In defense of hovertanks

[CON_Troll]

That is an incredibly well thought out and articulated post. Well done, sir. I can't really argue with any of your points. And I especially like your explanation of how the GEV skirt and lift chamber works.

Having said that, it's clear to the inhabitants of the world of OGRE (pity those poor souls) that they think of GEVs (at least the Paneuro ones) as hovercraft. With slang terms such as "blowers" and "hovers" in much of the fiction, scenarios and even the rules, it's clear that the definition of a "hovercraft" in OGRE is much different than what we think of them here in the real world.

So, you're absolutely right. I just believe that it is a matter of what constitutes a "hovercraft" in the OGREverse. A good example of this is Mathieu Moyen's excellent article in OGREZine #1 wherein he explained a bit WHY Combine GEVs look so different. In effect, Combine GEVs are "true" ground effect vehicles while the Panueropean GEV is more closely akin to a hovercraft, but still far different than hovercraft as WE think of them.

[alsteel]

Originally Posted by CON_Troll

That is an incredibly well thought out and articulated post. Well done, sir. I can't really argue with any of your points. And I especially like your explanation of how the GEV skirt and lift chamber works.

Thank you. It's all hypothetical of course, but I'd like to think it's plausible, which is about as good as it gets in SciFi anyway. :) At least it's not a fantasy explanation.. "It's MAGIC damnit! Don't question it!"... never really worked for me.

Originally Posted by CON_Troll

Having said that, it's clear to the inhabitants of the world of OGRE (pity those poor souls) that they think of GEVs (at least the Paneuro ones) as hovercraft. With slang terms such as "blowers" and "hovers" in much of the fiction, scenarios and even the rules, it's clear that the definition of a "hovercraft" in OGRE is much different than what we think of them here in the real world.

Agreed. It's all about semantics. Trying to break from the misconception that a GEV is an ACV. Two TOTALLY different beasts. Like a Harrier, Osprey, or F-35B, GEVs can hover and remain motionless, they just don't spend a lot of time doing it. It's that ability that defines their overall perception but it's not how they generally operate. It's also important to distinguish them from aircraft, helicopters, and ducted fan aircraft. GEVs use ground effect to assist in lift, requiring minimal lifting surfaces (aka Wings/Rotors/giant outboard ducted fans) but more air control and capture surface but no ability to sustain higher altitudes. They just don't have the control/power/lifting surfaces (large wings, ailerons, elevators, rudders, large rotors) to sustain controlled flight so they are near-earth bound. But they can apply directed bursts of power to rapidly gain some altitude when needed ("hop") and maintain a controlled descent. Being a pop-up target is not a good thing in the OGREverse so the less time you spend UP the better.

Originally Posted by CON_Troll

So, you're absolutely right. I just believe that it is a matter of what constitutes a "hovercraft" in the OGREverse. A good example of this is Mathieu Moyen's excellent article in OGREZine #1 wherein he explained a bit WHY Combine GEVs look so different. In effect, Combine GEVs are "true" ground effect vehicles while the Panueropean GEV is more closely akin to a hovercraft, but still far different than hovercraft as WE think of them.

I'll have to check that out, I'd like to see how that article tracks with my thoughts. Thanks!

[Tim Kauffman]

"Several factors led to the reappearance of mechanized warfare. The first, of course, was the development of biphase carbide (BPC) armor. Stronger than any steel, it was also so light that even an aircushion vehicle could carry several centimeters of protection. The equivalent of a ton of TNT was needed to breach even this much BPC armor – which meant that, in practice, nothing less than a tactical nuclear device was likely to be effective."

"The armed hovercraft or ground effect vehicle (GEV), equipped with multileaf spring skirts for broken ground, could make 150 km/h on any decent terrain, and nearly 200 on desert or water. Conventional tanks were slower but tougher. All fired tactical nuclear shells."

[Preface from OGRE rules]

GEVs were armed with TAC-Nuke rounds and thus able to attack much heavier armored units such as the OGRE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon

I understand they are designated as GEV (Ground Effect Vehicle) however, I think GAEV (Ground Air Effect Vehicle) is a more accurate description. They are literally a design fusion of a Ground Effect Vehicle and Jet Aircraft, even Spacecraft Technology. They "effect" not only the ground, but the air around the vehicle.
If OGREs were developed and fielded to became the modern indomitable monsters of the TAC-Nuclear Battlefield, such a menagerie of technological advancements, innovations and development would be sought out at all costs to counter this threat and be developed to it's fullest potential as well. Enter the Legendary GEV and the human pilots that flew them against the metal monsters called OGRE!

