Book "The Ragged, Rugged Warriors", one of the principle problems of the Buffalo was a tendency to develop an oil leak that sprayed oil over the pilot's cockpit window . . . making forward viewing rather difficult. This is an unimaginably bad thing to happen in combat, of course, but as you might imagine it also had a dramatically negative effect on the pilot's ability to land even an otherwise undamaged aircraft safely. Pilots who survived the Buffalo tended to be those who had a lot of flying experience with it BEFORE they went into combat, and those were very few.

By Steve Cain (Stevecain) on Sunday, April 25, 2004 - 01:13 am: Edit

Jeff-
Jessica is the one that was indicating that Brewster did the Coursair. I was referencing her on them shutting down to (seemingly) change to another plane... not sit idle for the rest of the war.
Jessica- what info did you have on this? Thanks for the clairification.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica) on Sunday, April 25, 2004 - 02:41 pm: Edit

Actually, I was quoting Richard on the Corsair thing; my sole contribution was to note that the Buffalo was barely a fighter and that the Brewster plant was running with shady accounting practices from the get-go.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, April 26, 2004 - 05:35 pm: Edit

Richard Wells:

Going back to your post RE: A-12 a speed 12 streak fighter upgrade of the venerable -A10 design...

Since there has not (AFAIK) been a A-12 published yet, it seems ...timid...I guess covers it, to abandon the A-12 tag in deference to one or more proposals that failed to be accepted.

IIRC the A10 had spd 10, 1xP3-FA, 2xI drones, Damage 16, 1xPhoton-FA, 1xP3RA, BPV 10. YIS 171. DFR 1.

What were you thinking as stats for the A-12 (or whatever other tag used)?

Spd 15, no FA phaser, 2xI drones, damage 12, 1xPhoton-FA, no RA phaser, BPV 8. YIS 171.DFR 1.
able to mount a phaser pod.

Not sure about the drones...should it be able to carry type I's or Type VI's?

JUst for the record, The US AirForce did have a upgraded A10 design called the A12...it was the Shrike...a modification of the very old Curtis A8 all metal low-wing attack monoplane that first flew in 1931!...they were still in service at the time Japan attack Pearl Harbor...and 9 of the aircraft destroyed on Dec 7, 1941 were A-12's.

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 01:21 am: Edit

Jeff: If several people all purpose very similar concepts under the same name, the meme is well planted. Of all the things to argue about, fighting to overturn someone else's proposal ranks fairly low.

I was never contemplating the streak shuttle variant on the A-10 as an improvement but rather as an alternate concept built around a different tactical model using photons to clear out Klingon fighters to free up a path for drones.

The no phaser idea was a new wrinkle on an old concept, just an attempt to make the precursor of the G-12 different without simply being worse. Most of the versions of the design I toyed with included a phaser because that is a good element but excessive for a failed design.

Stat wise, I was predicting something along the lines of speed 12-15, [phaser-3 FA], 2 x type I or Type VI, damage 8-12, photon FA, DFR 2 or 3. A range of possible designs which includes the G-12 stats if the photon could be replaced with phasers.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 02:18 am: Edit

I'd like to see the Klingons produce a disruptor fighter modeled on the Stinger (as the stinger has two fusions).
=============================
ZDF

Single space fighter.
12 hit points
Spd=15
Drones = 2 x Type I + 2 x Type VI
Special = 2 x Disruptor (two charges each/ 1 per turn)
1 x Phaser-3 (360) Yes, I mean 360°. Klingons have always had lousy arcs for their fighters. Finally they can shoot a drone that is behind them!
BPV 12

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 02:24 am: Edit

New rule for late era:

Carriers may lend two ECCM to their fighters that can be used to increase the range that a fighter can target to by 5 hexes.

This ECCM counts towards the the lending limits but is not used towards EW for the receiving fighters if used for this purpose.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 11:19 am: Edit

Loren;

Regarding your proposed new Klingon fighter - do the Tholians get a new fighter too? Consider - the top-of-the-line Tholian carrier based fighter, the Spider-2, has one disruptor (two charges) and one 360 phaser-3. That's it. Your proposed fighter (single space) has the same phaser suite, TWICE the disruptor firepower, and four drones. It's even faster than the Spider-2 (speed 15 vs. speed 14). The only Spider-2 advantage (other than the fact that your fighter would undoubtedly be more expensive) is that the S-2 takes 14 damage to kill. Hardly sufficient compensation for the enormous advantage in firepower your version has.

