What would a war on the moon look like?

What would be the meta? Most realistic setting it could happen? Challenges?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Browning .50 cals

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    dude what if all armies on the moon ended up marching like this

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >encounter enemy
      >do a 180 and moonwalk away

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        But now you're going toward them!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        gotta hit em with the ol' 360

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >OP wants to know what war on the Moon would be like
    TANSTAAFL

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I have no idea. and anyone claiming to know is a liar.

    But I do know what it will sound like:

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wouldn't lighter smaller cartridges reign supreme. What range would lighter calibers have?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Artillery would reign supreme. I suspect you could have potentially global(wtf is the Moon version for this) reach on conventional artillery due to no atmosphere and miniscule gravity.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Kinetic bombardment.
    If you have a developed interest on the moon, anything worth fighting over, you must be routinely decelerating things from orbit and gently landing them on the surface.
    All you have to do is not decelerate and you have rods from god.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Let's say you bombard a position with artillery or ships, will the dust cloud be 6 times bigger, higher and last longer because of the reduced gravity? I heard that the regolith causes lots of interference with electronics because it is statically charged, does it work also as a form of EMP?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >dust cloud
      dust particles travel in a ballistic arc, no clouds

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Dust will go farther, because low gravity, but it will not hang in clouds, because there is no air.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        How would you create smoke screens, if it's even possible? Let's say you need to screen your infantry or drones, how to do it? Would you put like metal particles too to disrupt electronics and signals?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Those metal particles won't stay up either. Maybe you could just use bigass spotlights or something and shine them in the enemy's eyes/sensors to blind them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah they won't stay up like here on earth but wouldn't be offset by the lower lunar gravity? Like things fall faster on Earth because of higher gravity but wouldn't particles stay up long enough to be somewhat viable? Maybe not as long as on earth but long enough for tactical/operational use?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Probably not. Even in reduced gravity, those particles will still be in free-fall, not suspended in the air. They will only be above the ground for a few seconds. Maybe that's good enough to detect a missile launch and puff out a cloud of chaff to make it miss, but it's not enough to screen force movements.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So you need a smoke generator, it could be a vehicle or launched as some sort of big missile and generates smokes/regurgites regolith? Idk just trying to think of various ways of screening an advancing force as in my setting, any drones/robots with a signal can be easily jammed/hacked as AI EW in the future is very strong, no one can achieve space supremacy as laser/kinetic AA are abundant so it's either screen an advancing force with mobile laser/kinetic AA to intercept drones, missiles and artillery or dig underground (think NOD subterranean APC from Tiberium sun). No one will chuck an asteroid at the Moon as it is seen as a big escalation (just like russia doesn't nuke ukraine) and no kinetic bombardment as no one has that kind of ship to do so (only a space navy patrol ships to police the outer rim and protect shipping lanes

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Like things fall faster on Earth because of higher gravity but wouldn't particles stay up long enough to be somewhat viable? Maybe not as long as on earth but long enough for tactical/operational use?

              Anon, there is no atmosphere on the moon. Everything you throw in the "air" will accelerate downwards at 1.62 m/s^2.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah it's slower than earth's 9.8m/2 but finer things stay up because of atmosphere. I know there's no atmosphere on the Moon but my point was even with 1.62m/2 acceleration, will it stay up enough so it can be viable on the lunar battlefield? Things accelerate almost 9 times slower than on Earth so maybe it's enough to offer a brief screen and instead have the smoke/particles spewed higher to offset the lack of atmosphere

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Yeah it's slower than earth's 9.8m/2 but finer things stay up because of atmosphere. I know there's no atmosphere on the Moon but my point was even with 1.62m/2 acceleration, will it stay up enough so it can be viable on the lunar battlefield? Things accelerate almost 9 times slower than on Earth so maybe it's enough to offer a brief screen and instead have the smoke/particles spewed higher to offset the lack of atmosphere

                Motherfricker it will take an object starting from 100m high 11.11 seconds to fall to the ground on the Moon. You can't have a smoke screen without atmosphere.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    R8 my setup