Here are two interesting images showing a GEV that is less "GEV" and more Jet Aircraft, a fusion of the two from a official OGRE game released years ago:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yJvLIYlnMU...2B08.25.50.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AVP2bHvWDv...2B08.29.35.jpg

My take is...GEVs (GAEVs) are all the "hovertank" you need in OGRE.

[alsteel]

Originally Posted by Tim Kauffman

"Several factors led to the reappearance of mechanized warfare. The first, of course, was the development of biphase carbide (BPC) armor. Stronger than any steel, it was also so light that even an aircushion vehicle could carry several centimeters of protection. The equivalent of a ton of TNT was needed to breach even this much BPC armor – which meant that, in practice, nothing less than a tactical nuclear device was likely to be effective."

"The armed hovercraft or ground effect vehicle (GEV), equipped with multileaf spring skirts for broken ground, could make 150 km/h on any decent terrain, and nearly 200 on desert or water. Conventional tanks were slower but tougher. All fired tactical nuclear shells."

[Preface from OGRE rules]

GEVs were armed with TAC-Nuke rounds and thus able to attack much heavier armored units such as the OGRE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon

I'm fairly aware of the canon take on it. I just like my SciFi to make sense, even if it's all hypothetical. ACV's don't make sense because even with spring skirts, you can't maintain an aircushion over broken ground, and I can't think of any ground more broken than a nuclear battlefield. Not to mention the control surfaces (that are non-existent on the PE GEV) that would be necessary to overcome the momentum of 40tons of vehicle moving at 150kph. That leaves me with powerful ducted fans for hovering and lifting bodies/movable control surfaces/vectored thrust for forward NoE flight all while taking advantage of the ground effect. Weaponry, in all the official and fan art for the GEVs looks to be on the smaller caliber side. It's possible that crafty engineers figured out a way to squeeze a nuclear shaped charge into a 75mm shell (the US had a 155mm atomic shell and even 105mm was considered possible... in the 60s!) but anything smaller... I don't know if the physics works, but hey a nuclear shell slinging 40mm may be possible.

Originally Posted by Tim Kauffman

I understand they are designated as GEV (Ground Effect Vehicle) however, I think GAEV (Ground Air Effect Vehicle) is a more accurate description. They are literally a design fusion of a Ground Effect Vehicle and Jet Aircraft, even Spacecraft Technology. They "effect" not only the ground, but the air around the vehicle.

"Ground effect" is an actual aerodynamic property. It's the added lift produced when an aircraft gets close to the ground (typically within a wingspans length). The disturbed air from the wings and body strike the ground and roll upwards to the plane, generally causing undesired lift because it happens on landing. Helicopters also have this issue. GEVs (see the Russian Ekranoplan) on the other hand, actually use GE to assist in their flight by a careful balance of the GE, added lift from motion/air direction and lifting body design. But yeah, the fusion of GEV/Aircraft/Spacecraft... I like it.

Originally Posted by Tim Kauffman

If OGREs were developed and fielded to became the modern indomitable monsters of the TAC-Nuclear Battlefield, such a menagerie of technological advancements, innovations and development would be sought out at all costs to counter this threat and be developed to it's fullest potential as well. Enter the Legendary GEV and the human pilots that flew them against the metal monsters called OGRE!

Here are two interesting images showing a GEV that is less "GEV" and more Jet Aircraft, a fusion of the two from a official OGRE game released years ago:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yJvLIYlnMU...2B08.25.50.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AVP2bHvWDv...2B08.29.35.jpg

My take is...GEVs (GAEVs) are all the "hovertank" you need in OGRE.

OMG! That needs to be a meme, certainly deserving of a t-shirt... "G.E.V. all the hovertank you'll ever need!"

The takeaway here is that the GEV redefines what a "tank" actually is.

[J. Durr]

Regardless of the tech I'm glad that Steve called them GEVs because it sounds really cool.

[alsteel]

Maybe a 50mm gun?? :)

https://youtu.be/U0prcaXEwKU

[CON_Troll]

Could be. Could be.
In J.D. Bell's excellent story "G.E.V." there is mention of the GEVs having dual purpose ammo (at least for their main forward gun, I would think.) The first type of rounds were referred to as "hivelocs", which I believe was short for "high-velocity". While the second type of round had a micronuke warhead.

"Our Hivelocs would smoke most normal armor, but not Ogres. That’s what we carried the nuke rounds for."

I'm guessing that the turret and sponson mounted guns are effective against infantry and (perhaps) most armor, but that only the main gun (using the nuke rounds) can damage Ogres.

So, why not use nothing but nuke rounds? First, I would guess that nuke warheads were far more expensive to manufacture than hivelocs. Second, all sides of the conflict tried not to use too many nuclear rounds. Not because of humanitarian concerns (where the enemy was concerned) but for the safety of their own troops. Too much radiation in a small area would limit an attacker's ability to move forward through that area.