If your version had only one disruptor, it might be acceptable as an upgraded (and expensive) version of the ZD. But I'm dubious about any single space fighter carrying two disruptors.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 11:31 am: Edit

Alan: Good points to consider but I would suggest comparing to other Klingon fighters.

One more advantage the Spider has is the ability to operate in web.

It is a first draft idea for late war of course. I'll look into it later today.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 12:14 pm: Edit

Loren:

I agree completely that the ZD doesn't come off well compared to the ZY. The same goes for its Kzinti counterpart (is it the DAS? can't remember) compared to TADS. Since there are currently no disruptor armed single space fighters in SFB that are very effective as general purpose fighters (though I think the Klingon, Kzinti, and Tholian Fast Heavy Fighters are all pretty good), I put this down to some peculiar quirk of the disruptor, that there is a point beyond which it doesn't "scale down" effectively. (I mean for starship combat. Obviously the anti-personnel disruptor-based weapons in Gurps are much smaller, but even a fighter-disruptor has an effective range and power level that is orders of magnitude greater.)

As a fan of the Tholians (I'm looking forward to reading your story, by the way) I would like to see something done to improve disruptor-armed fighters. As it stands now, the Spider-5 (the Tholian Fast Heavy Fighter) is really the only Tholian fighter that generates firepower comparable to its counterparts in other races. And since it doesn't appear until the PF era, give or take a year, the Tholians don't really gain much in terms of attrition unit capability, the Arachnid PF being one of the most cost effective PFs in Alpha Sector.

I would like to see something happen to improve the capabilities of single space disruptor-armed fighters. The Klingons, Kzinti, and (through their use of Klingon fighters) Lyrans and Seltorians would all benefit. But all those races have effective drone-armed fighters they can use. The Tholians would probably gain, relatively speaking, more than the other races since they don't have anything else to fall back on except the Spider-3, and that has two ph-3s but no non-phaser weaponry. They also have the Spider-2P, which has a 360 ph-3 and an FA ph-2. This may actually be the best all-round Tholian single space fighter. But the rules are very explicit that it operates from bases or planets, never carriers.

Still, as I already admitted, once PFs become available I can't complain about the Tholian attrition unit situation any more. BPV for BPV the Arachnid is a hammer.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 08:03 pm: Edit

I can see the Tholians maybe getting a new fighter but not because of a disparity with Klingon fighters. I would have to be on its own. You see, Tholian fighters got a bit boost with the Web Caster. They don't get them of course but a ship in the fleet can have them and the combo of web casters and Spiders can be really strong.

The Feds really got great fighters and next to the Fed the Klingons are pretty big fighter users but their fighters seem to fall behind a lot compared to their enemies fighters. The ZDF I proposed is a first draft. I expect there to be adjustments. The BPV, the hardest thing to figure with out testing, might be low. It certainly isn't too high. I tried to sacrafice a bit, such as the second Ph-3 (but gave the one left a full arc) of the ZY and maybe the speed could be lowered but not as low as the ZD. Please note, I'm talking ISC war era here. I just wanted to see the Klingons get an all around, DF heavy fighter. I figure the Klingons would take a bit of a clue from the Hydrans and Feds as to the power of a DF based fighter.

The ZDF should cause the Hydrans to pause a bit.

I hope you enjoy the story, the Klingons are the bulk of the story but I'm working on a back-story that tell of the events from 100% of the Tholian PoV. I can't go in to it further for now, but I'm excited about it.

By Christopher E. Fant (Cfant) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 08:13 pm: Edit

Gads, I really do not want to see everyone with a great fighter.

The Feds have them. The Hydrans have them, enough is enough.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 08:15 pm: Edit

But of course.

By Steve Cain (Stevecain) on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 02:46 am: Edit

That ZDF does have a lot of punch. You might recall that hydrans have no drones (aka damage sponge) and thus what fighters make it in must have a higher damage potential. What is your proposed YIS?

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 04:10 am: Edit

24 disruptors from 12 fighters means 16 hits or about 6 to 8 cripples. A second shot at range 4 would add yet more cripples. Somehow, I doubt it would be much fun to have to use 2 squadrons of Stingers to match up against 1 squadron of ZDF. Then there is the nightmare sniper if the ZDF got megapacks.

Like other fighters that attempt to bring large numbers of DF weapons able to easily cripple fighters from a distance, the ZDF probably will create all sorts of problems for the BPV system as its effectiveness will more heavily rely on what the opponent brings to the battle. I like the idea but that second disruptor on a single space fighter may be too much for any real fighter to have. Certainly too much if a decent drone armament can be retained as well.