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Narrow aperture scope
      >On a gun that you inherently cannot put your face up to

      0/10

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        At that point in the show it was 1983, at least give them credit for the adjustable stock. It also could be a long eye relief scope as well

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >M16A2, paint it white, throw a retro AR scope and M4 stock on it
      >here's your spacegat bro

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Considering that in the show it was incredibly rushed to get Marines to the moon base, it's impressive they did all that

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    you think we will really made it to space?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well given that you can literally observe the ISS with a backyard telescope you can buy on Amazon, probably.
      Also the fundamentals of GPS technology require satellites in space

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >What would a war on the moon look like?
    Eat shit Horus

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Walls Fail, Fists do not
      The sons of Dorn are the absolute gigachads of the series and nothing can convince me otherwise

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        they are featcucked by the blue man group

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Like an Earth war, but with less dignity.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's saying something because the current Earth War doesn't look like there's much dignity to begin with

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    moon warfare would be way too deadly it simply can't be allowed so the answer is shooting down spacecraft before they get there

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The moon has normal gravity and a breathable atmosphere. #dontbelievenasalies

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The US Army's 1959 Project Horizon included plans to use Davy Crockett nuclear recoilless rifles and modified claymores to defend its moon base.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Orbital superiority fighters and underground slugs

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Day 1 of the 2 week Special Moon Operation
    >We have discovered that 1 Lunar day-night cycle is 28 days
    >No rations provided because intelligence said the moon is made of cheese
    >T-72 turrets have orbital velocity now

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >>No rations provided because intelligence said the moon is made of cheese
      kek

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      On the bright side, they'll never make it to day 500 of the 2-Week Special Lunar Military Operation because they'll all be dead.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the first question is why would people be fighting on the moon?

    while there are interesting features like potent sites for solar power and reserves of water ice
    its nothing you couldnt get on other celestial bodies like asteroids
    if there are manufacturing hubs on the moon to take advantage of its low-gravity, then youre still better off fighting with politics to deprive them of raw material and supplies rather than taking them by force

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      because its cool anon
      space war is cool

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        nta but i don't think it is
        the reality of space war would be mega lame because everything is so fragile and projectiles have basically infinite range
        not until we invent shields or something

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          infinite in the sense that they can retain killing power after years of drifting
          but effective range will be strictly limited, even if its still much further than terrestrial combat

          a missile doesnt just need enough delta-V to match its target, every time the target moves your projectile needs to expend fuel to move
          but needs enough delta-V to overcome enemy defenses
          you launch a missile, the enemy launches an interceptor missile
          so your missile needs to have enough fuel left after outlasting the defensive missile to continue to hit the target

          and once its at close range, the enemy might fire a laser
          even if its too weak to destroy the missile outright, it can ablate the surface and create a small but constant change in velocity to which your missile will need to apply a constant counter-thrust to overcome

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            lame and gay nerd shit
            no cool armor or ships just the same rockets and crap
            point defence isn't cool at all

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >its nothing you couldnt get on other celestial bodies like asteroids
      But we CAN land on the moon, we CAN’T land on asteroids yet.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Rosetta sent a probe to a comet, though It took from launch in 2004 to landing in 2014, which would be a bit of a problem if humans were on board

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the first question is why would people be fighting on the moon?
      Same reason Man climbs mountains; because it's there.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because get the frick off my plantoid you fricking foreigner

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I would develop a cartridge specifically designed that when fired from 3-6' above the surface of the moon, it has the correct kinetic energy to orbit the moon so if you miss your target, it'll come back around again and give you a second chance to hit it. Combine that with a highly agile moon rover technical with a machine gun, you can fire away from your enemies (who are behind cover), and kill them from behind. Or maybe it'll have a gas system that can be quickly tuned to make the bullets land at predetermined intervals (1/8th of an orbit, 1/4 of an orbit, 1/2 of an orbit, etc), that way you can have a relatively small number of astronauts control the entire moon. Also, armored boxes made from AR500 steel that they can hide in so they don't die from enemies or their own bullets. Remember, if your suit gets punctured, you're as good as dead, so the projectiles don't necessarily need to wound effectively, only destroy the other guys suits.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >be me
      >space forcer (uwu)
      >want to kill dirty cosmonaut on the other side of the space road
      >line up my shot on the commie frick
      >fire special space bullet at cosmoChang
      >Ivan ducks and returns fire with inferior, non orbiting bullets
      >low lunar gravity and bulky atmosphere suit restrict my movement
      >I remain in cover while waiting for him to run out of air or bullets (I know he doesn't have food)
      >orbiting bullet smashes me in the back of my helmet
      >the last thing that goes through my mind is 5.56mm of American greatness

