Voting is open
A design quest! I love these.

Let's get a real cannon on this thing eh?

[x] Hispano-Suiza 12N
[X] Pilot/Loader Design
 
Contest 2: Cavalry Mech, Phase 2- Weapon Selection
After a great deal of soul- and budget- searching, you finally settled down on a pilot-loader design, as well as the… rather dubious… decision to take in the 12N engine. Fundamentally, it made sense. If you placed the stabilizing gyroscope behind the articulation point of the leg in a digitigrade fashion, then you could put the engine under the pilot, and the transmission under the loader. This lasted for about half an hour, before Yves shat on that plan on grounds of making it bloody impossible to keep the control mains free. He wanted the pilot in front of the engine, as far forward as possible. Matthew then objected in return, listing that he couldn't make the engine sit like that, it was completely impractical. He suggested an engine-aft design, which you then objected to because you needed room aft to put your bloody weapons system in.

Design meetings were adjourned for a week while the question of the transmission was addressed and parts were acquired. The eventual Hotchkiss-Foucault 1500rpm gyroscope was chosen since it had the lowest power draw to stabilization, and you were actually inordinately proud when Workshop 1 sent a formal request to use a copy of the design. That, right there, was what victory looked like.

What victory did not look like, however, was staring at the utter slew of guns across the armory floor that Niels had brought to your attention. Everything from the new 7.5mm light machine guns to a monsterous 120mm gun-mortar were laid out, and you were honestly quite lost. Fortunately, Niels had a plan to 'simplify' matters.

The new mecha needed a large, dangerous anti-mecha weapon. That was what the big guns were for. It also needed an anti-personnel machine gun. That was what the little guns were for. Therefore, to make things easy, you'd decide on both separate the other.

For machine guns, there were plenty of options. The newest gun was the Reibel, a drum-fed in 7.5x54, the 'new service cartridge of the nation' according to Niels, it would be a very solid choice. You weren't personally so sure of the drum magazines, since a 150-round pan was, well… lacking. Sure, it was better than strip feed, but you were a personal proponent of belts.

The old Hotchkiss mle.1908 and mle.1914 stood by, but neither you nor Niels wanted to talk about them. Both were showing their age, and you weren't feeling it about designs as old as you. Worse was the fact they fed old 8mm Lebel, a round that was loosing traction rapidly. Their one benefit was that the new mle.1914/1926 refits could accept up to 500 round belts: more than enough ammunition between reloads.

Fortunately, however, new hotness was next to them. The Hotchkiss mle.1927 was a massively upsized mle.1914 with parts of the guts cleaned up, with the entire design rechambered into 13.2x96mm. While not as powerful as the 11mm Antichar rounds, it still possessed a respectable heft, and Internal Testing revealed that it would reliably penetrate a 15mm flat plate at 150m out of the standard 76 caliber barrel. It wasn't a proper anti-armor weapon, but it was more than enough to handle light vehicles and scout mecha- and more importantly, buy you some extra wiggle room if your choice in explosive weapons wasn't up to snuff.

The high explosive weapons, meanwhile, were more varied.

First on the docket was the old reliable SA 18 cannon. With a 37mm shell and a 21 caliber barrel, she wasn't a looker in the race. The gun had been a staple on the old Araignée, and very few people would look askance if you decided to re-use it, right until technical testing began. Each shell weighed 670 grams with 30 of that as fill; not nearly enough to meet the 750 gram fill requirement! A secondary weapon, if you needed one, but hardly a first choice.

Following along was the canon de 65 M mle.1906. A bit of an antique, it was a mountain gun that was nonetheless both light and incredibly soft-recoiling. While it wouldn't pass the fill requirements, it would be incredibly easy to mount the gun so that it wouldn't cause recoil issues if you needed to go for a high weapons mounting. The one thing worth noting was that there wasn't a huge, ready supply: if you picked this gun, there might be actual museum pieces getting refurbished until Schneider could pick up a contract to produce some for you new.

Lastly, and certainly most prominently in the full-up artillery section, was the venerable Soixante-quinze; the Matériel de 75mm mle.1897 gun. In her appearance here, she was one of the 1914 Schneider builds, with a new recoil control spring and longer barrel. More than capable of fulfilling any shell requirements (and if she couldn't the board would be forced at gunpoint by the Artillery Branch to abandon such foolishness) it also came with the benefit of a massive pre-existing supply of guns. The catch was, however, recoil and weight. The full length barrels made them heavy, and while the recoil dampeners would control the weight of a 75x350R shell, control was not the same as cancel. Either you would need to be very conservative in mounting this gun, or you'd need to cut down the barrel and accept losses in accuracy and power.