By Mark Norman (Mnorman) on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 06:35 am: Edit

What if:
1) the ZDF could only carry 1 charge for each disruptor.
2) had a firing rate limitation (maybe a minimum of 16 impulses between shots)

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 11:21 am: Edit

I agree the second disruptor is a lot and creates the 12/24 situation.

I was only thinking along the lines of the Stinger but then the Fusion has such a poor effective range that it doesn't compare to the disruptor well.

So, reduction to one disruptor with two charges seems reasonable. And actually the BPV should be the same. The ZDC is 11 and the 2xDisr one is considerably better than +1 BPV (probably should have been 14 or 15).

So we have:
ZDF
Spd 15
Phaser: P3 (360)
Drones: 2xI + 2xVI
Damage: 12
Special: Disr (FA) 2xcharges
BPV:13
YIS: (ISC era) 190+
DFR:3
Ref: Here


Is that more reasonable?

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 01:13 pm: Edit

If Klingons get the ZDF, then I don't see how the Lyrans won't get one. The Kzintis will probably get one, too.

Also, if you get the ZDF, I finally want to get my Fed A-18.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, April 29, 2004 - 12:26 am: Edit

Well, it's just a proposal. It's something the Klingons don't have and if there is to be a J3 then there needs to be something. Might not be this one but at least is something different. If it's too good then, well, I wont make it. But, it seemed a logical progression.

Regarding the Lyrans and Kzinti, that might not be true. The Klingons might well just only produce enough to fight the ISC and later the Andros with. They might not be able to build the extra building plants to supply the Lyrans with any. The Kzinti might want to copy it but by the time they see it they are up to their wiskers in trouble with the ISC and soon the Andros. When they get breathing room to develope it the X2 era in upon them and they would come up with something else.

Now, they may produce something different that they had started earlier but not a copy of the ZDF.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 29, 2004 - 09:42 am: Edit

Loren:

I think two disruptors is too much for anything smaller than a heavy fighter. But I think your modified proposal published 11:21 AM on April 28 would work fine.

One question - Currently the ZD is generally deployed in half squadrons with a half squadron of ZY fighters. So a C8V carries 18 ZY and 6 ZD. Your ZDF is capable enough that, at least for some missions, a change to a full ZDF squadron plus a full ZYC squadron might be apprpropriate. That doubles the amount of power required to arm all the disruptors, but they are flying off a dreadnought hull after all. Do you anticipate a change in Klingon deployment doctrine if the ZDF is accepted?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, April 29, 2004 - 12:14 pm: Edit

TO a full squadron? Ya, it would make sense. That is part of the reason there is two charges, to limit the number of times the carrier has to sink a lot of power into recharging them. Clearly, the change would be limited. In some cases there wouldn't be any change, just an improvement to the squadron. In other cases a full squadron might replace the ZYC half depending on the mission.

The ZDF would be absolutly effective on a SCS as a ship assault unit. It follows in its wave of drones, fires on the ship then has type-VI's and it's Ph-3 to deal with enemy fighters and enemy Type-VI's. (and chaff).

It can then fire the second charge or SAVE IT. The save option means that the carrier doesn't have to spend power on recharging while the fighter is relaoded with drones. This comes at a time when the carrier will likely have to keep it's speed up.

During all this the SCS's PF Flotilla is holding back the enemy ships and clearing the way for the fighters to return to the area of at least Escort protection.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, May 03, 2004 - 10:13 pm: Edit

Loren,

Sounds like a viable proposal. Is it time for you to move your ZDF to the Proposals section?

Mike West, May I suggest that now would be a good time to re-open the discussion on the A-18?

At the very least, a file should be opened for a Kzinti ZDF type!

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, May 04, 2004 - 08:18 am: Edit

Nope, I will only open the A-18 discussion if the ZDF is successful. The A-18 has been rejected in no uncertain terms. I have no desire to get SVC annoyed at me.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, May 04, 2004 - 10:42 am: Edit

Mike West,

Atleast you are numbered amongst an august company of "SVC Annoyances"!

Perhaps we should form a club... Just think of the T shirt sales and matching hats!

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Tuesday, May 04, 2004 - 03:27 pm: Edit

How about a T-shirt with mug shots of all you guys in crosshairs? The captions, "To Post and to Annoy" and "Steve's Bane."