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If war over the moon were fought it likely would not actually be fought on the moon itself but in lunar and earth orbit, with involved sides attempting to blockade each other from reaching the moon.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Raids over the lunar surface to sabotage rival landing points or infrastructure would be kino

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    taking a selfie?
    also I accidentally read nuclear hand held claymore device and got erect

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you are interested, read book 2 of the Heritage trilogy by Ian Douglas, Luna Marine.

    It covers a wide range of fighting on the Moon with "near-future" tech, everything from camo to survival/food/logistics to vehicles and weapons.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >What would a war on the moon look like?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      /k/ultured reference, Monsieur

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Go back to r*ddit homosexual everybody has seen A Trip To the Moon.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >everybody has seen A Trip To the Moon.
          yeah right, I grew up in fricking Missouri bro. You come here and tell me how many people watched some French silent movie.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >grew up in fricking Missouri bro
            I grew up in fricking Arkansas, we saw it in elementary school. It's a very famous film

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            the film is often shown in normal public school classes. its exceptionally famous.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Challenges?
    IFAKs, trauma care in general.
    On the Earth, medics tear clothes off before starting any serious treatment. On the Moon, you can't do that.
    Even more, medkit should definitely contain some sort of space suit sealant to prevent depressurization.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pogostick Airborne
    >bounce
    >bounce
    >weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
    >lands behind your lines
    nothing personal kiddo.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You would need a way to rapidly cool any firearm. Sine kind of swappable chemical heat sinks or something. Until then, it'd be about the blade.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >sci fi futuristic space warfare
      >crossbows and spears

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Excellent anon

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Really, nobody posted the Shaw concepts astronaut suit? Wow.

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The meta would be the same as all high tech, high budget modern warfare. Blow them the frick up before they even see you.

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    no deibido

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Relativistic grains of sand.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Read Gunpowder Moon and Sixteenth Watch.

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There would be no infantry in a vacuum. At best you'd have troops for taking buildings, mostly without space suits.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >mostly without space suits.
      Seems like a really bad idea
      >It sure would be a shame if somebody were to depressurize the compartment your boarding team is in

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This is an idea analogous to saying you built a ship that self floods to combat boarding actions. A space habitat with an international method of self venting air is just something that can go wrong.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          *intentional

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          NTA I don't know that the analogy really carries tbqhwyfamalamadingdong. For one thing, if you are doing a boarding you *should* have flotation capability. We issued buoyant armor when I was going to sea. For another, you actually can flood virtually any space on a warship, although that's not a defensive consideration but more a byproduct of the way we route wet lines. At any rate, I should think that you'd want to prepare for the possibility of accidental decompression.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          the risk of accidentally depressurizing the hull has to be pretty significant it seems stupid to not issue spacesuits
          if you didn't then people would start designing bases with multiple locks inside to depressurize in the event of intrusion anyway
          unlike a ship a space base wont sink when you depressurize it and intentionally depressurizing as an emergency procedure wouldn't be hard to do sure you might lose some shit but that shit is lost anyway

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The Soviets omitted space suits in order to cram another cosmonaut into the capsule. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chinese do the same.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voskhod_1

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >vatniks are moronic
              whoa so crazy

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >intentional method of venting
          You shut off the pumps.

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Lots of cube sats in low orbit shooting at each other.

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    In the vacuum of space, birdshot would be amazingly effective.