Finally came the small weapons, those oddballs not so mighty as to take another task. First among them was the Crapouillot, or more formally the Mortier 58mm type 2. While the launcher was an inconspicuous clump of metal, the bomb of 18 to 35kg on a long stick was not. With 5-10kg fill, depending on bomb size, it would absolutely massacre whatever you hit it with. The issue, however, was hitting things. Even with guidance fins, the bombs were very much area weapons, and their high angle of fall made them near impossible to aim. It took little discussion with Niels to determine that if you were to use these, they would require extensive work to make palatable- but if you wanted to put that work in, the resultant weapon would let you strike like a god.

Next was the rockets. First, but not least, was a copy of the Soviet standard mecha rocket. At 65x400mm, they were a hefty rocket, each with 2kg fill. Standard use had them socketed into ten-rocket racks, tied to a common electric fuse for ignition. One would shoot the entire pack en masse, or not at all. Accuracy was debatable, since you didn't have secret Russian documents, but information from the Germans that had been acquisitioned by people in dark rooms reported that on average a single rack at 150 meters tended to fill a 10x25m square with 8/10 rockets.

Of course, some people couldn't stand the concept of a Soviet weapons system, and had taken pains to Frankify it. The result was the 96x650mm rocket: a much heavier weapon, with 3.2kg fill. The issue was, all you had was the rocket: there was no established weapons mounting for it, or much use data at all. In truth, the only reason it was here was because it had been decided at Higher Levels than you to develop a heavy weapon to mount on the Lièvre and Requin in limited numbers to give them mecha-killing firepower. If you committed to it early, the result would be the ability to dictate a weapons system with incredible firepower, and more importantly one you could port forward across multiple mecha.

Of course, this didn't solve the problem of aiming any of these, but that was a cockpit integration problem. Since trying to design a universal aiming system was foolishness, you'd rather instead get the topic of which weapon to use nailed down first.

Naturally, this is when you walked back into the workshop, hoping to get back to work and instead watched the engineers and tradesmen race wagon wheels out into the fairway with the H-F gyro. Needless to say, they would start getting rather bored if you didn't wrap this weaponry nonsense up soon.

///
Votes

Light Weapons
[] mle.1914 Hotchkiss 8mm
[] mle.1926 Reibel 7.5mm
[] mle.1927 Hotchkiss 13.2mm

Heavy Weapons
[] SA 18 37mm canon
[] 65mm montagne cannon
[] 75mm mle.1897/14
[] 58mm Crapoulliet mortar
[] 65mm rocket pack system
[] 96mm rocket
 
The eventual Hotchkiss-Foucault 1500rpm gyroscope was chosen since it had the lowest power draw to stabilization, and you were actually inordinately proud when Workshop 1 sent a formal request to use a copy of the design.
So it looks like our personal knowledge has helped pay-off on gyros, but it looks like our guy has an average understanding on weapons systems. Meaning, Niel has to guide us through this.
 
[X] mle.1926 Reibel 7.5mm
[X] 58mm Crapoulliet mortar

So this took a little thinking from me machine gun mostly but some on the heavy weapon.

So went with the 1926 as even though it's drum fed it's from what I can tell lighter then the other options so weight and more ammo while I went with the mortar for the same reasons including the fact that it's has great punch to weight ratio. Now inaccuracy is a problem but since we are going to have to design an aiming system and modify the mortar anyways it's not much a big deal.
 
Now inaccuracy is a problem but since we are going to have to design an aiming system and modify the mortar anyways it's not much a big deal.
I don't think inaccuracy is that big an issue. If you look back at the data book then
M.1918 Lièvre
-10 tons
-2x Hotchkiss Portative machine guns
-Crew: Pilot, Gunner
Notes: A light reconnaissance mecha, the Lièvre was the first dedicated artillery spotting platform designed and built as a motorized unit. While not incredibly dangerous like her big brother, the French obsession with terrain crossing is visable here as this mech can cross any broken country with ease.
France already has a dedicated artillery spotting machine. This older model combined with the Fourmi we made, means an artillery focused mech is going to have quite a bit of support as it walks up with the main army.

