06-07-2020, 11:30 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
_Travois_ -- A Design Challenge
_Travois_:
Mini-Van; XH chas.; 2x PR tire. SS [B; SD [B]; L [SS - SD]; Cargo: 1 sp.|100 lbs. Armor: F, L, R: 10; B: 20; T, U: 9; 2x 5-pt. CWG. $2,212; 1,080 lbs. Opt.: rm. SD, link, 5 pts. A [B: 15]; add 1 sp.|100 lbs. Cargo. $1,817. The challenge: Is it possible to design a usable cargo hauler on a Mini-Van trailer body? ("Usable" here defined as "at least 100 lbs. per cargo space available".) This is what I came up with, just using "basic" weapons and items. The armor is about what one would expect for such a small vehicle -- that is: Weak; but the tires are well-protected, so one doesn't necessarily have to ditch the trailer the first time someone looks at it. The optional design is for those areas where leaving dropped weapons on the road offends local law-enforcement. As a bonus, here's a likely tow vehicle: _Sargasso Hauler_: Subcompact; XH chas.; Hv. susp.; Md. PP [1,400 PF]; 4x PR tire; Driver. MG [F]; Lt. Hitch. Armor: F: 20; L, R, B: 15; T: 9; U: 10; 4x 5-pt. WG. $5,724; 2,760 lbs. Acc. 10; TS: 120; HC: 3. Decently armored for a Sub, even with the addition of a Hitch and WGs. Its weakness is attacks from the sides; 'tis a pity Subs cannot use Turrets which carry actual weapons....
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
06-08-2020, 04:05 PM | #2 | |
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: CA
|
Re: _Travois_ -- A Design Challenge
You seem to have answered your own design challenge ;)
Not a bad use for the old Sargasso. I did an OR Lt Cycle haul vehicle Tuglet -- Light Cycle, Off-Road suspension, Medium Cycle power plant w/PC, 10-pt CA (Power Plant), 2 Motorcycle Off-Road Heavy-Duty tires, Cyclist w/BA and 10-pt CA, Explosive Light Hitch w/5-pt armor (Tow Capacity 1092 lbs.), Plastic Armor: F13, B10, 2 5-pt Cycle Wheelguards, Acceleration 10, Top Speed 157.5, HC 2, 798 lbs., $3695 I'd go for your trailer, just add OR tires. Quote:
|
|
06-08-2020, 11:55 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: _Travois_ -- A Design Challenge
I went a slightly different route as I usually consider the use of the minivan as either a dedicated DW carrier or cargo only (as in the former case you free up cargo space in the towing vehicle and in the latter case you need all the capacity for the cargo). Given the multitude of counter measures available to the modern driver a single DW is probably not much use.
In this Cargo version I have upgraded the protection with CA for the cargo area. Ordinarily I would have assumed 50lb for each space of cargo and just had another space and beefed up the armour. If you get into trouble, the towing vehicle is going to have to deal with it (I strongly recommend a turret or your own trailer is going to block LOS). If you are expecting trouble you really should have made the minivan sacrificial (and maybe fitted 1 space of remote detonated kamibomb rather than the CA, to discourage hijacks). Mini-Van, Lt Chassis, CA Frame. 2 x HD tires with 5 point wheel guards, 55 points armour (20 B, 10 L&R, 5 F,T&U), Cargo (2 spc. and 200lb) Cost $1535, 795 lb This is 15lb short of the trailer load limit which is enough for 3 dischargers of your choice for some pretence at defensive weaponry. I didn't think you could use CWG on trailers (even if they used cycle tires) as they are still side mounted rather than fore and aft. If you rule that you can there is an extra benefit there to be had. I lowered the protection on the front as I couldn't see much likelihood of that being attacked unless the towing vehicle had already been destroyed. I also lowered the spec on the tires as I believe the biggest threat to them is direct fire and they are a tiny target. Last edited by swordtart; 06-09-2020 at 12:03 AM. |
06-09-2020, 02:04 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: _Travois_ -- A Design Challenge
True -- but I do like to see other folks' ideas.
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
|
|