  35. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Kevlar space suits
    >Water cooled, high bore, machine guns (fired from the hip, closer to centre of gravity so less rotational force applied)
    >To counteract hip firing the moon Vickers will have to be fitted with a muzzle camera hooked into the HUD projected onto the inside of the Space Marine's helmet visor
    >Vast majority of 'kills' will be punctured suits, that the Marine should be able to patch himself before it actually kills him
    >Lack of atmosphere and microgravity allows for crazy long range engagements, possibly even BVR small arms fire.
    It honestly sounds kind of fun.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If depressurization is the major killer then space Marines would wear armor under their suit, which would need to have a compartmentalization system to prevent a puncture from destroying the whole suit; something like pressure sensitive tourniquets to lock off limbs, or a banding system like the Michelin Man to lock off sections around the abdoman

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Why the frick would you wear the armor UNDER the suit? Just design an armored suit. You don't even have to worry about making it weigh hundreds of kilograms on the Moon because of the low gravity.

        > something like pressure sensitive tourniquets to lock off limbs
        Frick the tourniquette idea. Cutting off the circulation with tourniquets will kill the injured limb even faster than on Earth, since all the blood that remained in the injured limb has now boiled off into the vacuum and all the tissues will just die.

        >banding system like the Michelin Man to lock off sections around the abdoman
        Design bands that can be tightened to form almost airtight seal around joints, and if the suit is punctured, isolate that section with the bands and flood the punctured part of the suit with rapidly hardening sealing foam that will seal the hole. That way you can still maintain pressure in the punctured section.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Planes wouldn't work on the moon for reasons that I hope are obvious, so no air support or air recon. IIRC most lunar orbits are pretty unstable, so I think satellite recon would be pretty patchy. I suspect that artillery would be used heavily, but I don't know what that'd look like, since everyone is going to be pretty heavily armored head to toe, so small shrapnel will probably be a smaller threat, and you can't just spot for indirect fire with a UAV. I suspect you'd see a lot of big howitzers with ground penetrating shells to kick up high velocity regolith shrapnel.

      >Kevlar space suits
      everything weighs 17% of what it does on earth, you could give everyone fricking plate armor and they'd still be able to move and fight.
      >Water cooled, high bore, machine guns (fired from the hip, closer to centre of gravity so less rotational force applied)
      why not hand held pom-poms? Also I suspect worrying about rotational force is misguided, because while gravity is lower, inertia isn't. In moon gravity you can carry around about 6 lbs of gear for every pound you could carry on earth, so moon loadouts are going to be so heavy that recoil isn't going to be noticeable even for really heavy weapons.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        you would still have 'air' support in the form of LLO sats

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          LLO support would be pretty different from air support in practice. With very short orbital periods and being pretty low, they would have basically zero loiter time. They also would be very vulnerable to ground fire since even infantry weapons would be able to fire at them, and every evasive maneuver would cut into their lifespan, probably dramatically. I think LLO support would be pretty limited in what it could accomplish economically.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >so no air support or air recon
        You don't need wings to fly

  36. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    a hollywood movie and nothing else

  37. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Guess I'll be Thread Schizo

    https://www.youtube.com/@BruceSeesall

    This guy's been talking about the wars on the moon for a while now.

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >What would a war on the moon look like?
    It's gonna be hard to see.

  39. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Gyrojets. Gyrojets everywhere.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Unbelievably kino.

  40. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There's no way to use a weapon in space without making yourself exactly as vulnerable, so all conflict will be indirect: sabotaging facilities, using drones to harass other astronauts, intercepting resupply flights, etc.
    It sounds like it'll be a jolly good summer of gentlemanly competition, tbqh

  41. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No idea. But if primo space babes like this are you reward, I'm all in!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      WOULD!

  42. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    1911s with 45 ACP

  43. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the surface of big moons are the only place in our solar systen where mecha are actually viable

  44. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    fighting over the moon is actually quite a stupid thing to do

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You can use the moon for slinging stuff further out to the solar system like for mining the asteroid belt, so by controlling the moon you could deny your enemies this opportunity.

  45. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Any fighting done on the Moon would be mostly fragmentation and cluster munitions. Just simply vent everything and everyone that is a problem.