The issue lies in that is this a direction we want to go? I think the Soviet Rocket Rack is a contender. We get two on the shoulder or the sides, and then we're in business.
 
Really tempted to just grab the new rocket and try to make something that works with it. Because it looks like if we can get it to work, we'll have something that we know all about that will be used for the next decade or so I want to say? Probably score some decent brownie points with High Command as well.
 
[X] 75mm mle.1897/14
[X] mle.1926 Reibel 7.5mm

Honestly, no idea. But these seem good choices for a mech that walks alongside infantry and mixes it up. Almost all our heavy weapon choices are either subpar or will need extensive modifications - wish we had someone with Weapons knowledge but too late now.
 
Really tempted to just grab the new rocket and try to make something that works with it. Because it looks like if we can get it to work, we'll have something that we know all about that will be used for the next decade or so I want to say? Probably score some decent brownie points with High Command as well.
I actually feel like French designers over designed this system because they really didn't want to admit the Soviet model was nice. They overcompensated and had this rocket too heavy, and weight is a concern since we have less stability being a bipedal model.
 
I don't think inaccuracy is that big an issue. If you look back at the data book then


France already has a dedicated artillery spotting machine. This older model combined with the Fourmi we made, means an artillery focused mech is going to have quite a bit of support as it walks up with the main army.

The issue lies in that is this a direction we want to go? I think the Soviet Rocket Rack is a contender. We get two on the shoulder or the sides, and then we're in business.
The problem with accuracy for a mortar is the lofting and dropping which was noted in the update. As for the missiles the reason I didn't go with them is this reload time, safety and weight. With the mortar or the cannons reloading is much faster and safer with weight varying but I belive lesser then the rocket system.
 
So it looks like our personal knowledge has helped pay-off on gyros, but it looks like our guy has an average understanding on weapons systems. Meaning, Niel has to guide us through this.

No, you all voted Gyro for tech upgrade, you got Gyro for tech upgrade. Character experiance has nothing to do with this.

So went with the 1926 as even though it's drum fed it's from what I can tell lighter then the other options so weight and more ammo while I went with the mortar for the same reasons including the fact that it's has great punch to weight ratio. Now inaccuracy is a problem but since we are going to have to design an aiming system and modify the mortar anyways it's not much a big deal.

The Riebel is lighter, yes, but it is kneecapped in the fact it uses drum mags. If the guns aren't accessable easily, this can mean guns running dry in a fight. As for accuracy... well... you'll quickly learn about accuracy.

Honestly, no idea. But these seem good choices for a mech that walks alongside infantry and mixes it up. Almost all our heavy weapon choices are either subpar or will need extensive modifications - wish we had someone with Weapons knowledge but too late now.

Eh, Niels is no slouch. He'll give you what you ask for, so just don't ask for stupid things.

I actually feel like French designers over designed this system because they really didn't want to admit the Soviet model was nice. They overcompensated and had this rocket too heavy, and weight is a concern since we have less stability being a bipedal model.

...no. What they designed was a rocket that's capable of beating the shit out of a mecha in a single shot, and has enough explosive fill so that it can engage a machine gun nest or anti-mecha gun with an unfavorable degree of accuracy. Payload covereth a multitude of sins, and when you're firing without a dedicated gunner, the sin of inacuracy will come and bite a lot of pilots in the ass.
 
The mountain gun was labeled as trivial to mount, would it be possible to use it and one of the rocket packs?
 
no. What they designed was a rocket that's capable of beating the shit out of a mecha in a single shot, and has enough explosive fill so that it can engage a machine gun nest or anti-mecha gun with an unfavorable degree of accuracy. Payload covereth a multitude of sins, and when you're firing without a dedicated gunner, the sin of inacuracy will come and bite a lot of pilots in the ass
You've also said there's no data on it because it's that new, and that the motivating force was
people couldn't stand the concept of a Soviet weapons system, and had taken pains to Frankify it.
what appears to be nationalism. Not faulting them as nobody's perfect, but it sounds like there flaws that nobody has accounted for to be used on a mech.
 
Yeah that concerns me about the mortar. We're building infantry support, not artillery.

I don't like the rocket pod because if we choose it, why did we get a loader?
So actually a mortar makes sense for a infantry support mech while yes it's an artillery piece if you look at real world inter-war, WW2 infantry support armored vehicles alot of them mostly had artillery pieces for main weapons.
The Riebel is lighter, yes, but it is kneecapped in the fact it uses drum mags. If the guns aren't accessable easily, this can mean guns running dry in a fight. As for accuracy... well... you'll quickly learn about accuracy.
Eh all I can really say is hopefully we can place the gun where the drum mags won't be a problem and accuracy is a we'll burn that bridge when we get to it.
 
[X] 75mm mle.1897/14
The 75mm seems like the best option. Powerful, good availability, and the main drawback is controllable through cutting down the barrel (which is not that terrible, right?), or by doing the "conservative mount" option (which I don't understand). I'm assuming "conservative mount" means something like "very little traverse/elevation without moving the body of the mecha". This seems fine to me, both options were successfully pursued by the StuG and seem very reasonable. Big caveats here are: I probably have no idea what I'm talking about and that mechas are not tanks so what worked for them probably won't work for us.

The idea of using a mortar or rockets here sounds not great to be honest. Both suffer from accuracy problems (and mitigating this comes at a cost).

Less opinions on smaller armament, neither option seems great. All options seem fine, in an ideal world we could see how other things shake out before picking small armament (i.e., maybe we find our light armament mountings are not very accessible, as QM mentioned this might making drum changes really hard, thus disqualifying the Reibel).
 
Last edited:
[X] mle.1927 Hotchkiss 13.2mm
[x] 96mm rocket

I don't think we can make the drum magazine work as I understand the current setup.
 
Last edited:
If the mortar is picked I think the mle.1927 Hotchkiss 13.2mm would be very handy for direct fire.

I'm very tempted to go for the 75mm mle.1897/14 anyways. It makes for something closer to a self-propelled gun than any standard mecha, but that just might work out if it really does stick with infantry.

Rocket packs would have been a nice option with a single crew member, but I have a sense that it might be at odds with the two man design limiting armor while increasing weight. That makes it tricky to charge into good firing ranges even if the loader can help set up a fresh rack quicker. If we want rockets the new rocket system may be a better bet.

Light Weapons
[X] mle.1926 Reibel 7.5mm
Heavy Weapons
[X] 75mm mle.1897/14

I anticipate needing to fire the artillery piece from the hip and cutting down the size for mobility reasons. Fingers crossed that we can make it work well enough with everything so it doesn't catch on every bit of terrain from Brest to Athens. Picking the newer small gun design to please the selection committee, it does give me the feeling that the ammo reloads are going to be an issue for a mech.

(I could be convinced to support the new rocket system with relative ease. If it comes to that)
 
[X] 75mm mle.1897/14

seems like the one we could, with a fair bit of work, get to the point of reliably hitting what it's aimed at. Simplifies a lot of the logistical chain too.

Not really sure on the smaller weapons.
 
[X] mle.1926 Reibel 7.5mm
[X] 75mm mle.1897/14

we need to bite the bullet and start modifying mech cannons
 
[X] mle.1926 Reibel 7.5mm
[X] 75mm mle.1897/14

And this is why I advocated for a weapon upgrade.
 
You've also said there's no data on it because it's that new, and that the motivating force was

what appears to be nationalism. Not faulting them as nobody's perfect, but it sounds like there flaws that nobody has accounted for to be used on a mech.

There are many reasons for something like this to exist. I make it a point not to lie when I'm writing this, but I can't put everything in writing at once either. Ask questions, get answered.

The mountain gun was labeled as trivial to mount, would it be possible to use it and one of the rocket packs?

Right now you're picking the core and essential systems of the mech. With weight limits as they are, you'll have to see what you can add as secondaries later.


Eh all I can really say is hopefully we can place the gun where the drum mags won't be a problem and accuracy is a we'll burn that bridge when we get to it.

That's next update, along with selecting where you want to outsource to. The trans and actuators are still up in the air after all.

That makes it tricky to charge into good firing ranges even if the loader can help set up a fresh rack quicker. If we want rockets the new rocket system may be a better bet.

Point of order: at no point will I try and sell you guys on unguided rocket reloads under armor. Guided missiles I'll give the option, but dumbfire rockets? Nah. The MC ain't an idiot.
 
Voting is open
Back
Top