  46. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  47. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wouldn't fire arms have longer ranges and have more accuracy with the removal of an atmosphere?

  48. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I just realized sandblasters would be fricking S tier weapons in the vacuum of space. Just use some super hard abrasive metal filings, and blast them in the direction of your enemies. Figure out a way to give them electric charge as they so they stick to whatever they hit. The particles will scratch and ruin optics and also accumulate in joints of suits.

  49. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >moon
    Basically there will be space superiority fighters/drones that would deal with any surface or space threats.
    Lack of atmosphere and objects on the surface, combined with advsncements in precision strike and optical technologies by the time we get to space, means death sentence to anyone who would dare crawl out onto the lunar surface.
    But at least the moon has networks of natural caves and lava tubes, so wars would involve sophisticated underground fortifications. Once the fight for space superiority is over, either it will be a long drawn out siege or CQB assault teams would descend to clear out and capture said bases.
    The fortification part assumes that people will construct lunar bases with wars in mind, but civilian buildings would most likely operate on the surface to cut costs, making their capture/bombardment much easier.

  50. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Absolute impure carnage

  51. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All coms would be in Mandarin and Hindi so it would be hard for westoids to listen to is the con

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I doubt China will have any relevance in 100 years with their crashing demographics and abyssimal foreign relations

  52. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Like this:

  53. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >this was still not posted
    Look, I know it's a disappointing space thriller but hey blew like half of their budget into that scene.
    Show some compassion.

  54. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >What would a war on the moon look like?
    Please consider pic.
    As a bad example.

    With no atmosphere any sort of flying unit would need huge amount of propellant despite the lower gravity. Hovering is unsustainable and transport would be mostly ballistic trajectories.
    With a low gravity, any wheeled/tracked vehicle would risk flipping at the slightest bump. The only way around would be high & smart suspension that preemptively move even sideway the vehicle center of gravity to prevent flip. If you ever were to build mecha this is the place to do so. Plus you'll have a tons of craters to climbs.
    With no atmosphere & low gravity, pretty much any form of artillery can have incredible range, use magnetic cannon shooting shells made of Lunar metal and you have cheap ammo. The ammo don't even need to be aerodynamic, only balanced.
    Guided shells however lose in precision with no medium to steer.

    With magnetic artillery the problem will be energy, the range allow a base to provide artillery but it is also going to require constant hard-kill defense against enemy shells. If enemy vehicle can escape low speed shelling there might be a niche for mobile artillery vehicle with nuclear power source.

    Warship in orbit sound nice but they would be incredibly weak to any sort of surface attack, from missiles to lasers. Carrying no weapon a ground unit wouldn't have easier time using. The only armor spaceship can afford is going to be like paper.

    If there is infrastructure both side are desperate to protect no matter the cost, like civilian industries or magnetic launch ramp, you may have a very polite war about making as little damage as possible, only taking control until the other side is willing to negotiate.
    Both side might then compete in sophistication to create weapons that effectively disable the enemy with as little collateral damage as possible, all the while using the protection of civilian infrastructure as cover.

    Brb I'm putting money on space-swordsmen.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >wheeled vehicles
      The way I saw anykind of movement on the Moon or on significantly lower gravity, is with RCS. Like let's say the wheeled vehicle goes straight on a very bumpy field with lots of craters that will normally launched it in the air or have significant air time thus exposing itself to longrange fire, well with predictive/smart suspension + RCS modules that will fire in a timely manner to keep it as close to the ground as possible. I think you need to have RCS modules on either vehicles or infantry, most of the time it's to control your altitude (to keep you close to the ground) and help control yourself in low g but it also be used to quickly dodge or to rapidly flank and enemy. This is why a gunship like your picture is a bit useless in my opinion? Like your armored APC can act as a gunship for a moment with RCS launching it a few meters off the ground, pop a few shots and come back down. I imagine the weight will make it hard, idk just trying to imagine it

      Also, I think a grapling hook might work in this environment for infantry and mechs, as well as some kind of talons or deep spikes for stabilization if you fire artillery or heavy caliber bullets

      What do you think about smart bullets like in cyberpunk? Idk like someone firing low velocity 20mm shoulder fired canon (for sufficient frag/HE payload, thrusters, guidance and some way of EW protection), stabilized with either deep spikes or kind of an astronaut MMU or like you see in the video game boundary

      Not sure how realistic it is for 150 years in the future but innmy settings, signal guided drones/robots aren't that useful as AI EW + EMP + jamming is very potent so you either do it wired (like a wired guided ATGM) or somekid of autononous AI (extremely taboo/illegal in my setting)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >RCS
        Consume propellant which, unlike Earth will be weak (no using air expansion) unless you have huge thrusters
        Also your plan involve having appropriate bump right when you need it.
        Just make the -absolutely required- high/smart suspension system on your APC allow to jump, or make a mecha and quit wasting our expectation.

        >What do you think about smart bullets like in cyberpunk?
        In space vacuum you lose the medium that would allow any kind of mid-air turn. You also complexify a lot what is supposed to be a CHEAP ammo.
        (unlike guided shell which at least aim to shot more costly target far further away)

        Given that surviving in space already require a full suit and robotic, you are better building exo-armor with integrated aimbot/auto-turret.
        Also keep in mind that shooting weapon in 0.1G is going to make it harder to brace.

        >With a low gravity, any wheeled/tracked vehicle would risk flipping at the slightest bump.

        Do you think something like M1 Abrams would suddenly flip over, if instead of 60 tons it now weighs just a puny 10 tons?

        If anything, we'd have a new Golden Age of insane battle tanks with mass of hundreds of tons, wielding naval artillery as their main guns.

        >Do you think something like M1 Abrams would suddenly flip over, if instead of 60 tons it now weighs just a puny 10 tons?
        Weight =/= Mass.
        So I'd say only if you spend a significant time above ground.
        Look at this video in slow-motion and you'll see a tilt that we can assume to be 'samey' if we ignore atmosphere and assume equal gun/projectiles mass/exhaust speed.

        You wouldn't really need to increase projectile speed as you'd likely already have ridiculous range on the moon (everything become artillery) and more problem curving behind the horizon.
        But you could increase the mass/size of the projectile to make it harder to intercept/stop, this, would increase the recoil a lot.

        >battle tanks with mass of hundreds of tons,
        Forgot to mention up there that both wheels/tracks would have a really poor grip in 0.1G, your tracks would need to reshape itself to grab as much surface as possible.
        The alternative is mecha (it's always mecha) where instead you know where your legs will be planting itself and push harder.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >You wouldn't really need to increase projectile speed as you'd likely already have ridiculous range on the moon (everything become artillery)

          Muzzle velocity of a M256 gun on a M1 Abrams is about 60% of the escape velocity for an object on the moon - you could just about use it to bombard people on the opposite side of the moon.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Thanks for checking it out.
            When I said ridiculous range, I kinda expected to shot like a quarter of the moon away.
            That said, reaching half escape velocity may not allow you to hit the other side, because you can shoot horizontally without the surface getting in the way.
            You'd need an eccentric orbit and given how weak the moon gravity is, it might take a fricked up trajectory to keep the projectile within its orbit.

            "Colonel! I have a firing solution to hit the enemy base"
            "Show me."
            >shell turn around Lagrange L1, make a swing near Earth, then another by L2 before falling right on top of the enemy base"
            "If we shoot now! in 3 week they are dead!"

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >With a low gravity, any wheeled/tracked vehicle would risk flipping at the slightest bump.

      Do you think something like M1 Abrams would suddenly flip over, if instead of 60 tons it now weighs just a puny 10 tons?

      If anything, we'd have a new Golden Age of insane battle tanks with mass of hundreds of tons, wielding naval artillery as their main guns.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        That would be kino

  55. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    BLUE ROCK MY BELOVED

  56. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bombs to raise terrible dust just an appetizer for every fight, big enough to shut up satellites and drones. Anything outside dustbowls is Artillery meat.

  57. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *