PDA

View Full Version : Why don't Drop Pods go plewey?



HsojVvad
17-08-2008, 17:46
I was reading about the new Drop Pods coming. I was thinking since the DP coming shooting down to the planet from orbit so fast that nobody and track them and shoot them, that when they hit the planet, why dosn't it go like miles are way deep inside the earth? (by earth I mean the ground not the planet)

If it dosn't and it rests as it does as you see on the table top, that means it slows down so it can land correctly so the SM or what ever can come out. So if it slows down then it should be able to be shot at fluff wise, I don't mean game wise.

So either way the DP should go plewey one way or the other, and using Drop Pods is not really a good way of getting down.

Can someone give me some info on how Drop Pods work Properly?

t-tauri
17-08-2008, 18:01
Moved to 40k background.

Yamacon
17-08-2008, 18:09
Well if you read the greywolf novel by william king, it tells how when the drop pod is slowing down there is a very real chance of being shot down, as ragnar himself panics about it.

Adra
17-08-2008, 18:30
They seem to fall to ground at very high speeds and then, at some point relativly close to impact, they fire boosters on their base that slows them down so as not to splat onto the rocks. This is still a very hard impact which even space marines find uncomfortable and few mortals could survive.

Dreachon
17-08-2008, 19:11
They are equipped with retro rockets which activate minutes before the pod lands to allow for a more comfterable landing, this is also the reason why droppods are deadly to non-marine humans, they can't take the sudden change in G forces placed upon them.

Disciple of Caliban
17-08-2008, 19:13
Several books show them in use. Basically (as has been said) they plummet to earth at huge speed, then just above ground level they fire their landing thrusters which slows them down a lot. They still hit the ground with a hell of a thud though, which is why only marines can use them, humans would be crippled from whiplash if they used a drop pod

EDIT: damn, beaten to it, must learn to type quicker

Fire Harte
17-08-2008, 19:57
They are equipped with retro rockets which activate minutes before the pod lands to allow for a more comfterable landing, this is also the reason why droppods are deadly to non-marine humans, they can't take the sudden change in G forces placed upon them.

Quite true Dreachon!

^*^Spoilers^*^

However in legion it does have grammaticus and co using a pod to make planet fall, who are non-astartes.

I'm not digging at you, its jjust what I have read which conflicts with your statement.

Fire In The Hole
17-08-2008, 20:21
I don't understand why they don't inflict damage when they land as it must still be hitting the ground at some speed.
Troops on the ground would be crushed into paste by the impact, and I thought that they were designed to be fired straight into the enemies heart, like weapons in their own right, before the troops inside disembarked.

Finnith
17-08-2008, 20:35
I don't understand why they don't inflict damage when they land as it must still be hitting the ground at some speed.
Troops on the ground would be crushed into paste by the impact, and I thought that they were designed to be fired straight into the enemies heart, like weapons in their own right, before the troops inside disembarked.

Im guessing that they will crush tanks, flatten squads and generally make a mess of anything they hit. Its just that taking out anything short of a titian means that the missile youve just fired cost a hell of alot more time, money and investment than what youve just killed. Especially if youve just shot a marine command squad on top of a tank which then explodes killing them all.

Off topic: Not quite sure how you would want to work out the damage done when ramming from out of space.

olmsted
17-08-2008, 20:37
well if anything was hit by it then yeah it would be severly damaged.. and yes they are used to "fire" marines into the enemy so they can cut out the throat and kill the brains behind the operation.

a few things drop pods can be tracked by anti aircraft fire in fluff and can be taken out before they land. it is very dangerous to attempt a drop pod attack as most will be shot before they land.

and reasons why they dont go deep into the earth is because of the retrorockets attached to it that keep it from digging into the earth. however.... that does give me a great idea for a new drop pod... now all i need is a giant drill head and a can....

tunnel drop pods

Finnith
17-08-2008, 20:57
Wasnt there a tunneling missile from 2nd edition / epic? Looked like the Mole thing from thunderbirds. Could quite easily be swapped for a drop pod.

olmsted
17-08-2008, 21:08
you can actually find a pic of it in the back of the apoc. book

ChaosBeast
17-08-2008, 21:19
they fly down at terrific speeds but the rockets activate just before impact. it still makes a small crater, and they could probably wipe out a command squad just by landing.

heretics bane
17-08-2008, 21:20
Ever saw one of the missions in Halo 2? where the master chief and a few mates get shot onto a halo ring? see just before they land the semi-parachute things deploy slowing the pods down enough for the base of them to heat up?

Thats how drop pods work except they use booster-rockets to slow them down.

Deus Mechanicus
17-08-2008, 21:22
Can't go all that fast. Didn't Garviel's drop pod in Galaxy of Flames land on a roof of a church of something?

HsojVvad
17-08-2008, 21:26
thanks guys I havn't read any fluff books so never knew.

Shouldn't there be a rule then that if using Drop Pods your enemy gets a free shot at you before being deployed, since this will represent the Pod slowing down and being able to be shot at? Or maybe rolling twice on the DS chart and having to take the worse result, or rerolling sucesfull DS?

Just like to hear your ideas.

olmsted
17-08-2008, 21:28
who wrote it? if it was goto then just go ahead and burn that book. they shoot at extremely fast speeds have to make it through the atmosphere. i extremely doubt they could land on a roof and not crash through in any physical terms

MrBigMr
17-08-2008, 21:43
Pods being shot at:
We're struggling to shoot down missiles (those bit ICBM's) so I would think pods are as hard to drop. Sure, one or two will be dropped, but I don't think the SM come one pod at a time. On the table they might, but 40K TT is just small part of a larger battle. When those pods start to land, the sky will be filled with them. so when you see the sky filled with dots that are coming right for you, which one do you shoot? How do you know what'll land withing few meters.

And even planes aren't that easy to shoot at. When you see a fighter coming at you, are you going to start peppering it with your rifle or take cover and leave it to the AA batteries?

Goruax
17-08-2008, 21:55
Loken's (I think) pod does indeed land on a church/thingy (along with Squad Locasta)
It's obvious from a couple of sources they don't just get dumb-launched.

They have some form of mechanism, regardless of what it actually is, that allows them to slow enough and not cause the landing g-forces to kill even the Marines inside.

Leftenant Gashrog
17-08-2008, 21:56
Its worth noting that Forgeworld agrees that the standard rules for Drop Pods are unfluffy, they include some alternative rules in Imperial Armour volume 2 that allows a small chance for them to be shot down.

GodofWarTx
17-08-2008, 22:09
I know that shooting down a ICBM on its balistic descent onto the target is incredibly hard, because at the speeds the warheads travel, arming systems of missle systems fail to even recognize the target is within the killbox before the warhead has already left the killbox. Even *IF* the interceptor missle detonates, its explosive fragmentation doesnt even travel fast enough to reach the warhead before the warhead has continued on past.

I see the problem with shooting down nukes on their terminal decent as the same problem as shooting down a droppod rocketing towards you. Just like ICBMS, if you want to take out the droppods, engage them in space or upon launch =)

tankworks
17-08-2008, 23:44
It is my understanding that pods just drop, they do not fly, so only the retros slow them from their super-sonic speeds. The retros would have to be on to negate the fall. This would (in real life) take time and they would have to be on all the way to the ground or the pod starts free-falling again, so, either the pod hits with a hell of a crunch or the force of the retros blasts whatever is underneath it. Either way it would be a place you would not want to be.

Slaaneshi Slave
18-08-2008, 00:31
About shooting down missiles, take a look at Metal Storm, it's a new weapon system being developed with one of it's potential functions being shooting down of missiles. Also we are already using lasers to shoot at missiles, which don't have to worry about lag time or speed of the missile, if it's in your crosshair, it will be when the beam hit's it.

More on topic though. In Warrior Brood (is that the one with the 'Nids?) an Inquisitor rides in a Drop Pod with the Marines. When they land I believe she was almost killed by the G-Force and was bleeding from most places which could bleed..

Hellebore
18-08-2008, 01:36
Drop pods might have anti grav suspensors (I don't think it's ever mentioned either way).

Don't forget all the Deathwind drop pods that are dropped as well. They don't just send a wave of marines in pods, they clear the field with deathwinds first, THEN land the marines.

I wouldn't be surprised if they sent out empty pods as well. A marine probably costs more than half a dozen pods, so ensuring their protection would be the highest priority. Decoy pods would reduce incoming casualties.

Considering that TEN pods constitutes an entire company and a company is a massive resource to commit to a battle, they would sort of HAVE to launch empty ones and deathwind ones to make up an actual wave.

Think about it, an entire chapter would launch in one hundred drop pods. That's not really that many at all.

I reckon they would be launching at least 5 empty/deathwind pods for every 'live' pod. Perhaps in a discrete pattern that puts the live pods inside a ring of decoys to make it even harder to shoot the marines down.

Hellebore

Lostanddamned
18-08-2008, 01:49
In terms of drop pods crushing things - they would do, but in rules terms (and real life to an extent) if you see something big moving towards you from the sky, you run away. Any away. and far away.

In rules terms (if I remember) models under a deepstriking model are moved away from it.

MrBigMr
18-08-2008, 01:50
You're forgetting terminators and dreadnoughts and all that. You need more than a hudred pods for the job. But I see your point. They could also launch supplies in pods for the marines to use once on the ground. And possible other stuff as well.

TheRoadWarrior
18-08-2008, 01:51
wasnt there a chater or something in one of the last chancers book where they were in a drop pod, and 2 of the guys inside of it died?

PondaNagura
18-08-2008, 04:12
http://www.dawnofwar2.com/us/videos#/video?id=4&size=lg
in the first couple seconds of the DoW2 'updated teaser', a drop pod lands on some orks...

i think whether a drop pod could get shot out of the sky really depends on the defenders resources. well dug in units with orbital platforms might see it coming, but would still have to add a lot of suppressive firepower to the air...
where as other enemies might be pre-occupied with already established ground forces and might not even see em coming, let alone have the ability to shoot them out of the sky.
drop pods are rapid response vehicles, they are meant for suprise attacks.

MrBigMr
18-08-2008, 04:24
There is also one thing to remember: the pods are big chunks of reinforced metal in free fall. Even if you put a missile in it, kill everyone inside it and destroy it, it's still a big, now burning, chunk of reinforced metal in free fall. It'll come down no matter what.

They should make it so that if you shoot it down, instead of a pod a pie plate comes down. It there's enemies or friendlies under it, sucks to be them. Teaches you to shoot my pods.


Another thing. If you can shoot a dropping pod, why not assault marines, stormtroopers, battlesuits, swooping hawks, etc. gliding down from the skies? Or any other thing that's able to deep strike via flying in. Doesn't make much sense really.

olmsted
18-08-2008, 04:37
im sure they get shot at as well. also you cant really call a drop pod assault secret.... objects entering the atmosphere look like falling stars and when the stars are following on your location its not secret.

read in the cities of death when they take on hurons fortress of thorns and a chapter makes a drop pod assault. it says that while many of the drop pods were destroyed enough marines landed to take the fight or something to that effect.

flack is flack and if the drop pod is knocked off course chances are that one tiny nudge can send your pod spinning end over end and your land on the nice softer side of the pod and crunch.


just so you know you cant shoot at drop pods in game.....

PondaNagura
18-08-2008, 04:53
i didn't say secret i said SUPRISE! i think drop pods lend to the shock effect as well...your honed in on the fight right in front of you, and the next thing there's this momentary bright light...you might think it's incoming orbital fire and then Wham! dust clouds and marines...or worse a dread.
aside from flaming pie plate of doom, i'd expect a pinning test within D6" of any surviving pods.

MrBigMr
18-08-2008, 05:03
Think about all those capsules that come down from space. The guy know where they're gonna land (estimated), but still they have huge search parties out looking for them and there's a good chance the pod gets to set down on parachutes before they're found.

Besides, not only are we dealing with 3 dimensions here, but astronomical speeds as well. I've talked with some radar operators during my time in the army and they pretty much will tell you that the chance to actually spot an enemy fighter and reporting it to the defense batteries before the plane has flown out of the screen is nigh impossible. Chances are you won't even get to stand up from your seat before the incoming missile hits the station even if you spot it on the radar.

So before the defender get to even aim the guns, a good deal of the Marines are sure to be on the ground and well on their way taking down those batteries.

Alessander
18-08-2008, 05:07
The marines aren't just sitting in the pods, they are strapped into impact seats to cushion their landing. Non-Astartes have to have adapted seats to have them work.

Yes, it's a ridiculous concept, but this a universe of psychic powers, demons and spaceships.

The impact is sure to cause some ground damage, which is why all my drop pods are modeled so they nestle nicely in custom-made craters.

Slaaneshi Slave
18-08-2008, 06:34
Space Marines are based on Starship Troopers. In Starship Troopers the Marines (or whatever they are called) drop pod in individually in a small cacoon like pod. As that pod enters the lower atmosphere (retaliation range) it sheds its outer layers in order to provide a mass of metalic garbage to confuse radar and enemy AA batteries. I see no reason why the updated Starship Troopers pods (Space Marine ones) could not do something similar.

Geddonight
18-08-2008, 10:36
Loken's (I think) pod does indeed land on a church/thingy (along with Squad Locasta)


Keep in mind: Imperial churches are not anything resembling our nice steepled, wooden construction churches. These are massive, gothic fortress churches... It'd take a wee bit more to bust in that roof, I imagine.


@ Hellebore: Good point. I suppose they'd send down several dozen Dreadnought drop pods too; imagine the Deathwind-esque loadout you could have on those decoys.



They should make it so that if you shoot it down, instead of a pod a pie plate comes down. It there's enemies or friendlies under it, sucks to be them. Teaches you to shoot my pods.

I cackled at this :D

I seem to recall reading somewhere that drop pods had internal stasis fields which protected their passengers from all those nasty G-forces. I can't cite sources, though.

Also, am I incorrect in assuming that the turbine-like piece at the top of the pod is a rocket/jet/some form of propelling device? It seems that pods do more than "drop"; it appears that they're propelled towards their target, making them extremely fast & hard to hit.

I imagine that it's only in the last few thousand feet of a descent that the retro rockets are firing (aka only the last few handfuls of seconds)... still very tough to shoot down at any rate without just filling the sky with countermeasures.

anyway, fun topic :)

heretics bane
18-08-2008, 12:14
Lokens pod hits the church but takes a a pretty hefty wack out of the ceiling and surrounding area.

ADF
18-08-2008, 15:14
In fact, one of the BFG suplements stated that only 1/100 of the dropped pods actually carry marines; the rest are deathwind pods, decoys that are rigged with melta charges (so in fact torpedos that explode on impact) and decoys with jamming equipment to prevent AA systems from locking on target. However, a drop assault is still considered one of the most risky endeavours a commander could propose.

Lord Dante
18-08-2008, 15:31
Drop pods use retro thrusters to slow thier descent at the last moment.

The SM are in 'grav-harness's' that remove some of the impact and the massive ammounts of breaking energy

The drop pod is clearly tough enough to withstand planet re-entry

The tactis employed for drop od assult would be risky but anuy commander with half a brain cell would obviously try and reduce loss's by removing defences, picking a good drop site, using decoy pods and jamming radar etc...

MrBigMr
18-08-2008, 16:28
I hope that if the pods become death traps in the game, they would at least go down in price. I could get a kitted Rhino for the price of a pod.

imperial_scholar
18-08-2008, 19:03
Trying to shoot anything out of the air is very difficult. I emphasize **VERY** difficult.

Try playing battlefield 2 and shoot at a helicopter that is fairly far away.

You have to content with the speed of the object, gravity of the planet (bullet drop) and your tracers giving you visual information that is no longer valid. Now considering that you are firing with weapons with a high rate of fire which usually don't have much of a chance to destroy it anyways, I really don't see it being worth slowing a turn down to firing at an airborne drop pod to hit it on a 6 and then maybe glancing it on a 6.... especially since the thing doesn't do much when it lands (unless deathwind of course).

The reality of it too.. is that helicopter pilots crash land, they usually crush vertebrae. SM's are known for having their vertebrae reinforced. I just found a paper saying 41 feet per second (http://www.scribd.com/doc/521875/Helicopter-Crash-Landing) is a survivable crash for humans. Suppose marines can withstand 3 times (Because marines are almost 3 times more points than IG) that (123 feet/sec). That is
123ft / 5280 (feet in a mile) = 0.023 295 454 545 miles/second
0.023 295 454 545 miles/second into hrs = 83.863636362 miles per hr or 134.96544 km per hr

Considering how a drop pod looks (a lot of solid metal) I could see it surviving the impact and the marines upper tolerances achieved

[Edit]
If someone wants to check my math please go ahead

About the church roof... depending on how thick the roof is and what material would depend if the drop pod would have fallen through.. my estimates... probably not.. but I'm shooting kinda high here.

[edit again]
If someone wants to figure out the terminal velocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_velocity) of a drop pod (because it probably will reach terminal velocity) we could verify if a drop pod could ever decelerate to 135 KM/h from terminal velocity would be the question I want answered :D

CELS
18-08-2008, 19:09
I believe inertia dampeners are also a significant component for Imperial technology such as drop pods, boarding torpedoes and star fighters. You need something more than muscles, power armour and seat belts to stop Marines from going squish when these things suddenly accelerate or decelerate.

It would also explain why humans can be deployed with drop pods, as in the Horus Heresy novels.

Of course, the dampeners wouldn't actually negate the inertia completely. Not the Imperial ones, anyway.

Krimzenkov
19-08-2008, 03:09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-E1RcRvny8


Check out the drop pod that comes in to the right of the Blood Ravens banner at 1:46 in.

imperial_scholar
19-08-2008, 05:53
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-E1RcRvny8


Check out the drop pod that comes in to the right of the Blood Ravens banner at 1:46 in.

I guess that counts... of course, I still like my answer better. I think if they slowed that much before landing they'd get shot down easily.

Maybe the drop pods have 2 modes, aggressive drop and passive drop.

TheOverlord
19-08-2008, 07:08
Actually they WOULDN'T get shot down if they slowed down during the last few minutes of their descent because AA guns would at that point have lost the angle of attack on them, or at least they'd not risk it for fear of being out of position.

Master Stark
19-08-2008, 07:35
I'm not digging at you, its jjust what I have read which conflicts with your statement.

Well, according to some of the things we read in BL publications, SM can roll and dive and jamming rocks into the muzzle of a scatter laser will make it asplode.

Obviously, some artistic licence has to be allowed.


Trying to shoot anything out of the air is very difficult. I emphasize **VERY** difficult.

Yes and no. If you just blanket a square kilometer of sky with explosive death, then anything coming through it is going to be torn to pieces.

Drop pod deployments have to be considered in the larger scale of the battle. Marines are arguably one of the most precious resources the Imperium has. There is, after all, only around a million of them. So any kind of engagement that puts them in risk had better have a mighty large pay-off.

If you're sending them to destroy a target on the ground, there had better be pretty good reasons why the ship deploying the drop pods couldn't just deploy torpedoes instead. If the drop pods are going to be exposed to anti-air defences, there had better be a pretty good reason why those anti-air defences haven't been destroyed from orbit also.

I like to imagine that for some reason the ship-based weapons of the 41st millenium don't penetrate atmosphere very well. A dedicated pounding from a capital ship should still be game over, but you would need complete space superiority and time to achieve it. It would explain why we have special weapons (bombardment cannons, planet killer, etc) designed specifically to engage targets on a planets surface.

It would also explain why seiges and large scale battles can be considered viable. Remember the battle of Hoth, with the AT-ATs attacking the shield generators? Now imagine that those shield generators are buried underground, and the location defended behind massive walls bristling with gun emplacements. You'd need a large hammer to crack that nut.

Could a drop pod glide through an active shield? Or would it be deflected? Because I can imagine drop pods being dropped onto half a dozen enemy strong-points across the city to kill the shields, disable enemy defences and destroy their HQ, enabling the planet to be taken before enemy reinforcements arrive and force the Imperial fleet into an egagement, possibly tipping the scale and leaving the attacking forces stranded on the ground without the benefit of a heavily guarded shield to protect them.

ChaosBeast
19-08-2008, 07:53
Pods being shot at:
We're struggling to shoot down missiles (those bit ICBM's) so I would think pods are as hard to drop. Sure, one or two will be dropped, but I don't think the SM come one pod at a time. On the table they might, but 40K TT is just small part of a larger battle. When those pods start to land, the sky will be filled with them. so when you see the sky filled with dots that are coming right for you, which one do you shoot? How do you know what'll land withing few meters.

And even planes aren't that easy to shoot at. When you see a fighter coming at you, are you going to start peppering it with your rifle or take cover and leave it to the AA batteries?

well since an entire company is 100 men thats only ten drop pods, 11 or 12 with dreads and thunderfire cannons. and is stressed how rare it is for even a company to deploy. so saying the sky would be filled with drop pods is a bit of an exaggeration. there would probably be about 6 falling down during a normal conflict.

Master Stark
19-08-2008, 09:30
well since an entire company is 100 men thats only ten drop pods, 11 or 12 with dreads and thunderfire cannons. and is stressed how rare it is for even a company to deploy. so saying the sky would be filled with drop pods is a bit of an exaggeration. there would probably be about 6 falling down during a normal conflict.

Surely a dop pod is a much lesss valuable asset than a Marine?

So wouldn't it be feasible for a marine strike craft to launch many more deathwind pods?

Sai-Lauren
19-08-2008, 12:17
Wasnt there a tunneling missile from 2nd edition / epic? Looked like the Mole thing from thunderbirds. Could quite easily be swapped for a drop pod.

Do you mean the Termite, Mole and Hellebore tunnellers? ;)

Marines would also try and pick a drop zone where there aren't significant AA turrets, defensive screens and the like, and, aside from decoys, deathwinds and other pods as already mentioned, may make use of things like EMP bursts to supress targetting systems. Slaaneshi Slave's chaff idea is a pretty good one as well.

There's also the possibility that they have additional disposable heat shields that also act as air brakes in the upper atmosphere, beyond the effective range of interceptors and ground fire, so that they're not coming in at full speed anyway - just fast enough to be a very difficult target to hit.

Marines also have A-G tech (land speeders), so I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the pods have some as well to help decelerate.

If a pod gets a penetrating hit on the way down, it'll probably break up as the stresses overcome the structural integrity - a glancing hit might throw it off course, but they're fairly aerodynamic, and would tend to flip back into a normal descent profile, although if the retros are damaged, no one's walking away.

MrBigMr
19-08-2008, 15:22
well since an entire company is 100 men thats only ten drop pods, 11 or 12 with dreads and thunderfire cannons. and is stressed how rare it is for even a company to deploy. so saying the sky would be filled with drop pods is a bit of an exaggeration. there would probably be about 6 falling down during a normal conflict.
What about something like the Deathwing of the DA? That doesn't fit into 10 pods. And there's one thing people seem to take for granted: that the pods are all full. I don't see why, especially with smaller number, whey wouldn't spread the troops around in combat squads.

Slaaneshi Slave
19-08-2008, 15:31
And why wouldn't they put 20 empty pods down for every real one? They wouldn't need complex anti-grav stabilisers or any of that nonsence, just throw them at the ground and let them take the fire.

heretics bane
19-08-2008, 15:40
well since an entire company is 100 men thats only ten drop pods, 11 or 12 with dreads and thunderfire cannons. and is stressed how rare it is for even a company to deploy. so saying the sky would be filled with drop pods is a bit of an exaggeration. there would probably be about 6 falling down during a normal conflict.

11 or 12 dreadnoughts:wtf: thats alot to being with let alone dropping them all into one battle. And why wouldnt the sky be filled with them? it would make more sense to have every one in ten pods being full confusing your enemy and stretching their forces even more as thye go of trying to get the pods but only finding dud ones are booby trapped ones.

ChaosBeast
19-08-2008, 18:27
no, i mean 11 or 12 in total, 1 or 2 dreads.


Surely a dop pod is a much lesss valuable asset than a Marine?

on the contrary, a drop pod is worth 3 and a third marines :D

Paganite
19-08-2008, 23:08
Space Marines are based on Starship Troopers. In Starship Troopers the Marines (or whatever they are called) drop pod in individually in a small cacoon like pod. As that pod enters the lower atmosphere (retaliation range) it sheds its outer layers in order to provide a mass of metalic garbage to confuse radar and enemy AA batteries. I see no reason why the updated Starship Troopers pods (Space Marine ones) could not do something similar.

When I first read of drop pods this is how I thought they would be like as a fan of the book...

I guess you could say that this all happens which is why the manage to get to ground. Just like we pretend that in every battle air superiority plays no part whatsoever and that long range bombardment has minimal effect. Though I would love to see rules for calling in the 40k equivalent of the A10 Warthog to crumble a hard held building in cityfight... Hmmmmm.... such a pretty picture... Nothing beats a flying tank with a really big cannon, 3 control systems and a canopy that could survive a small tank round... I can't imagine what they could do with the concept in 40k.

Slaaneshi Slave
19-08-2008, 23:17
Though I would love to see rules for calling in the 40k equivalent of the A10 Warthog to crumble a hard held building in cityfight... Hmmmmm.... such a pretty picture... Nothing beats a flying tank with a really big cannon, 3 control systems and a canopy that could survive a small tank round... I can't imagine what they could do with the concept in 40k.

It's there.

Imperial Armour Apocalypse, page 38.
Imperial Armour Volume One, page 235.

MARAUDER DESTROYER

3 Structure Points (can survive a LARGE tank round). It's got 3 twin linked Auto Cannons, 2 twin linked Heavy Bolters, and a twin linked Assault Cannon. It can have 6 bombs, and 10 Hunter Killer Missiles.

If that isn't a beefed up A10, I don't know what is. :p

SabrX
19-08-2008, 23:24
How did we land men on the moon and probes on Mars without creating a huge crater? Drop Pods are not meteorites.

Slaaneshi Slave
19-08-2008, 23:32
The problem is a child with a pea shooter can take down a lunar lander. You need to come in fast to avoid incoming fire, and be heavy and sturdy enough not to tip over or be destroyed when it hits the ground. So, large object in free fall from space. Now strap an engine on the BACK to make it fall faster.

ADF
20-08-2008, 09:34
Something we did not consider until now:
In the story that accompanied the start of the 3d war for Armageddon, the ork rocks were noted to have shields that "comdensed" under them as they hit the ground, slowing their descent on the last ~15 metres, until giving up, blowing, but having molten the ground to glass. The energy of the shields also emitted huge shochwaves that forced imperials into cover. Perhaps drop pods, following the same concept on a larger scale, could have similar shields for triple purpose: surviving the haet of re-entry, shrugging of the odd glancing hit from AA, and slowing the descent on the last metres. However, I do not recall any mention of shields other than heat shields (IMHO physical ceramite plates, not force fields) on pods.

Slaaneshi Slave
20-08-2008, 09:39
I don't care how hardy they are, even Marines can't withstand slowing from above terminal velocity to stationary in only 15m. Orks it's a different matter because we have no idea how they are made up, but with a human it's going to turn your internal organs into pulp. You would need something inside the pods to disconnect them from gravity and momentum.

Sai-Lauren
20-08-2008, 13:04
1st edition epic had some support pods with a plasma cannon turret - however, they weren't actually that good ;), heavy bolters and/or missile launchers would have been better, and may have kept them around.

Tarantula's and Hyperion missile platforms could conceivably be dropped in this way, as could Land Speeders - with the pod opening at altitude to release the cargo, possibly with some submunitions deployed at the same time.

Some of the drop pods may also contain muntions and other supplies - the marines themselves and their pod will presumably have some ammunition, enough to last an extended firefight allowing them to secure a beachhead, but space will be limited, and they'd need resupply fairly shortly after.

They could also potentially deploy a command/control pod, comms uplinks, a small techmarine workshop, a pod of servitors for various tasks, such as clearing a landing field (for example, to allow armour to be deployed), creating defensive positions and so on, a field apothecarion and so on, maybe even power cores and power/void shields, especially if they're establishing a beachhead for planetary operations. A variant of the dreadnought pod seems to me to be a good fit for such general transport.

IMO, Thunderhawk transporters also have a hook or two to pick up drop pods and take them back to the deploying craft (unless they fit into the grabs, which is a possibility), or the pods can be broken down into large components (doors, central spine etc), crated up, and lifted back to orbit by T'Hawk transporter.

I don't think they're designed as disposable - they may have self-destruct systems in case they have to be abandoned, but the chapter would probably make every effort to recover them if they can.

Ubermensch Commander
20-08-2008, 15:47
More on topic though. In Warrior Brood (is that the one with the 'Nids?) an Inquisitor rides in a Drop Pod with the Marines. When they land I believe she was almost killed by the G-Force and was bleeding from most places which could bleed..

No, vetoed, denied, negatory nein. Goto book. Burn it. Right now, not later.
Yeah that was the one with the nids and the kung fu master mantis marine...who I think was a Librarian as well....I had the misfortune of reading it and DoW before realizing that C.S. Goto can't write for ****.
"Yeah Dark Reapers totally have their own spirit pool cuz they can't add the spirit stones to the regular infinity circuit....becaus! yeah because!"

Anyway, besides Goto and his abominable writing, there are occasional instance in the BL books that have regular ol humans deploying in Drop Pods. Though again, i think that generally the G-forces would kill humans.

Keichi246
20-08-2008, 15:50
Drop pod assaults work because GW says they work. That's it - plain and simple.

The problem is not necessarily the deceleration trauma (though - honestly it would be pretty brutal). The drop pod would slow to terminal velocity in air during the course of it's decnt - and any decent retro rockets firing for more than a few seconds will reduce the final deceleration to "nasty but acceptable" - especially for a genetically modified supersoldier.

The problem is the amount of time the drop pod is a viable target.

In a world with hypervelocity or light speed weapons - AKA *Lascannons* - Drop pods should be toast. If you can see it - you can track it and kill it with a laser. Doesn't matter HOW fast the drop pod is moving - you are basically traveling through x MILES of uninterrupted LOS. And since the drop pod is not likely to be traveling fast enough to get out of LOS by the time it crosses the horizon...

Target saturation MIGHT work - but then again - if *I* was an enemy of the Imperium - I'd try to make my headquarters area was surrounded by as much laser AA as I could lay my hands on - well disguised of course. Bait in the local Space Marine company and then burn them out of the sky... I mean - how long *DOES* it take for a laser in the 40k-verse to burn through armor? I'm under the impression it's a pulse of less than a couple seconds. Plenty of time to automatically track and engage multiple targets in the MINUTES it would take to travel from orbit to ground. We know the 40k verse has surface to orbit lasers - which means they should have both the tracking software/hardware to kill targets in LOS.

No - the only reason drop pod assaults - as described by GW, work is because they built the universe that way...

imperial_scholar
20-08-2008, 15:58
In a world with hypervelocity or light speed weapons - AKA *Lascannons* - Drop pods should be toast. If you can see it - you can track it and kill it with a laser. Doesn't matter HOW fast the drop pod is moving - you are basically traveling through x MILES of uninterrupted LOS. And since the drop pod is not likely to be traveling fast enough to get out of LOS by the time it crosses the horizon...


Its still going to be hard to hit them. The light still has to travel and you still have to aim at a small point 100's (or 100,000) meters away. By the time its big enough to shoot at, your reaction time would have to be bang on and you'd still have to lead the target. Not to mention if we even know if lascannons need to fill their energy source with enough energy before they fire or if the charge is instantly available (like Digital cameras)

Light is also effected by gravity. So there are other forces at work.

Meriwether
20-08-2008, 16:00
The answer: Science fiction. The notion that drop pods cannot be intercepted because they are traveling too fast is ridiculous.

We have a hard time incercepting ICBMs because, for example, the Minuteman III travels at about 15,000 mph. Even so, Americans now have fragmentary interceptors that have had some limited success in doing so.

As to landing, it doesn't matter what type of neato force-disperser you have at the bottom, the long and short of it is that you have to put a certain amount of force on an object in order to bring it from some speed to rest.

The L50 (that is, speed at which half of those involved are expected to die) of a car accident is 30 mph combined speed. Assuming a Space Marine is ten times hardier than a normal human (instead of 1.333% hardier as T4 vs. T3 would indicate), that means that you could hit the ground at 300 mph and expect only half of them to die -- while the rest would just be seriously messed up.

Ignoring the fact that it is almost trivial to shoot down something moving at this speed, let's take it for a small mathematical exercise. 300mph to stopped in 15 meters would require (calculated by the work-kinetic energy theorem, F*d = 1/2*m*v^2) 600 Newtons of force per kilogram of space marine. Assuming a preposterously light 200 kg space marine, that's 27,000 pounds of force. You might as well just drop nine of my cars on him (I drive a Chrysler Cirrus.)

Congratulations, Brother Moronicus, you just got tank shocked by a planet and attempted "Death or Glory!"

Meri

Edit: Light _is_ effected by gravity, but not to any extent that would be even vaguely noticeable in these situations.

imperial_scholar
20-08-2008, 17:17
Edit: Light _is_ effected by gravity, but not to any extent that would be even vaguely noticeable in these situations.

lol.. good post
I was hoping no one would notice that part :P

Did you read my post (http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158274&page=2#40) :P

We're thinking along the same lines... Marines 10 times tougher? By my calculations the Drop Pod would hit at 280 Miles per hour (or 450 Km/h). At which point... I don't think a marine being 10 times tougher than a human would apply... I doubt a bolder can withstand that amount of force.

I think we should ignore the fact of them getting shot down, because it would be the commanders job to put them on a mission where they most likely not be shot down :D....
I.E. You wouldn't drop pods on world war II (equivalent) torn Berlin(1945) or London(1940)

Keichi246
20-08-2008, 17:23
Its still going to be hard to hit them. The light still has to travel and you still have to aim at a small point 100's (or 100,000) meters away. By the time its big enough to shoot at, your reaction time would have to be bang on and you'd still have to lead the target. Not to mention if we even know if lascannons need to fill their energy source with enough energy before they fire or if the charge is instantly available (like Digital cameras)

Light is also effected by gravity. So there are other forces at work.

Over the distance traveled - atmospheric conditions would have a FAR greater influence than the effects of gravity.

I presume that since everyone has surface to space weapons - they have sensors that can gather information across that battlespace. Drop pods on re-entry will NOT be stealthy - so they are relatively easy targets to track...

As far as leading target? Bah - negligible...

Let's say the drop pod is 600 km away - travelling at mach 1 (343 m/sec - a *very* high number given the duration of deceleration bursts it uses to slow to survivable impacts). The speed of light in atmosphere is about 291,060,639 meters/sec. The travel time is 1200km, or 1,200,000 m (time to see the target and shoot a beam back) is about .004 seconds... At 343 m/sec, the drop pod has travelled about a meter and a half. As the dimensions of the drop pod are a significantly larger than 2 meters in every direction - you WILL get a hit if you continuously aim directly at the drop pod. Also realize that at Mach 1 - ANY deformation of the drop pod caused by damage will result in aerodynamic instability - which equals a grizzly death for everyone on board.

Weapon cycle times, reaction times? That's what computers - whoops - I mean hard wired targetting servitors are for...

The only reason ballistic missiles are hard to hit is because they DON'T have to decelerate to a landing - they unmanned. The moment you slow done a reentry vehicle to the point it can land safely - weapons can and should turn it to slag...

Re: Terminal Velocity
Gonna be a tough one to figure out, actually. We need the loaded weight of the drop pod, and the diameter of the thing to determine its drag... I wonder if the Imperial Armor books have the info I need...

Edit - whoops - beaten to it...

Brother Enok
20-08-2008, 20:55
Congratulations, Brother Moronicus, you just got tank shocked by a planet and attempted "Death or Glory!"

Thanks man. You just made tea come out my nose.

Meriwether
20-08-2008, 20:56
Of course, a preliminary orbital bombardment can do a lot to discourage flak cannons. Even if you don't take them out, you could have the crews keeping their heads down while the drop pods land...

...but the statement about speed = can't shoot 'em down is still garbage.

Meri

Edit: Cheers, Enok.

Master Stark
21-08-2008, 07:21
Drop pod assaults work because GW says they work. That's it - plain and simple.

Thats a little grandiose. Several of your assertions rest on unfounded assumptions.

Obviously highly accurate motion sensing targeters are either non-existant, or extremely rare in 40K, and I imagine that drop pods would include all sorts of inertial dampeners and gravity fields, not to mention its structure would preclude most secondary impacts, eliminating most of the things that make car accidents and similar collisions fatal.

I think it could change it's velocity faster than some give it credit for, and I think some over-estimate the ability of 40K weapons and warriors to fire accurately.

Slaaneshi Slave
21-08-2008, 07:28
The problem is not the ability of the Drop Pod to change it's speed rapidly, it is the ability of it's occupants to survive these changes is speed.

Master Stark
21-08-2008, 07:36
The problem is not the ability of the Drop Pod to change it's speed rapidly, it is the ability of it's occupants to survive these changes is speed.

I should have been more specific. I think the drop pod can safely change it's speed more quickly than some others seem to think. You die in a car crash because your body is crushed by the crumpling car, or because your body bounces around inside the car causing your bones to break and your organs to decelerate too rapidly and go plewey.

If the armour can be locked down, and locked into a frame within the pod, then the the crumpling element and 'bouncing body' element of the impact are greatly minimised. A normal human could survive a much higher speed collision if there was no chance of their vehicle crumpling or their body bouncing around inside it. A marine could survive a much higher collision again.

Sai-Lauren
21-08-2008, 08:50
A normal human could survive a much higher speed collision if there was no chance of their vehicle crumpling or their body bouncing around inside it. A marine could survive a much higher collision again.

True, there was a racing driver (indycars I think) a few years back that hit a concrete wall dead on at full speed.

IIRC, the official reckoning is that he pulled something like 140g. :eek:

But back when they were doing g-force experiments in the 50s and 60s, they had people experiencing momentary forces in the 30-40g range.

Aha - Wikipedia to the rescue


Highest g-forces survived by humans

Voluntary
Colonel John Stapp in 1954 sustained 46.2 g in a rocket sled, while conducting research on the effects of human deceleration.


Involuntary
Formula One racing car driver David Purley survived an estimated 179.8 g in 1977 when he decelerated from 173 km/h (108 mph) to rest over a distance of 66 cm (26 inches) after his throttle got stuck wide open and he hit a wall.

Indy Car driver Kenny Bräck crashed on lap 188 of the 2003 race at Texas Motor Speedway. Bräck and Tomas Scheckter touched wheels, sending Bräck into the air at 200+ mph, hitting a steel support beam for the catch fencing. According to Bräck's site his car recorded 214 g.


And he didn't quite walk away:-


He suffered multiple fractures, breaking his sternum, femur, shattering a vertebra in his spine and crushing his ankles. He spent 18 months recovering from his injuries.

He made a short lived come back in 2005, retiring for good in 2006.

A marine drop pod is probably decelerating at about 15-20g.

Shooting at a drop pod - they're small targets, travelling rapidly, so tracking is going to be diffcult at best unless you're right underneath it, when they'll gain extra protection from the plasma wake generated by their entry, and the thickness of the heat shield itself.

Add in that there's probably at least a couple of bombardment cannon rounds dropping as well, and it's a tricky prospect.

Meriwether
21-08-2008, 16:56
I should have been more specific. I think the drop pod can safely change it's speed more quickly than some others seem to think. You die in a car crash because your body is crushed by the crumpling car, or because your body bounces around inside the car causing your bones to break and your organs to decelerate too rapidly and go plewey.

If the armour can be locked down, and locked into a frame within the pod, then the the crumpling element and 'bouncing body' element of the impact are greatly minimised. A normal human could survive a much higher speed collision if there was no chance of their vehicle crumpling or their body bouncing around inside it. A marine could survive a much higher collision again.

This is for the most part untrue. A 200-kg Space Marine would need nine of my cars' weight to stop, regardless if the stopping was done by a wall, some kind of harness, or what-have-you. Even if all of your motion was stopped by some kind of uber-harness, it would still crush you dead.

Meri

MajorWesJanson
21-08-2008, 17:23
Given that humanity has mastered artificial gravity, drop pods likely have some for too. It's just that the g-forces are so high that they are felt even over the dampening.

Las AA might work, but It's probably an issue of power. Apparently Las weapons have a range, probably due to atmospherics and diffusion, while heavier things like defense lasers and lance arrays have much longer range but are far larger. The big stuff is to slow to hit them, and the small fast stuff lacks range to hit for more than the final moments. Drop pods also seem to have ceramite armor, which negates heat and melta, and likely reduces the effectiveness of las weapons too.

LostTemplar
21-08-2008, 18:18
In Storm of iron Drop Pods are shot into the ground with a number of blanks and / or Drop Pods without infantry in them, but with weaponery instead.

Meriwether
21-08-2008, 19:18
Like I said, guys, the answer to the question is "Science Fiction". Intertial dampeners, antigravity harnesses, force fields, what-have-you. There is no scientific answer to the question, because scientifically it isn't possible.

Meri

PondaNagura
21-08-2008, 20:16
no no, 40k is fanciful pseudo-sci-fi. science fiction, in the classical sense actual goes about trying to explain in logic how things can work.

besides marines are the best of the best, with the best of the best equipment and heightened reflexes. drop pods would probably have a bottom armor score of like 14 for re-entry purposes. as the pods fall a marines armor may lock into the initial part of the journey down through the atmosphere (assuming the planet has one), but releases when the sonar-like counters built into the pods machine spirit read the altitude/speed. then as the pod reaches its final deceleration and right before it slams into the ground and the firing pins blow the doors out, the marines using their peaked training and coordinated super-human reflexes, simply jump.

Meriwether
21-08-2008, 20:20
no no, 40k is fanciful pseudo-sci-fi. science fiction, in the classical sense actual goes about trying to explain in logic how things can work.

Right, right. More on the FM side of the AM/FM sci-fi scale. (Don't get the reference? Google the 'Turkey City Lexicon').

Meri

Slaaneshi Slave
21-08-2008, 20:32
then as the pod reaches its final deceleration and right before it slams into the ground and the firing pins blow the doors out, the marines using their peaked training and coordinated super-human reflexes, simply jump.

So they jump? They are travelling south at about 500 metres per second (what do you think the engine on the top is for? Increase the speed to avoid getting lasered., and they jump? The jump will be what? 10 metres per second? Still means they hit the deck doing 490 metres per second. Not a great deal of difference.

Meriwether
21-08-2008, 20:38
Yeah, Mythbusters busted that one in the 'falling elevator' episode. Jumping will not help you.

A tuck-and-roll at speeds in excess of 300 mph isn't going to help!

Meri

Meri

Master Stark
22-08-2008, 06:22
This is for the most part untrue. A 200-kg Space Marine would need nine of my cars' weight to stop, regardless if the stopping was done by a wall, some kind of harness, or what-have-you. Even if all of your motion was stopped by some kind of uber-harness, it would still crush you dead.

Meri

But there is no impact. All parts of the marine are already clamped in place. The pod isn't going to crush him, and he isn't going to impact any parts of the pod. Think about it this way: Drop an egg from a balcony, and it breaks. Put an egg inside an airtight inch thick skin of artificial diamond, and you could fire it out of a cannon without the egg breaking.

Slaaneshi Slave
22-08-2008, 07:03
The skin wouldn't crack, but there would be no distinction between the white and the yoke anymore. The insides are liquified.

Master Stark
22-08-2008, 07:29
The skin wouldn't crack, but there would be no distinction between the white and the yoke anymore. The insides are liquified.

Very true. That is the only thing that would really worry Marines in a drop pod: how will their internal organs handle the deceleration?

We can't really know for sure, but I'm willing to bet that going from 100kph to rest in five metres wouldn't be too much of a problem. Which could mean they go from 400kph to rest in 20 metres.

Slaaneshi Slave
22-08-2008, 09:18
400kph is very slow though. Sure, I can't run that fast, but a bullet travels at nearly 1kps. :p

Master Stark
22-08-2008, 09:21
400kph is very slow though. Sure, I can't run that fast, but a bullet travels at nearly 1kps. :p

Yeah, but if you allow for 40 metres to decelerate, you suddenly get up to 800 kph!

Marsekay
22-08-2008, 13:40
I'm sure drop pods are FIRED at the planet, they dont just fall off the "mother" ship do they and find their way nicely towards the planet, im sure they are propelled.

imperial_scholar
22-08-2008, 14:25
400kph is very slow though. Sure, I can't run that fast, but a bullet travels at nearly 1kps. :p

1kps is 3600 KM/h (kph).
Seriously... my grandma runs faster than that :P

theunwantedbeing
22-08-2008, 14:41
If a drop pod hits the ground at 1kp/s and comes to a full stop within say..1m
The marines inside the pod will have just suffered a hundred thousand g .

If it hits at 400kph and stops in the same 1m of space the marines inside have only suffered 1260g, which is noticably less damage.

Come to rest in 10m and at 1kps you'll only suffer a mere 3670g.
If your going 400km/h then you've only suffered a mere 126g.

If a space marine can survive 3x the g of a human, then he can survive hitting the ground at 400km/h so long as he comes to rest after 10m.

So....not all too improbabale.
Assuming the speeds arent too high and the stopping distance isnt rediculously small.

Bloodknight
22-08-2008, 14:52
After reading the thread and thinking about it, Drop Pods must be fuelled by large doses of Handwavium, including the Marines.

Meriwether
22-08-2008, 16:53
But there is no impact. All parts of the marine are already clamped in place. The pod isn't going to crush him, and he isn't going to impact any parts of the pod. Think about it this way: Drop an egg from a balcony, and it breaks. Put an egg inside an airtight inch thick skin of artificial diamond, and you could fire it out of a cannon without the egg breaking.

All you have demonstrated here is a lack of understanding of basic physics.

*Something* _must_ bring the Space Marine (or egg) to rest. The **ONLY** way to reduce the force bringing Brother Moronicus to rest is to extend the _time_ of the impact -- and that means braking over more than 15 meters. Surrounding him in uber-diamond from the Dark Age of Technology simply means that he's crushed against the front edge of the diamond with a force of 27,000 lbs, instead of against the ground.

Brother Eggicus, coming in at a tremendous 100 g (not counting his power armor) would experience 1/200th of the force of the Brother Moronicus -- so a mere 135 lbs of force to bring him to rest. I've yet to see an egg that can withstand 135 lbs of force...

And remember, this is with the stupendously *slow* speed of 300 mph, which would be rather trivially easy to shoot down, and a stopping distance of 15 meters.

These numbers are inversely proportional to the stopping distance, so if you wanted to give them 150 meters in which to brake, the forces become 2700 lbs on Brother Moronicus and 13.5 lbs on Brother Eggicus... They're both probably still dead. (Keep in mind that Moronicus' power armor probably weight more than he does, so we're underestimating the stopping forces by at least half).

...but these numbers are also proportional to the *square* of the starting velocity, so if you wanted to double the speed (to a respectable but still reasonably easy to shoot down 600 mph), you would *quadruple* the force needed to stop our Brothers in the Emperor's Service.

Note, again, that it *doesn't matter* what provides this stopping force. It could be a diamond shell, some kind of uber-harness, an anti-grav rockety thing, or the ground. What is providing the impulse is _irrelevant_ to the size of the force needed to bring an object to rest from speed V in time T.


After reading the thread and thinking about it, Drop Pods must be fuelled by large doses of Handwavium, including the Marines.

LOL. Meri likes.

Meri

heretics bane
22-08-2008, 17:56
If a drop pod hits the ground at 1kp/s and comes to a full stop within say..1m
The marines inside the pod will have just suffered a hundred thousand g .

If it hits at 400kph and stops in the same 1m of space the marines inside have only suffered 1260g, which is noticably less damage.

Come to rest in 10m and at 1kps you'll only suffer a mere 3670g.
If your going 400km/h then you've only suffered a mere 126g.

If a space marine can survive 3x the g of a human, then he can survive hitting the ground at 400km/h so long as he comes to rest after 10m.

So....not all too improbabale.
Assuming the speeds arent too high and the stopping distance isnt rediculously small.

What about impact absorbtion that could be built into the pods and maybe environmental factors? like if it went through a roof first?

But in the new HH series when there doing a drop pod assult dosnt Loken feel like his fused rips will break under the strain of the descent?

Burnthem
22-08-2008, 18:03
I know it's hardly the best source of solid Fluff, but the original Dawn Of War intro video showed Drop Pods decelerating quite a bit before hitting the ground, not as dramatic as smashing down i admit, and also a bit risky, but remember that a drop would be accompanied by loads of decoy Drop Pods, huge amounts of electronic warfare stuff etc etc, so the risks of getting shot down when decelerating may not be all some people are making them out to be.

A good example would be Heinlens' book 'Starship Troopers', there is an excellent description of a Drop Pod Assualt in it, with the pods being covered with vast amounts of countermeasures, chaff, jammers, decoys, you name it.

Master Stark
22-08-2008, 20:28
Note, again, that it *doesn't matter* what provides this stopping force.

Of course it does.

Put a watermelon in the back of your boot, near to the rear of the car. Drive at 100 kph. Slam on the brakes. What happens to the watermelon? It shoots forward and shatter against the inside of the boot.

Do the same thing, but with the watermelon already hard up against the back wall of the boot. What happens? Nothing. The watermelon is already touching the back wall of the boot, therefore it has more time to stop.

Go back to the egg scenario. That egg, fired out of a cannon, isn't going to break. It is going to be able to withstand much greater impact than the unprotected egg, because the skin around it is absorbing the blow and the egg inside cannot move around. The inside of the armoured skin is still providing a stopping force to the egg, but not breaking it.

Same with humans and marines inside drop pods. If they are strapped into their power armour (which would actually provide part of the harness) then they will not be bouncing around inside the drop pod. Their bones will not be breaking, because there will be no uneven pressure. The only concern would be the movement of internal organs.

Keichi246
22-08-2008, 21:11
Same with humans and marines inside drop pods. If they are strapped into their power armour (which would actually provide part of the harness) then they will not be bouncing around inside the drop pod. Their bones will not be breaking, because there will be no uneven pressure. The only concern would be the movement of internal organs.

Not quite right - but close...

The problem is - at the forces involved - EVERYTHING in the human body would be breaking...

Every cell in your body is decelerating. Skin - hair, bones, all your juicy organs, etc...

Most of the human body is water in little baggies - aka cells. At the level of deceleration we are talking about - those cells WILL rip open - causing massive cellular damage.

Sure - the pod and armor locked in it will survive. But the Marine inside will be dead because of massive trauma.

Think of it this way. What is a concussion? It is tissue damage caused by the impact when the brain hits the inside of the skull at high velocity. It is generally caused by a sudden acceleration or decelleration. That's because your brain isn't really ATTACHED to the inside of your skull very well.

Now think of EVERY organ in your body dropping downward at the speeds we are talking about. (or - more specifically - the skeletal system of your body being driven upward against the momentum of your relatively soft 80% water filled flesh) Your brain concusses against the bottom of your skull. Sadly - there *is* no bone underneath your rib cage - so the only thing stopping that movement would be the tensile strength of human flesh...

Yep - I repeat - Drop pods only work because GW says they do...
Everything argument otherwise is using "handwavium" to ignore the physics they don't like...

Anodai
22-08-2008, 21:27
Yep - I repeat - Drop pods only work because GW says they do...
Everything argument otherwise is using "handwavium" to ignore the physics they don't like...

Not that there is anything wrong with that of course...

g0ddy
22-08-2008, 21:37
....
Some of the drop pods may also contain muntions and other supplies - the marines themselves and their pod will presumably have some ammunition, enough to last an extended firefight allowing them to secure a beachhead, but space will be limited, and they'd need resupply fairly shortly after.
.......



Ammunition? who needs that... I thought they just walked around and popped peoples heads with their hands....

Seriously though.. the imperial armour books usually have some pretty good information...

In IA3 Taros Campaign they detail the assault on a obital laser silo....

If I recall correctly.. either the cruiser makes a quick pass over the planet or they dispatch a smaller ship. Anyway - they briefly bombard the site, then dispatcha thunderhawk - who (while staying out of range of the AA guns at the silo site) drops off some assault marines.. who then complete the journey down to the surface and take out the AA... then they come down and land the rest of the marines via a series of other thunderhawks.

Later on in the book they describe a drop pod assault on the governors palace... (surprise operation in the "heart" of enemy territory)
Deathwinds are sent down first to suppress any troops in the immediate area... then a number of pods go down to drop 30 or so marines off. After completing the mission a short while later they are picked up via thunderhawk.

Both of these operations for obvious reasons rely heavily on surprise and (forgive me...) "shock and awe". The latter of the two has a very strict time table - to get the marines back out before reinforcements arrive.

----

Earlier on someone mentioned something about stasis pods... Ive heard of something similar in use in regards to 'infiltrating' an Eversor Assassin onto a planet. However the stasis chamber was used throughout the space-journey, mostly to protect the crew of the ship from the 'pre-programed' psychotic killer that is... an Eversor Assassin.

---- (EDIT)

One more note... I seem to recall the number - 3 minutes - as the time it takes a drop pod to go from entering the atmosphere to landing 'safely' on the ground. Anyone care to calculate the required velocity for your average planetoid?

(EDIT : 120 km over 3 minutes? 2400 km/h just barely under mach two - depending on atmosphere... (1100 feet per second))

These operations would be very carefully timed - first pods landing seconds after the last shells of the barrage land kind of thing...


~zilla

Meriwether
23-08-2008, 13:38
Of course it does.

Put a watermelon in the back of your boot, near to the rear of the car. Drive at 100 kph. Slam on the brakes. What happens to the watermelon? It shoots forward and shatter against the inside of the boot.

Do the same thing, but with the watermelon already hard up against the back wall of the boot. What happens? Nothing. The watermelon is already touching the back wall of the boot, therefore it has more time to stop.

That is because in the second scenario the stopping time for the watermelon is longer than in the first instance. (The stopping time for your car is the same, but the stopping time for the *watermelon* is different. In the second case the time of acceleration for the car and the watermelon are the same. In the first case the car is undergoing negative acceleration while the watermelon is rolling forward in the trunk/boot... the watermelon then abruptly stops when it hits the front of the trunk/boot. Note that I am ignoring bouncing in this example -- any bouncing will increase the overall impulse).

The calculations that I performed were _assuming a situation similar to your second, friendlier-to-the-cargo example_. If Brothers Moronicus, Eggicus, and WatermeLionelelJohnson weren't strapped in nice and tight, their stopping time would be significantly decreased, and the force on them therefore significantly increased.

...and your egg-in-a-cannon example is demonstrably false, and is demonstrated to be false on a yearly basis in many physics classes around the globe, including mine. I do a lab every year where my students must build an egg launcher, and we don't get anywhere close to something approaching a 'cannon'... and yet eggs still break. A lot of them.

The trick in that lab is to extend the 'launch time' as much as possible so as to minimize the launching force. Same concept.

Impulse = Change in Momentum = Force x Time

If you wish to provide a certain Impulse (like, say, stopping a Space Marine or launching an egg), you must use the appropriate combination of force and time. If time shortens, force goes up. If time lengthens, force goes down.

Dash board foam, for example, lengthens the time of a collision with your head from around 1/100th of a second to 1/5th of a second -- 20 times the time, so 1/20th of the force.

Trust me on this one, man. Unless you want to call into question the validity of Newtonian physics, this simply isn't up to debate. The equations I performed were for the *most favorable conditions*, and the Space Marine and egg would both be broken.

Meri

Burnthem
23-08-2008, 13:48
To be honest i think you're all approaching this problem from the wrong end, instead of trying to justify Marines hitting the ground at stupid speeds you need to reconsider how a Drop Pod actually lands. It's highly possible that the mental image that we have all had for years of a Pod steaking through the atmosphere and then smashing to earth is simply wrong.

Again, look at the Dawn Of War intro video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFkFo5SBx-g this shows an entirely plausible landing by Drop Pods at sensible speeds, add in the regularly mentioned 'softening up' of the landing area by orbital bombardment/Deathwind pods etc etc and you have a good explanation, instead of trying to compare watermelons in cars to fictional soldiers landing from space.

Slaaneshi Slave
23-08-2008, 13:52
The only problem with them landing nice and slowly though is that a single Guardsmen with a Lascannon can take down entire Marine chapters.

Meriwether
23-08-2008, 14:02
Right. My point from the beginning is that the statement that 'drop pods cannot be intercepted because of their speed' is ridiculous.

If you have to slow down enough for the guys inside to survive (not only survive, but emerge shooting!), you're going to open yourself up to enemy fire. Like a single guardsman --er, heathen cultist-- with a lascannon killing a tactical squad by himself.

So yeah, there are lots of ways to minimize casualties -- dummy pods, orbital bombardment immediately before drop, advance teams of scouts taking out flak guns, etc, etc, etc. Sheer speed ain't one of them. They'd go plewey.

Meri

Burnthem
23-08-2008, 14:18
So yeah, there are lots of ways to minimize casualties -- dummy pods, orbital bombardment immediately before drop, advance teams of scouts taking out flak guns, etc, etc, etc. Sheer speed ain't one of them. They'd go plewey.

Meri

QFT, Marines aren't stupid, they won't drop in front of an enemy AA detachment.

ChaosBeast
23-08-2008, 14:38
isnt everyone forgetting the fact that different planets have different enviroments, i.e. gravity, the density and make up of the atmosphere, the height of the atmosphere etc. surely that will effect any calculations people perform.

ive always found it ridiculous how men can fight on a completely alien world without any adjustment time

Meriwether
23-08-2008, 14:45
Actually, I've distilled it down to the most basic physics. My calculations involve nothing more than the speed of the pod, the desired stopping distance, and the mass of the passengers. That's it. All of those other variables are moot.

Meri

heretics bane
23-08-2008, 15:19
Well would the marine assult not first have plenty of ship fire to take out the AA batteries and any other threats to the incoming pods, and dont they usually have scouts find a safe landing point before setting the locator beacon down for the pods?

Slaaneshi Slave
23-08-2008, 15:41
I'd have thought that if WW1 tought us anything is that you can't take out hardpoints with artillery. In the age of space to ground artillery they will have appropriately hardened bunkers too.

Meriwether
23-08-2008, 17:04
The question there of course would be whether or not defensive armor can keep up with offensive weaponry -- and whether or not any weaponry that could destroy such hardpoints would leave the [insert pretext for ground invasion instead of orbital bombardment here] intact.

Meri

Slaaneshi Slave
23-08-2008, 17:16
I think it is fairly obvious that defensive armour is at least as advanced as offensive weaponry, or there would be no need for ground assaults against these structures.

heretics bane
23-08-2008, 17:31
I'd have thought that if WW1 tought us anything is that you can't take out hardpoints with artillery. In the age of space to ground artillery they will have appropriately hardened bunkers too.

But wasnt the majority of shells fired not even of bunker busting desing? but direct hit from massive laser batteries or precision bombing could knock them out or atleastmake ever one go and hide. I had a pic of how a tactical missle works today, the shear blast of the device and fire ball is enough to kill the people down the tunnel.

As for the pads that pic shows a pretty precise looking landing

Burnthem
23-08-2008, 20:06
But wasnt the majority of shells fired not even of bunker busting desing?

Yep, theres a helluva difference between normal high explosive Artillery rounds and ones designed to penetrate underground bunkers.


but direct hit from massive laser batteries or precision bombing could knock them out or at least make everyone go and hide.

Exactly, having a concentrated Lance Bombardment sweep across your position is definitely going to make you think twice about sitting up on your exposed AA gun.


isnt everyone forgetting the fact that different planets have different enviroments, i.e. gravity, the density and make up of the atmosphere, the height of the atmosphere etc. surely that will effect any calculations people perform.

ive always found it ridiculous how men can fight on a completely alien world without any adjustment time

Dont forget that many, many worlds have been terraformed both prior to and during the age of the Imperium, most worlds that humans would fight on in 40K would probably have once been a human world anyway, due to the imperium currently holding less ground than humanity used to during the DAoT etc etc.

Meriwether
23-08-2008, 20:25
I think it is fairly obvious that defensive armour is at least as advanced as offensive weaponry, or there would be no need for ground assaults against these structures.

I don't think it's as obvious as you think. There are all kinds of reasons why you would not want to destroy a place from orbit with a giant lance battery, and instead capture it. Especially when human life is so darn _cheap_.

It's not a matter of 'we can't do it', it's a matter of 'we'd rather take it relatively intact'. Otherwise, there would be *no* ground conflict, and just massive orbital barrages and Exterminatus.

Meri

SwordJon
24-08-2008, 06:15
The most likely, simple and effective counter measure to getting all your marines shot our of the sky would be to send out ten times as many drop pods as you have actual marine units landing in the field. That way your opponent won't be able to take out a squad of marines or a dreadnought every time they manage a lucky hit.

Plus, they wouldn't have to activate the retro's on some the un-used pods, they can just shoot them at the battlefield and hope they hit something useful. However, they would still want to fire the retros on many of the un-manned pods in order to continue the illusion that every pod is a potential target for the enemy.

Whether or not they've ever done this in the fluff, though, is beyond me.

The extra distraction would also mean that the retros on the manned pods would be safe (as far as enemy AA is concerned) to fire at a high enough altitude, giving enough time to slow the pod so that the occupants won't be crushed by the impact; the enemy AA would not be able to react fast enough to the retros firing (which could very well be outside of their ability to retaliate with AA fire at that point) to specifically target those manned pods, and that's even assuming he would know what to look for. Plus, having extra unmanned pods firing their retros would mean it would be almost impossible for an enemy to purposely shoot down a manned pod.

They'd have no way of knowing which was which, and the psychological effect of having so many (potential) enemy marines dropping right down on top of you would be daunting, to say the least. The enemy would think there are ten times as many marines as their really would, causing them to overreact, which can work to the marines advantage.

zeep
24-08-2008, 09:04
The most likely, simple and effective counter measure to getting all your marines shot our of the sky would be to send out ten times as many drop pods as you have actual marine units landing in the field. That way your opponent won't be able to take out a squad of marines or a dreadnought every time they manage a lucky hit.



Bringing up the even more obvious response of adding more and better ranged ground to LEO defenses. Of course the defensive lasers fire at the speed of light, and the drop pods move at a decidedly slower pace. All in all I've always considered the idea of "air-mobile insertions" and effective aircraft as completely implausible given light speed Los weapons. Hell, the heat sink alone that an ocean would provide compared to some small "emperor class"...

Master Stark
24-08-2008, 09:09
That is because in the second scenario the stopping time for the watermelon is longer than in the first instance. (The stopping time for your car is the same, but the stopping time for the *watermelon* is different.

Now replace watermelon with marine, and car with drop pod.

A marine strapped into a drop pod can withstand any amount of force that does not cause the individual cells of his body to rupture, or cause the drop pod to be crushed, or cause signficant damage to his internal organs. This makes him exponentially more durable than a human in a car

That force could, IMO see them slow safely from 1000kph to rest in 50m. To be honest, I wouldn't consider it unfeasable for them to be able to withstand forces even stronger than that.

Master Stark
24-08-2008, 09:16
I'd have thought that if WW1 tought us anything is that you can't take out hardpoints with artillery. In the age of space to ground artillery they will have appropriately hardened bunkers too.

Yes and no, I guess. If we are talking astartes battle barge bombardment cannon, then unless your bunker is buried at the centre of the planet, it's getting blowed up. And if the planet killer happens to turn up, then you're in a world of hurt.

But a combination of defensive structures and void shields would be enough to render most orbital bombardments rather ineffective, I imagine.

The real question is, could a drop pod pass through a void shield?

Slaaneshi Slave
24-08-2008, 10:23
A Space Marine is only human. He toughened bones and all that good stuff, but all his internal organs are still as squishy as yours are.

Master Stark
24-08-2008, 11:37
A Space Marine is only human. He toughened bones and all that good stuff, but all his internal organs are still as squishy as yours are.

Never said they werent.

What I said was, a marine in a pod could safely be exposed to forces several orders of magnitude greater than a human in a car could endure. How much gravitational force would be required to actually crush a cell under it's own weight? How rapid a descent would it take to dislodge and damage internal organs?

Slaaneshi Slave
24-08-2008, 12:04
You don't need to crush cells, you just need for his body to keep moving but his brain, stomach, liver, kidneys and all the good parts to keep moving.

Master Stark
24-08-2008, 12:09
You don't need to crush cells, you just need for his body to keep moving but his brain, stomach, liver, kidneys and all the good parts to keep moving.

:eyebrows:

Did you mean 'keep still'?

Anyway, I ask again: how rapid a descent would it take to dislodge and damage internal organs? Could those forces be counteracted to some extent by artificial gravity inside the pod?

Deus
24-08-2008, 12:20
Say they make stopping distance 200m with a velocity of 1234 km/h = 343m/s (Speed of sound on earth atleast)

A human can survive: (variable, but a good benchmark)
7g for about a min
14 g for a few seconds
A marine could withstand a higher g (assumption)
in the +Gz axis (ie, accelerating up)


Some basic physics, using earth as a model:
Deceleration over 200m from 343m/s: 294.1225 m/s^2 = 31 g (30 + 1 for earth) which takes 2.81 secs
Deceleration over 300m from 343m/s: 196.0816 m/s^2 = 21 g (20 + 1 for earth) which takes 4.007 secs

Depending on what a marine can withstand and the need to shorter stopping distances it is not unreasonable for a 300m stopping distance or even 200 if they can withstand 31 g's for 3 secs.

A list of values:

Distance, g's, time
100, 61, 1.59
200, 31, 2.82
300, 21, 4.01
400, 16, 5.19
500, 13, 6.37

If any one wants to shoot me some physical constraints i can do the calcs.

So all in all a drop pod going super sonic and slamming the brakes at 200m from the earth could very well be survivable for the marines, but whether their technology is up to it is another thing.

Burnthem
24-08-2008, 13:27
Again, everyone is approachig this from the wrong end, instead of trying to justify Marines surviving incredible G forces and hitting the ground at stupid speeds, adjust the speed of the Drop Pod itself to a more survivable velocity.

Add in all of the aforementioned things such as decoy pods, Deathwinds, prior bombardment, Scouts on the ground, Assualt Marines dropping from Thunderhawks etc etc and you have a perfectly good explanation. If the Marines were going to take heavy casualties from enemy AA fire they wouldn't use Drop Pods, simple as that.

Deus
24-08-2008, 13:58
So if we have a speed of 250m/s = 900 km/h then 500 m stopping distance = 8.73 seconds with 7.38 G's.

Or at a speed of 139m/s = 500 km/h, 100m stopping distance = 3.93 seconds = 10.86 G's OR 200m stopping distance = 6.95 seconds = 5.93 G's.

Or for something a bit more technologically sound (ie, deceleration speeds for the retro's)

400m stopping distance, 12.8 seconds, 3.46 G's, easily survivable by a regular human.

In any case drop pods are quite sound from a physical perspective.

And just for clarity, all these calculations are based on a FEATHER landing that is, if the retros fired for any longer they would start to go up :P

Slaaneshi Slave
24-08-2008, 14:20
The bit which would kill them is hitting the floor WITHOUT a feather landing.

Templar Ben
24-08-2008, 14:52
If the Marines were going to take heavy casualties from enemy AA fire they wouldn't use Drop Pods, simple as that.

That would explain the tanks. If you know you can't just drop on the enemy then you use Land Raiders and Predators.

heretics bane
24-08-2008, 15:13
As for armour being as effective as weapons, plasma weapons prettymuch burn through everything along with melta and thats ground troop weapons.

Imagine massive ordance weapons melta style now those would be able to blow fortifictaions and bunkers to peices as thats what there disigned to do.

And i was under the impression that marines where pretty damn hard in a possible G reducing drop pods along with their power armour which would keep there body in a protective atmosphere.

How much pressure is applied when lets say a rocket was to hit a marine in the chest? a few thousand pounds of pressure? and most marines can pretty much get back up after a hit like that(providing its not a krak missile) so i wouldthink they could survive a few moments of extreme G forces.

Meriwether
24-08-2008, 15:49
Anyway, I ask again: how rapid a descent would it take to dislodge and damage internal organs? Could those forces be counteracted to some extent by artificial gravity inside the pod?

Speed of descent is irrelevant. Only the acceleration at the beginning and the end matter.


Again, everyone is approachig this from the wrong end, instead of trying to justify Marines surviving incredible G forces and hitting the ground at stupid speeds, adjust the speed of the Drop Pod itself to a more survivable velocity.

...and I already mentioned in response to this that the 300 mph figure I used would be _trivally easy_ to shoot down... So making it slower makes it even easier to shoot down.

Can you envision a scenario where a marine could survive a drop pod landing? Absolutely. But it doesn't jive with the fluff of speed = uninterceptibility.

Thus, the answer to the OP's question is "science fiction".


Add in all of the aforementioned things such as decoy pods, Deathwinds, prior bombardment, Scouts on the ground, Assualt Marines dropping from Thunderhawks etc etc and you have a perfectly good explanation. If the Marines were going to take heavy casualties from enemy AA fire they wouldn't use Drop Pods, simple as that.

True that.

Meri

Kloud13
24-08-2008, 19:05
Forgive me, I skipped a few pages (all of them really except for the first)

But, I just about Laughed Out Loud when someone mentioned working out Ramming if the Drop Pod landed on a tank.

But I think that would explain alot. I think, that when ramming happens, Both the vehicle being rammed, and the Ramming Vehicle, take a hit. So, The Side Armour on a Drop Pod is AV 12, But I think the Bottom Armour Must be AV 1200. And the Bottom armour has the same rule as the Thunderhawk in regards to Ceramite Plating, So no Melta Bonus.

So That Bottom Armour is Made to Resist Re-entry into an Atmosphere at the worst possible angle, and then Resist Impacting Into Hard Ground. Shoot at it all you Want, Hit it all you want, But There isn't a single weapon that's even going to put a scratch into that Armour. That's why they arn't shot down.

imperial_scholar
24-08-2008, 19:29
The original Post:

I was reading about the new Drop Pods coming. I was thinking since the DP coming shooting down to the planet from orbit so fast that nobody and track them and shoot them, that when they hit the planet, why dosn't it go like miles are way deep inside the earth? (by earth I mean the ground not the planet)

If it dosn't and it rests as it does as you see on the table top, that means it slows down so it can land correctly so the SM or what ever can come out. So if it slows down then it should be able to be shot at fluff wise, I don't mean game wise.

So either way the DP should go plewey one way or the other, and using Drop Pods is not really a good way of getting down.

Can someone give me some info on how Drop Pods work Properly?



...and I already mentioned in response to this that the 300 mph figure I used would be _trivally easy_ to shoot down... So making it slower makes it even easier to shoot down.

Can you envision a scenario where a marine could survive a drop pod landing? Absolutely. But it doesn't jive with the fluff of speed = uninterceptibility.

Thus, the answer to the OP's question is "science fiction".

I think the problem is we've deviated from the original post. I think we're trying to figure out how fast the pod goes to determine if it would slam through/into the ground and stop eventually much like a meteor would. Although, I love seeing the calculations of numbers and G forces and whatever... I think that you saying it is trivial to shoot down a pod is handwavium. I mean you aren't backing it up with any facts. I know its hard to produce facts in the 40k universe so we can only assume.

My arguement that it would be hard to shoot down a pod is (and others please feel free to shoot down or add too my arguements)
1) Drop pods wouldn't be intercepted by air crafts because it would involve knowning exactly where the pod is as soon as it enters the atmosphere. They would have to be already airborne and in the area to chase a pod down
2) To shoot down the pod the ground forces would need to:
a) Not caught off guard
b) Know where in the sky they are coming from
c) Have weapons that have the rate of fire and range to shoot down (The longer the range the more chances they have to shoot them down) and the training and/or the technology to take one down
d) Have weapons that can penetrate their armour at that rate of fire.
3) The race their engaging would even care about Anti-aircraft weapons.

So... I'm assuming that Meriwether has experience shooting down things out of the air that he's not letting us in on... I don't see why its so easy to shoot something moving so fast through the air from the ground.

imperial_scholar
24-08-2008, 19:35
In addition.. the range of most of these weapons.... in game terms... would most likely only get one or 2 chances to get even a glancing hit. Unless Bob has a crack shot with the missile launcher I still don't see how shooting down a pod is 'easy'

Iuris
24-08-2008, 20:02
I don't see why its so easy to shoot something moving so fast through the air from the ground.

In our time, it would be. Something moving in a straight trajectory (apart from breaking thrusters, the drop pods don't seem to be able to maneuver much), that is practically glowing due to the heat of atmospheric reentry, is an easy target. All you'd need would be a nice IR guidance system with a computer capable of calculating the required amount it needs to lead the target by.

I'll say one thing though: I spent days reading a very nice site pointing out things about what REAL space warfare would be like... It was very fascinating... but it also made it clear that it would include none of the fun elements we do so like...

Just try this: how thick is the atmosphere? And how much time would it take to pass that distance?

Burnthem
24-08-2008, 20:20
I'll say one thing though: I spent days reading a very nice site pointing out things about what REAL space warfare would be like... It was very fascinating... but it also made it clear that it would include none of the fun elements we do so like...

I actually started a thread about the possibilities of space warfare on here a few months ago, we did have a few interesting discussions - http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120040&highlight=space+warfare

Slaaneshi Slave
24-08-2008, 21:20
In addition.. the range of most of these weapons.... in game terms... would most likely only get one or 2 chances to get even a glancing hit. Unless Bob has a crack shot with the missile launcher I still don't see how shooting down a pod is 'easy'

You don't need to penetrate it, you simply need to knock it off balance. If you knock it and it tilts even slightly, either it will burn up in the atmosphere, or it will slam into the ground without slowing down at all, more than likely sideways or upside down (those thrusters which were supposed to slow it down are now driving it towards the ground).

Mag-El
24-08-2008, 22:04
Simply knock it of balance? The air itself will stabilize the pod. I think that the force to knock it off balance will actually destroy the pod before making it unbalanced. Since I don´t know the material and construction I can´t be sure, actually even if I did I wouldn´t be sure.

//Magnus

PondaNagura
24-08-2008, 22:12
i know this doesn't happen, but you could put the occupants of the pod in stasis, that would negate any effects of physics on them, and only apply to the pod itself.

Slaaneshi Slave
24-08-2008, 22:44
If you knock it off balance that big engine on top, coupled with the added extra friction from having more surface area exposed to the bottom will cause it to come down at an unpredicable angle. If it hits the floor at a bad angle? What happens when a car barrel rolls? Not try that with a drop pod doing 10x the speed.

SwordJon
25-08-2008, 00:09
Bringing up the even more obvious response of adding more and better ranged ground to LEO defenses. Of course the defensive lasers fire at the speed of light, and the drop pods move at a decidedly slower pace. All in all I've always considered the idea of "air-mobile insertions" and effective aircraft as completely implausible given light speed Los weapons. Hell, the heat sink alone that an ocean would provide compared to some small "emperor class"...

How would this even be an option? The defender doesn't react to the attacker like this. The Marines are going to role up in their ships, analyze the enemies defenses, and strike with the appropriate forces; the enemy isn't going to be able to say to themselves:

"Oh we're vs Space Marines today guys, so replace those hydras with laser silos, and let's put more AA up also, because we know they're going to use WAY more pods than we have the ability to stop otherwise! Last time we went up against marines we got caught unaware but now we're totally ready!"

In addition to that, the pods don't work by going faster than lasers, they work by outwitting the tracking systems of those defense systems (which in many cases are manned by humans as opposed to using computers, which in many cases wouldn't be too much more effective, I'd wager, since it's essentially a servitor usually).

Meriwether
25-08-2008, 00:18
I think that you saying it is trivial to shoot down a pod is handwavium. I mean you aren't backing it up with any facts. I know its hard to produce facts in the 40k universe so we can only assume.

Do you have any idea how flak batteries work? 'Cause if you do, you'd see that all we need to do is put stuff in the way that the drop pods can run in to, and they'll go plewey.


2) To shoot down the pod the ground forces would need to:
a) Not caught off guard

Obviously, units that are not trying to shoot down a drop pod (due to surprise or whatnot) would not be very successful in shooting down a drop pod.


b) Know where in the sky they are coming from
c) Have weapons that have the rate of fire and range to shoot down (The longer the range the more chances they have to shoot them down) and the training and/or the technology to take one down

Thus... 'flak guns'. And 'radar'.


So... I'm assuming that Meriwether has experience shooting down things out of the air that he's not letting us in on... I don't see why its so easy to shoot something moving so fast through the air from the ground.

Fill the air between where it is and where it's trying to get to with high-velocity (or not) flak. It then barrels into that high-velocity (or not) flak and gets torn up.

Do just a teensy, weensy bit of research on how AA fire works.


In our time, it would be. Something moving in a straight trajectory (apart from breaking thrusters, the drop pods don't seem to be able to maneuver much), that is practically glowing due to the heat of atmospheric reentry, is an easy target. All you'd need would be a nice IR guidance system with a computer capable of calculating the required amount it needs to lead the target by.

You wouldn't even need that. With a basic trajectory, you can just shoot like crazy at a spot above the ground where it's going to be.


Just try this: how thick is the atmosphere? And how much time would it take to pass that distance?

Of course that depends on the planet and the speed of descent. The Earth's atmosphere is approximately 100 km thick, so traveling at 300 miles per hour (482 km/hr), it would take a bit over 10 minutes to make the descent.


Simply knock it of balance? The air itself will stabilize the pod.

What gives you the idea that the air will stabilize the pod? If it is aerodynamic in a particular orientation, and is shifted from that orientation, it's in deep, deep dooky.


I think that the force to knock it off balance will actually destroy the pod before making it unbalanced.

Fair enough.

Meri

imperial_scholar
25-08-2008, 03:37
Do you have any idea how flak batteries work? 'Cause if you do, you'd see that all we need to do is put stuff in the way that the drop pods can run in to, and they'll go plewey.
Yes, WW2 flak guns were generally regarded as fairly ineffective. They were only used to increase morale and to have some effect in the long war since it is so hard to replace air plane losses. Flak throws debris into the air for the planes engines to capture into the air intake causing them to crash. In general... to be hit by flak directly was next to impossible.

Since WW2 'flak' has not shot down a plane. Marines also would not drop into the middle of a park full of AA.


Obviously, units that are not trying to shoot down a drop pod (due to surprise or whatnot) would not be very successful in shooting down a drop pod.
Again in part to the use of tactics, the marines would use this to their advantage.


Thus... 'flak guns'. And 'radar'.
Read Imperial Armour 2: Drop pods. Even if you want to get into space warefare... I can assume that maybe some sort of radar stealth technology would be used. Obviously the 40k universe is too gritty for that... but apparently the 40k universe is too gritty for radar that can pick up the profile of a drop pod.


Fill the air between where it is and where it's trying to get to with high-velocity (or not) flak. It then barrels into that high-velocity (or not) flak and gets torn up.
Again... shreds of debris wouldn't cause enough damage to stop the pod from descending. I am of course assuming the drop pods would be sealed and have no air intake valves.


Do just a teensy, weensy bit of research on how AA fire works.
I as well have an understanding how AA fire works. Again, you are not letting me in on why you are so sure. The defenders have a lot against them already.

Check out Imperial Armour 2, under drop pods, there is something even unique to their profile where they are difficult to track and detect. Thus radar would be useless. Defenders would only be able to use their eyes and wouldn't be aware of their arrival. So again.. flak or AA defenses wouldn't be any defense.

P.S.
Quote 6 isn't mine.

pinegulf
25-08-2008, 07:09
Maybe the pods got somesort inertial eliminator? I'd imagine antigrav-able STC would have been able to produce something similiar.

Master Stark
25-08-2008, 07:44
Again, everyone is approachig this from the wrong end, instead of trying to justify Marines surviving incredible G forces and hitting the ground at stupid speeds, adjust the speed of the Drop Pod itself to a more survivable velocity.

GW likes to make abig deal about drop pods going really fast, so I like to play around and see just how fast they may be able to go.


Just try this: how thick is the atmosphere? And how much time would it take to pass that distance?

From wikipedia:

There is no definite boundary between the atmosphere and outer space. It slowly becomes thinner and fades into space. Three quarters of the atmosphere's mass is within 11 km of the planetary surface. An altitude of 120 km marks the boundary where atmospheric effects become noticeable during re-entry. The Kármán line, at 100 km is also frequently regarded as the boundary between atmosphere and outer space.

Travelling at 1234kph it would take about five minutes to get from the outer atmosphere to the ground. Assuming a range of about 1,200 metres for most weapons capable of both targetting and damaging a drop pod, that gives you about four or five seconds of targetting time.


Do you have any idea how flak batteries work? 'Cause if you do, you'd see that all we need to do is put stuff in the way that the drop pods can run in to, and they'll go plewey.

What sort of stuff? With an AV of 12, a direct hit from an assault cannon only has a one in six chance of causing a glancing hit. You'd need a direct hit from an autocannon to even think about damaging it, and you'd wan't something like a lascannon or krak missile to be confident. Throwing up a cloud of shrapnel isn't going to cut the mustard.


What gives you the idea that the air will stabilize the pod? If it is aerodynamic in a particular orientation, and is shifted from that orientation, it's in deep, deep dooky.

With such a basic and important concern, I feel confident in saying that drop pods would have some kind of self righting mechanism.

Slaaneshi Slave
25-08-2008, 07:51
Maybe so, but in the few seconds before they "land"? I doubt it. As to penetrating it... Autocannons, Assault Cannons, Lascannons, they are all game mechanics. A Lascannon would probably be one of the least effective weapons against one, as it will not impact the side, meaning the pod will continue to decent in a straight line, and it will have a hard time burning through the ceramic (or whatever) heat shielding. Something like an Autocannon (or a Flak Cannon) which actually hits the pod will have a greater chance of destroying the pod by making it land off centre, probably crumpling the pod and everybody in it. Slam a tin of beans into the table end first, not a lot happens, do the same on the edge and it dents. Add a lot more momentum to that and you get flattened marines.

DarknessDawns
25-08-2008, 08:21
guys, remember the gravity of any planet except earth has different formulea for their g's

Slaaneshi Slave
25-08-2008, 08:34
It's just stronger or weaker, meaning terminal velocity is slightly faster or slower.

Burnthem
25-08-2008, 10:07
How would this even be an option? The defender doesn't react to the attacker like this. The Marines are going to role up in their ships, analyze the enemies defenses, and strike with the appropriate forces; the enemy isn't going to be able to say to themselves:

"Oh we're vs Space Marines today guys, so replace those hydras with laser silos, and let's put more AA up also, because we know they're going to use WAY more pods than we have the ability to stop otherwise! Last time we went up against marines we got caught unaware but now we're totally ready!"

QFT, many people seem to be giving the defenders of said planet too much credit, Marines wont assault until it is in thier favour to do so.


Maybe so, but in the few seconds before they "land"? I doubt it. As to penetrating it... Autocannons, Assault Cannons, Lascannons, they are all game mechanics. A Lascannon would probably be one of the least effective weapons against one, as it will not impact the side, meaning the pod will continue to decent in a straight line, and it will have a hard time burning through the ceramic (or whatever) heat shielding.

True, remember that AV 12 on a Drop Pod is only a game mechanic, in the Fluff they probably have extremely strong armour, and the amount of thermal shielding needed by a pod means that it would be practically invulnerable to any sort of thermal/energy weapon. So Melta's, Lasers, and to a certain extent Plasma weapons would be nearly useless as the power they give out is pathetic compared to what a drop Pod has to put up with whilst dropping through the atmosphere.


guys, remember the gravity of any planet except earth has different formulea for their g's

Not really, most planets that the Imperium would fight over would be near Earth-gravity, as most of the enemies of the Imperium live on Terra-compatible worlds. The chances are that if the G was different it would be less, as i imagine fighting occuring more on Moons than on Gas Giants ;)

Slaaneshi Slave
25-08-2008, 10:14
Lascannons, Plasma Cannons and Melta guns all give off considerably more heat than a reentry, in a much shorter amount of time. A melta weapon will slag a tank pretty much instantly, whereas stuff a lot less sturdily build (artificial satalites) crash into the ocean all the time.

Lord Raneus
25-08-2008, 13:13
thanks guys I havn't read any fluff books so never knew.

Shouldn't there be a rule then that if using Drop Pods your enemy gets a free shot at you before being deployed, since this will represent the Pod slowing down and being able to be shot at? Or maybe rolling twice on the DS chart and having to take the worse result, or rerolling sucesfull DS?

Just like to hear your ideas.

No way. Drop Pod armies are already hard enough to play without enemies blowing entire squads out of the air, or totally ruining my ability to drop behind their vehicles, which is part of the whole point.

As far as shooting pods go, when they shed their first metallic layer it fills the air with hundreds of false targets, and is usually preceded by a bombardment that will utterly WTFPWN any AA units in the vicinity.

Burnthem
25-08-2008, 13:38
Lascannons, Plasma Cannons and Melta guns all give off considerably more heat than a reentry, in a much shorter amount of time. A melta weapon will slag a tank pretty much instantly, whereas stuff a lot less sturdily build (artificial satalites) crash into the ocean all the time.

Ok, supposing you're right you still have to find a Melta weapon thats capable of reaching/hitting a far away, fast moving target. And by far away i'm talking many miles.



As far as shooting pods go, when they shed their first metallic layer it fills the air with hundreds of false targets, and is usually preceded by a bombardment that will utterly WTFPWN any AA units in the vicinity.

QFT. oh and WTFPWN is now my phrase for the week, excellent :D

Slaaneshi Slave
25-08-2008, 15:24
Ok, supposing you're right you still have to find a Melta weapon thats capable of reaching/hitting a far away, fast moving target. And by far away i'm talking many miles.

Titan or even Battleship grade weaponry. I never said such would be used in an AA role, merely that it is by far hotter than reentry.

Burnthem
25-08-2008, 19:54
Ok, but it's AA fire that Drop Pods have to worry about, so i'm right that anything shot at a dropping pod is going to have to be insanely accurate and capable of destroying/knocking it off course. Which slims down your options to pretty much nil. Remember that alot (i expect the vast majority) of planets that would be assaulted by Drop Pod would never have even heard of such a thing before, remember how rare Marines actually are.

And even if they know Drop Pods exist, the chances of getting adequate AA coverage over the drop area in time to shoot them down (amidst all the decoys/ECM/prior bombardment etc etc) are close to impossible.

Slaaneshi Slave
25-08-2008, 22:06
Flak AA would do the job. Remember you aren't after destroying the pod through a direct hit, but merely destabalising it.

Meriwether
25-08-2008, 23:27
Yes, WW2 flak guns were generally regarded as fairly ineffective.

Who said anything about WWII flak guns? Modern 'fragmentary interceptors' are significantly more effective than those of 65 years ago.


Marines also would not drop into the middle of a park full of AA.

Again in part to the use of tactics, the marines would use this to their advantage.

*sigh* Have I not repeatedly stated that my comments are directed at the fluff that says 'speed = impossible to intercept'? Have I not acknowledged the examples (AND added my own) of ways to minimize drop pod casualties (scout raides on AA batteries, bombardments, etc...)

You're arguing with me about something we agree on.


Again... shreds of debris wouldn't cause enough damage to stop the pod from descending. I am of course assuming the drop pods would be sealed and have no air intake valves.

You're still stuck in WWII. WWII planes were not moving at Mach 2+ the speed I deem minimal for a 'speed = impossible to intercept' claim). What do we call tiny objects slamming in to an object with a relative velocity of Mach 1 or more? We call them bullets.


Quote 6 isn't mine.

My apologies!


What sort of stuff? With an AV of 12, a direct hit from an assault cannon only has a one in six chance of causing a glancing hit. You'd need a direct hit from an autocannon to even think about damaging it, and you'd wan't something like a lascannon or krak missile to be confident. Throwing up a cloud of shrapnel isn't going to cut the mustard.

You are completely ignoring the fact that the velocity of the drop pod itself contributes to the deadliness of any (non-light) weapon that hits it. Supposing that your typical 40K projectile fires at around the speed of sound, a drop pod traveling at 1234 mph towards the upwards-traveling projectile would approximately *triple* the energy of impact.

Simply using AV and S values simply doesn't cut it here.


Flak AA would do the job. Remember you aren't after destroying the pod through a direct hit, but merely destabalising it.

To remember this, people would have to absorb it into their craniums (crania?) first... :D

Meri

imperial_scholar
25-08-2008, 23:56
Who said anything about WWII flak guns? Modern 'fragmentary interceptors' are significantly more effective than those of 65 years ago.
A quick google search shows that the term fragmentary interceptors is only used by you Meriwether.
Modern AA use radar extensively.


*sigh* Have I not repeatedly stated that my comments are directed at the fluff that says 'speed = impossible to intercept'? Have I not acknowledged the examples (AND added my own) of ways to minimize drop pod casualties (scout raides on AA batteries, bombardments, etc...)

You're arguing with me about something we agree on.
Sorry :D


You're still stuck in WWII. WWII planes were not moving at Mach 2+ the speed I deem minimal for a 'speed = impossible to intercept' claim). What do we call tiny objects slamming in to an object with a relative velocity of Mach 1 or more? We call them bullets.
Okay maybe I am. But I think my point still stands that radar based systems aren't an option since the 40k universe doesn't seem to have good radar and that drop pods aren't detectable by radar.

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 07:05
40k doesn't have good radar? They have better, what do you think all those little scanners you buy for Space Marines are?

NashTrickster
26-08-2008, 08:28
I've been reading only diagonally through this thread, so if I've missed something please bear with me. But I think you've been dismissing a lot of things which are pretty important...

It seems to me that you've launched yourselves into a bunch or "real physics" calculus about G forces while it doesn't really need to apply in the 40k'verse.

We know that a lot of races have anti-grav technology, which boils down to a system which would simply negate G forces.
We know from the fluff that the Imperial Navy use a variant of this technology to create a "fake" gravity in their ships but that this tech isn't perfect and has troubles completely cancelling drastic and unexpected changes in G-forces completely (hence causing everyone on board to feel the "hits").
What we don't know however is by what percentage such a technology "cancels" the G-forces... This "cancellation" can very well be exponantial as far as we know. In which case, the stronger the G-force the higher part of it is cancelled (which would still make the felt G-force increase).
Moreover, in situations were the changes are expected (when the drop-pod's cogitators knows in advance that the retro-jets are going to be fired and expose the drop-pod to a given amount of acceleration), that same technology may be able to cancel even more of it.

Thus, if a SM drop-pod is equipped with such a technology, it might only "brake" for, say, the last 2 seconds before the hit, being submitted to tremendous G-forces, but the inside of it would be subjected to more "reasonnable" ones.

additionally, the drop-pods passengers are very likely attached with a system which would absorb part of the impact (through elasticity, a bit like a car seat-belt, though probably much better) and are probably standing on a "plate" with inertial dampeners (the plate acting like a car's shock-absorbers, only much better ones).

All this could mean than although the drop-pod itself has to withstand thousands of G for a few seconds before the impact, its passengers would only have to survive a lot less actually. These G forces can still be high enough to kill a normal human in most cases, because his bones, and particularly the back-bone, would break for example, but Space Marines have ceramite-augmented bones which can withstand a lot more than ours. Some organs could rupture, but, with the increased clotting factor of their Larraman cells, as long as the organs don't "burst" completely, a SM would be fine, etc...

So, to summarize my point, what we don't know about the limits of Imperial technology and what we know of the Space Marines' enanced physiology can simply render all this calculus I've seen some of you make completely meaningless.

Call this "handwavium" if you like... I call that aknowledging the "fiction" part of sci-fi.

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 09:25
Space Marines could also be teleported into the Drop Pod after it lands, or they could even be cloned the moment it hits the floor, or they could me little mice men which burrow up from under the pod after it hits the floor making it look like they were inside, or, or, or, or, or...

Nothing wrong with trying to explain things, nothing at all. Excepting things on blind faith never led to a deeper understanding of anything.

NashTrickster
26-08-2008, 09:37
Just one thing "Slave": saying that the Imperium has the technology which allows for inertia dampeners on a scale that we can't calculate comes nowhere near those ridiculous examples you give...

And I feel like adding that using such "examples" to dismiss a theory by drowning it in sarcasm will certainly not lead to a deeper understanding.

carl
26-08-2008, 10:30
You know what’s so stupid about this thread?

The lack of actual looking at fluff descriptions of Drop pod's hitting the ground.

When these things hit mud they blast huge craters into the ground that an entire squad of marines plus the drop pod itself can take cover in. When they hit a structure it either collapses outright or takes a lot of damage.

These things aren't hitting the ground at a few hundred KPH here, their hitting at several thousand KPH.

Likewise, though the values given for orbital drop times vary, I’ve heard figures as low as 90 seconds, although I struggle now to remember the exact source, even the higher figures only give it a few minutes, and most of that tends to be spent outside the atmosphere.

Regardless the sheer impact speed, let alone the short drop times means these things aren't coming in slow. They aren't Apollo capsules on re-entry. They're MIRV's on re-entry. And that is why they are hard to hit. If they get low enough your average orbital defence battery isn't going to be able to track fast enough, and it travels so fast through the range of ground based flak that they won't have chance to get a shot off before it hits.

The key point to remember about 40K is that outside of advanced daemon engines/adeptus mechanicus systems all data relay and targeting is done by hand, the computers simply present data to the operators for them to use, and, (presumably), auto-calculate lead for them. That really kills the reaction times of the defences.

Also the very idea that shrapnel or nearby light explosions could hurt a drop pod is ludicrous. They hit the ground with far more force than they do a piece of shrapnel, it's extremely unlikely they'd suffer any real damage from it, even given the better armour penetration properties of shrapnel.

By the same token, sheer speed will keep them upright regardless of what you hit them with. Both the airflow, auto thrusters, and more importantly sheer inertia will make it very hard to tip a drop pod around. pretty much anything capable of doing it would disintegrate the drop pod from sheer concussive force anyway.

Given all that it’s an absolute certainty that Drop Pods have some form of G force reduction, because there’s no other way the occupants would survive, especially if they are SoB Celestians, who also use drop pods.

jfrazell
26-08-2008, 11:18
They don't. They break the laws of physics.

Hrw-Amen
26-08-2008, 11:38
It would appear to me as though any marine commander arriving in orbit would have a fairly good tactical sweep of a potential drop zone done before commiting his units. Therefore I imagine that if he felt it was likely that the enemy he was facing had the technology to shoot down his drop pods near enough to matter he would not use them, but would employ some other method of getting to the fight. Thus making the whole question of can they be shot down irrelevant, unless of course he has a traitor on his bridge which is unlikely.

From what I've read modern imperial drop pods come in pretty fast and make huge holes, so I can only imagine that they have some kind of dampers built into the marines holding compartment or something.

In the HH novels I did wonder what sort of pods they were using. At what stage in the HH did the Dredclaw pods start to malfunction? If they were using them on Istavann or when the ordinary humans took one in Fulgrim then that may explain the apparent softer landings. As I understand it they have larger retro thrusters etc that enable them to land and take off again. Therefore if, like in Fulgrim they were not dropping actually into a battle, I'd of thought that they could just land it gently like a shuttle. Then again if the Dredclaws had all gone off the boil by and been jettisoned that would not apply, unless of course the Alpha Legion having certain chaos tendancies kept them anyway.

CPT Commissar Ginn
26-08-2008, 12:20
I just figure there was some previously unmentioned tech which used anti-grav technology inside to protect the SMs. Ie along Mr Land's creations. And the obviously modeled retros on the model themselves...

Besides that we could just assue "Drop Pods are made on very few forgeworlds in the Imperium as the STCs which contain their data are highly coveted... and much has been lost since the great crusade...bla bla bla.

Or right before they hit the ground the DP actually opens and they jump out. :)

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 13:00
Or right before they hit the ground the DP actually opens and they jump out. :)

And hit the ground unprotected travelling at several hundred metres per second?

Sai-Lauren
26-08-2008, 13:09
isnt everyone forgetting the fact that different planets have different enviroments, i.e. gravity, the density and make up of the atmosphere, the height of the atmosphere etc. surely that will effect any calculations people perform.

I hadn't, but I was waiting until we worked out for 1g worlds before we muddied the waters even more.

Although atmospheric density is proportional to gravity, so a falling pod could possibly travel at the same velocity (terminal velocity is proportional to air resistance isn't it? Can someone run the maths for Venus, Earth and Mars?)

A vacumn world would be a problem though.;)



ive always found it ridiculous how men can fight on a completely alien world without any adjustment time

Ah, but they do - there's usually a journey time to the planet, and presumably they know what the environment is, so they probably gradually change the A-G settings, so that the troops being deployed are used to it by the time they arrive.



Actually, I've distilled it down to the most basic physics. My calculations involve nothing more than the speed of the pod, the desired stopping distance, and the mass of the passengers. That's it. All of those other variables are moot.

All other variables? As I just pointed out, atmospheric density certainly needs to be considered.

And the fact that you presumably want the troops to be able to fight once they deploy is even more important than anything else. ;)



direct hit from massive laser batteries or precision bombing could knock them out or atleastmake ever one go and hide. I had a pic of how a tactical missle works today, the shear blast of the device and fire ball is enough to kill the people down the tunnel.

Sorry, but any vessel trying to hold position to obliterate a defence turret is going to be turned into a shower of debris falling from orbit. Because they're going to need concentrated fire to knock out.



A marine strapped into a drop pod can withstand any amount of force that does not cause the individual cells of his body to rupture, or cause the drop pod to be crushed, or cause signficant damage to his internal organs. This makes him exponentially more durable than a human in a car

That force could, IMO see them slow safely from 1000kph to rest in 50m. To be honest, I wouldn't consider it unfeasable for them to be able to withstand forces even stronger than that.

Oh please - that's about 70-80g. You seriously expect anyone to be in any kind of shape to fight after that kind of deceleration? Or even be alive?

Look up the list of injuries for the indycars guy - he was out of action for over a year.

Pulling those kind of g-forces vertically would push the brain against the bottom of the brain pan, likely rupturing blood vessels and causing subdural haemotomas, and possibly also crushing areas like the cerebellum and severing the spinal cord at the base of the brain.
The lungs and heart would drop straight into the diaphram, and probably rip it - at worst leading to death by suffocation as they're now unable to draw breath properly, but certainly rendering them non-combatant. And that assumes the heart and lungs don't sever their own blood vessels as they shift around. The liver will probably shift as well, which could lead to major internal bleeding.
The blood would rush from their upper body to their legs, with the over pressure rupturing blood vessels, and causing them to pass out - the lack of blood may even cause the heart to fail, if it hasn't already through the sheer forces going through it, and they're in danger of not having any blood flow to the brain.
The spinal column? Forget that - it's pulped (pilots who eject pull about 10g, and they permenantly lose about a quarter inch of height due to crushed vertebrae), and their spinal cord is liquified. Their hips are probably smashed as well, and all the tendons have probably been pulled off the bones around their body as they've shifted around.



The real question is, could a drop pod pass through a void shield?

No. It might be a nice (although short) firework display though.



Some basic physics, using earth as a model:
Deceleration over 200m from 343m/s: 294.1225 m/s^2 = 31 g (30 + 1 for earth) which takes 2.81 secs
Deceleration over 300m from 343m/s: 196.0816 m/s^2 = 21 g (20 + 1 for earth) which takes 4.007 secs

Depending on what a marine can withstand and the need to shorter stopping distances it is not unreasonable for a 300m stopping distance or even 200 if they can withstand 31 g's for 3 secs.

A list of values:

Distance, g's, time
100, 61, 1.59
200, 31, 2.82
300, 21, 4.01
400, 16, 5.19
500, 13, 6.37

This I like - I'd plump for retros firing at a minimum of 500m (and probably starting earlier and then dialling up to full power) - don't forget the plasma wake on entry will help shield the pod (it affects comms, so it would also probably affect energy weapons and maybe also projectiles).

Add in atmospheric disruption (as it approaches the ground, that wake's going to have to go somewhere, buffeting any troops around - possibly also deploying grenades to conceal the pod on landing or disrupt the enemy even more).

Marines are still basically human. Yes, they can withstand higher forces than a normal human, but they're still basically operating within the maximum design limits of the human body. And no tech will allow them to go beyond that.

A likely landing time schedule is probably:-
t=0s - Deathwind pods land.
t=1s - Deathwind pods open and commence firing.
t=11s - Deathwind pods exhaust ammuntion.
t=12s - Troop pods land, receive squirt transmission of sensor data from DW pods.
t=13s - Data disseminated to troops, pod doors open, marines disembark and begin operations, targetting defensive positions based on the sensor data.
t=20s - Enemy troops begin to recover their wits and commence resistance...



You don't need to penetrate it, you simply need to knock it off balance. If you knock it and it tilts even slightly, either it will burn up in the atmosphere, or it will slam into the ground without slowing down at all, more than likely sideways or upside down (those thrusters which were supposed to slow it down are now driving it towards the ground).

No, they're tear shaped, with all the mass at the bottom, so that if they do get knocked off course (by enemy action or wind turbulence), they'll quickly roll back to a normal attitude.
The reinforcing vanes/fins would help it's aerodynamic properties as well (they could also spin it slightly, giving it an additional gyroscopic stability).



We know that a lot of races have anti-grav technology, which boils down to a system which would simply negate G forces.
We know from the Fluff that the Imperial Navy use a variant of this technology to create a "fake" gravity in their ships but that this tech isn't perfect and has troubles completely cancelling drastic and unexpected changes in G-forces completely (hence causing everyone on board to feel the "hits").
What we don't know however is by what percentage such a technology "cancels" the G-forces... This "cancellation" can very well be exponantial as far as we know. In which case, the stronger the G-force the higher part of it is cancelled (which would still make the felt G-force increase).
Moreover, in situations were the changes are expected (when the drop-pod's cogitators knows in advance that the retro-jets are going to be fired and expose the drop-pod to a given amount of acceleration), that same technology may be able to cancel even more of it.

Thus, if a SM drop-pod is equipped with such a technology, it might only "brake" for, say, the last 2 seconds before the hit, being submitted to tremendous G-forces, but the inside of it would be subjected to more "reasonnable" ones.

The problem there is - what happens if it fails (flak or turbulence might not spin it out and cause it to break up, but it might damage the systems)?

It's certainly a possibility though, but I don't think it's something to rely on.

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 13:29
No, they're tear shaped, with all the mass at the bottom, so that if they do get knocked off course (by enemy action or wind turbulence), they'll quickly roll back to a normal attitude.
The reinforcing vanes/fins would help it's aerodynamic properties as well (they could also spin it slightly, giving it an additional gyroscopic stability).

They are tear shaped with a massive engine on the top. Engine go push.

theunwantedbeing
26-08-2008, 13:35
If the pod contains G cancellation devices then it merely needs to have them work at full power for a very small period of time, the time right before and during the impact.

If they can drop the weight of the marines of the pod to say...10% that of normal (cant be all that tricky when they can generate normal earth level G on a space ship) or even go as far as to put it at 1% or less, than thats 2 or possibly 3 orders of magnitude less G that they are going to be suffering.

G forces tend to kill as the squishy internal bits find themselves weighing more than they can sustain and tearing. (really really high G will do the same to bone and other non-squishy bits)

But...if your body at say...1% g weighs a hundred times less than normal, you can now sustain 100x as much G force and survive just as well.

So...500m/s into the ground stopping after 5m, generates 50000g, although if you weigh 100x less, it's effectively only 500g.
If you weigh 1000x less than a human could conceivably surve such an impact! (as it would only be a mere 50g for a hundredth of a second).

Plus it would allow a however many tonne drop pod to hit the ground and stop before ending 20-30m in the ground as it would weigh far less, plus its structural itegrity would be improved as it would be holding up less of it's own weight and the forces would be fairly small.

So that must be how they work! ^_^

Meriwether
26-08-2008, 14:40
A quick google search shows that the term fragmentary interceptors is only used by you Meriwether.

Oh, yeah?!?!? Who you gonna believe, me or Google?!!!??

Er, what I meant to say was:

Yeah, that's because I'm lazy and I forget the term. I'm talking about things like the Patriot Missile and the new ballistic interceptors we've just POed the Russians with by agreeing to put some in Poland. Stuff that fragments and then relies on the speed of the target to slam into those fragments and go plewey.


Okay maybe I am. But I think my point still stands that radar based systems aren't an option since the 40k universe doesn't seem to have good radar and that drop pods aren't detectable by radar.

Ok, so use IR. Drop pods would produce a stupid amount of heat -- they're basically little Imperium-made meteors with guys inside. They'd be rather trivial to spot.


Just one thing "Slave": saying that the Imperium has the technology which allows for inertia dampeners on a scale that we can't calculate comes nowhere near those ridiculous examples you give...

This comes back to the conclusion that drop pods don't go plewey because of science fiction.

I have a problem with the phrase 'inertia dampeners on a scale that we can't calculate', because as fas as modern physics can tell, inertial dampeners are entirely impossible on every level.


And I feel like adding that using such "examples" to dismiss a theory by drowning it in sarcasm will certainly not lead to a deeper understanding.

Yes, but he is _funny_.

I think I'm done, here. The answer is most certainly **science fiction**, and we are free to basically invent whatever science fictiony device we want to explain it. Conjecture on what ways drop pods violate actual physics is not tremendously interesting to me, as they exist in a universe with teleportation and magic-wielding space elves.

I just want to make clear that drop pods cannot work as advertised in the framework of actual, real-world physics. They'd go plewey.

Meri

Sai-Lauren
26-08-2008, 15:25
They are tear shaped with a massive engine on the top. Engine go push.

Fine, add a little thrust vectoring, which it would have to have to keep the thrust going up when wind sheer buffets it around.;)

Anyway, when does the engine burn? Could a pod really carry enough fuel to power the engine all the way down, then power the retros for deceleration, as well as it's cargo (10 marines, each bordering on 1000 lbs with armour, weapons, ammo and other equipment, or a dreadnought) and the control systems, altitude sensors and so on?

Chances are the engine only burns after release and into the very upper atmosphere to get down past any orbital interceptors.

NashTrickster
26-08-2008, 16:07
as fas as modern physics can tell, inertial dampeners are entirely impossible on every level.And as far as modern physics is concerned anti-grav technology (on which inertial dampeners would be based) is impossible. Thus, in a universe where more than half the species have access to anti-grav tech, the "modern physics" argument becomes null and void.

It's not because modern physics say it's impossible that there is not a way "around" the problem.
I'll take an example:
Faster-than-light travel is impossible. Yet, through Warp translations, all Imperial vessels can travel faster than light, without ever having to reach relativistic speeds...

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 16:22
And as far as modern physics is concerned anti-grav technology (on which inertial dampeners would be based) is impossible. Thus, in a universe where more than half the species have access to anti-grav tech, the "modern physics" argument becomes null and void.

It's not because modern physics say it's impossible that there is not a way "around" the problem.

Hardly. We haven't done it, but there is no scientific reason why it would not be possible. People have been working on that particular problem for years. Gravity is the result of a theoretical partical called a Gravaton. Artificially creating these is the key to creating your own gravity field.


I'll take an example:
Faster-than-light travel is impossible. Yet, through Warp translations, Imperial vessels appear to travel faster than light, without ever having to reach relativistic speeds...

Here you go (http://www.l2lod.com/SpellingPoliceCat.bmp).

Starchild
26-08-2008, 17:26
Regarding the Original Post:

In Battlefleet Gothic, the Space Marine capital ships are equipped with Bombardment Cannons. These are intended to soften a drop zone prior to deployment. With any luck, the defenders are far too shell-shocked to intercept the Drop Pods as they dive in from low orbit. Scouts can be deployed by stealth to eliminate gun emplacements or other ordnance, making a Drop Pod assault that much easier.

As for the speed of the landing, one device from Rogue Trader that's hardly mentioned anymore is the Suspensor. It's a small anti-gravity tool used extensively by Space Marines. Suspensors help lighten heavy weapons and enable Assault Squads to make long leaps through the air (and deep strike!). There's no doubt that Suspensors are also used on the hulls of Drop Pods to make relatively soft landings possible.

NashTrickster
26-08-2008, 17:44
Gravity is the result of a theoretical particle called a Graviton.Allow me to return the favor! (http://www.l2lod.com/SpellingPoliceCat.bmp) (The difference being that I have reasons to do so.)

And I don't agree at all with your "correction" of my post...

Imperial vessels don't merely "appear" to have travelled faster than light. They have indeed made it from point A to point B (travelled) in less time than the light emitted from point A (hence faster).
Regardless if you took a short cut and drove slower than another guy who would have taken the "panoramic road", if you get to the finish line first, you've travelled faster than him!
Imperial vessels thus can travel faster than light, only not via the use of relativistic speeds.

imperial_scholar
26-08-2008, 17:50
Oh, yeah?!?!? Who you gonna believe, me or Google?!!!??

Er, what I meant to say was:

Yeah, that's because I'm lazy and I forget the term. I'm talking about things like the Patriot Missile and the new ballistic interceptors we've just POed the Russians with by agreeing to put some in Poland. Stuff that fragments and then relies on the speed of the target to slam into those fragments and go plewey.
Ah okay.. well that would be different as well... I'd think a missile would be more Armour 9 than armour 12. So I don't think flak still wouldn't make shooting a pod down trivial. I see what your talking about now.. but I still don't think using flak would make it _trivial_ to shoot it down. You'd have to put something the size of a power armoured marine in the path of a drop pod to really do damage.




Ok, so use IR. Drop pods would produce a stupid amount of heat -- they're basically little Imperium-made meteors with guys inside. They'd be rather trivial to spot.
IR!? Are you kidding me. IR can be defeated by flares... or by dropping out of the sun. IR generally requires you to know where to look as well which goes back to the original problem. It is also possible to minimize the heat signature after re-entry. It'd cool off... Once it gets to the the point where it needs its thrusters it'd be a heat signature yes... but it'd still require the IR to be looking at the right place. To find its exact position from the ground you'd need 2 IR systems looking at the same place. It'd also require laser range finders....
Does the 40k Universe have laser range finders? Seriously... does it.. I remember in 2nd edition they did. Not anymore?


Meriwether, I'd like to agree with you that it is possible... but not trivial.

Burnthem
26-08-2008, 18:05
These things aren't hitting the ground at a few hundred KPH here, their hitting at several thousand KPH.

Nothing could survive an impact at those speeds, handwavium included or not.




The key point to remember about 40K is that outside of advanced daemon engines/adeptus mechanicus systems all data relay and targeting is done by hand, the computers simply present data to the operators for them to use, and, (presumably), auto-calculate lead for them. That really kills the reaction times of the defences.

Eh? Where'd you get this from? The number of worlds in the 40K galaxy are beyond count, you cannot possibly make sweeping statements like this. Some worlds would have defences so advanced the defenders only need to blink and the enemy is vaporised, other worlds would resort to throwing sharp peices of stone into the air in an attempt to knock down the strange looking clouds falling from the sky.


Also the very idea that shrapnel or nearby light explosions could hurt a drop pod is ludicrous. They hit the ground with far more force than they do a piece of shrapnel, it's extremely unlikely they'd suffer any real damage from it, even given the better armour penetration properties of shrapnel.

True this.


By the same token, sheer speed will keep them upright regardless of what you hit them with. Both the airflow, auto thrusters, and more importantly sheer inertia will make it very hard to tip a drop pod around. pretty much anything capable of doing it would disintegrate the drop pod from sheer concussive force anyway.

As is this, IMHO.

As for all the ideas about Inertial Dampening Technology, it's a definite possibility, as mentioned before Imperial ships make wide use of it, so why not Marines?

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 18:06
Does 40k have laser range finders? Are you for real? They can plot a course to land within a few million miles all the way across the galaxy, they can teleport people into battle, they can tear holes in space and time to travel to alternate dimensions. You really have to ask if they laser range finders?

Besides, they don't need laser range finders, they have targeters.

Also, finding where a Pod is coming from. It couldn't be simpler. They will know where the ship is in orbit. The pods come from there. :rolleyes:

Meriwether
26-08-2008, 18:11
Hardly. We haven't done it, but there is no scientific reason why it would not be possible. People have been working on that particular problem for years. Gravity is the result of a theoretical partical called a Gravaton. Artificially creating these is the key to creating your own gravity field.

Sorry, Slaaneshi Slave, but this is flat wrong. Nothing whatsoever in modern physics indicates that a gravitational field can be canceled. To do so would require 'negative mass', which -- as far as anyone anywhere on Earth has been able to discern -- exists only on Star Trek and such similar shows.

There _IS_ a scientific reason why it would not be possible -- the theory of general relativity says it isn't possible.

Adding other forces to counteract gravity? Possible. Actual _antigravity_? Impossible.

(I'm not saying that there might not be some kind of unknown-to-us physics that might make this possible in the future, but there is no indication of any such thing at this time. You can of course find the random oddball who claims to have done it, or knows how, or whatnot, but these are neither more numerous nor more credible than your average Elvis-spotters.)


And I don't agree at all with your "correction" of my post...

Imperial vessels don't merely "appear" to have travelled faster than light. They have indeed made it from point A to point B (travelled) in less time than the light emitted from point A (hence faster).
Regardless if you took a short cut and drove slower than another guy who would have taken the "panoramic road", if you get to the finish line first, you've travelled faster than him!
Imperial vessels thus can travel faster than light, only not via the use of relativistic speeds.

Pish-posh. If you can travel slower through less space, you can get there faster. A folding of space is all that is need. (Albiet in the real world this is easier said than done, it's probably easier still than translating into an alternate universe of thought and emotion, protected from daemons only by the thin shell of a Geller field...)

But it _is_ conceivable to get somewhere faster than light would without traveling faster than that light. (Please note that 'conceivable' is a far cry from 'possible', which is a futher cry from 'plausible', which is further still from 'doable'.)


You'd have to put something the size of a power armoured marine in the path of a drop pod to really do damage.

...or baseball-sized bomblets?


IR!? Are you kidding me. IR can be defeated by flares... or by dropping out of the sun.

I'm not talking about IR homing devices or something, just IR TAq.


Does the 40k Universe have laser range finders? Seriously... does it.. I remember in 2nd edition they did. Not anymore?

Yes, targeters and range finders both exist in the 40K universe, floating around here and there in the fluff.


Meriwether, I'd like to agree with you that it is possible... but not trivial.

Fair enough.

Meri

Burnthem
26-08-2008, 18:12
Does 40k have laser range finders? Are you for real? They can plot a course to land within a few million miles all the way across the galaxy, they can teleport people into battle, they can tear holes in space and time to travel to alternate dimensions. You really have to ask if they laser range finders?:

This a reply to me? I don't remember mentioning Laser Range Finders :confused:


Also, finding where a Pod is coming from. It couldn't be simpler. They will know where the ship is in orbit. The pods come from there. :rolleyes:


Frankly, any Marine Chapter that -

A) Lets an enemy know the positions of its Ships
B) Doesn't have Space Superiority
C) Give the enemy enough time to even realise Marines are in orbit

deserves to get its ass kicked. Remember the first thing you will know about a Marine assault is when the Drop Pod lands on your house, they don't hang a sign up saying 'here we come'. :rolleyes:

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 18:22
Sorry, Slaaneshi Slave, but this is flat wrong. Nothing whatsoever in modern physics indicates that a gravitational field can be canceled. To do so would require 'negative mass', which -- as far as anyone anywhere on Earth has been able to discern -- exists only on Star Trek and such similar shows.

There _IS_ a scientific reason why it would not be possible -- the theory of general relativity says it isn't possible.

Adding other forces to counteract gravity? Possible. Actual _antigravity_? Impossible.

Anti-gravity is just sci-fi semantics for something which cancelled out or reverses the effect of gravity. You don't need to actually reverse gravity, just it's effects.


This a reply to me? I don't remember mentioning Laser Range Finders :confused:

Look at the post before yours. You ninja'd me. :p


Frankly, any Marine Chapter that -

A) Lets an enemy know the positions of its Ships
B) Doesn't have Space Superiority
C) Give the enemy enough time to even realise Marines are in orbit

deserves to get its ass kicked. Remember the first thing you will know about a Marine assault is when the Drop Pod lands on your house, they don't hang a sign up saying 'here we come'. :rolleyes:

The guys who just blew up your stations in orbit and are bombing your military installations. Those be the ones on the ship, yar? If you don't have orbital installations you are no threat to the Imperial Guard, and Marines wouldn't even be there. Chances are if you are not powerful enough to have defences in orbit then the Guard wouldn't even bother with you, it would be a Missionary from the church.

heretics bane
26-08-2008, 20:38
They are tear shaped with a massive engine on the top. Engine go push.

Or could go the opposite if the pods sensors detect its upside down and try to correct its flight path.

Slaaneshi Slave
26-08-2008, 21:23
Think of the speeds involved, correcting a spin at those speeds can be no easy thing, especially with the amount of time they have to do it.

heretics bane
26-08-2008, 21:30
So would hitting the thing in the first place;)

RexTalon
26-08-2008, 21:35
During the cold war a scientist in the US decided it would be a good idea to shoot down enemy missiles using short range nuclear blasts. The project was called BOMARC. The missiles would create huge blasts in the atmosphere knocking enemy missiles and bombers out of the sky before they could detonate on the ground.

After one of these missile sites caught fire near McGuire AFB in New Jersey and contaminated the surrounding water table they shut down the project.

A similar version could be used to create a blast wave in the atmosphere, damaging the pods as they descended. You wouldn't need current technology to knock them out of the sky, just something that can create a huge blast.

Master Stark
27-08-2008, 07:22
Think of the speeds involved, correcting a spin at those speeds can be no easy thing, especially with the amount of time they have to do it.

This is very true. If you hit the pod a hundred metres or so above the surface, it's not going to have time to right itself.

Sai-Lauren
27-08-2008, 09:51
IR!? Are you kidding me. IR can be defeated by flares... or by dropping out of the sun. IR generally requires you to know where to look as well which goes back to the original problem. It is also possible to minimize the heat signature after re-entry. It'd cool off... Once it gets to the the point where it needs its thrusters it'd be a heat signature yes... but it'd still require the IR to be looking at the right place. To find its exact position from the ground you'd need 2 IR systems looking at the same place. It'd also require laser range finders....

A drop pod entering atmosphere is going to have a plasma wake with a temperature of a couple of thousand degrees C - at a minimum. That's a very powerful flare that you're dropping to obscure them.

Cooling after re-entry - that drop pod's going to be hot for a good couple of hours after touchdown, unless of course you want to throw in a coolant system and add yet more weight and volume.

Dropping out of the sun (which wouldn't work for night drops BTW ;)), that would only interfere with visual sensors due to light intensity (that's what blinds you - the rods and cones in the eye overload, not any heat), and even if it does interfere with IR sensors, any defender with any sense will have calibrated their sensors to account for it anyway - even if it's just an extra array of sideways looking sensors as part of the normal sensor clusters, angled to look under the sun.



Does the 40K Universe have laser range finders? Seriously... does it.. I remember in 2nd edition they did. Not anymore?

They're called lasguns aren't they? ;)

As to the point about knowing where they're dropping because you know where the dropping vessel is, that's certainly true - a drop orbit is going to have to be low (to minimise the time they're spending in transit), and would be difficult to alter once begun. However, it's possible that a vessel may make a number of "drops", some of which are just bombing missions, a couple of which are decoys to draw enemy troops away, and that a full company drop may happen, but spread over three or four targets.

Then it comes down to the ground commander to assess which of the targets are the ones they're going after, and which are decoy strikes. He gets it right, and the marines will have a very bad day, he gets it wrong...

imperial_scholar
27-08-2008, 16:45
Geez, just when I thought I've made peace someone has to come and stir the pot.


A drop pod entering atmosphere is going to have a plasma wake with a temperature of a couple of thousand degrees C - at a minimum. That's a very powerful flare that you're dropping to obscure them.
Like a plasma flare maybe?!



Cooling after re-entry - that drop pod's going to be hot for a good couple of hours after touchdown, unless of course you want to throw in a coolant system and add yet more weight and volume.
Not necessarily. Depends on how the material on the outside deals with heat dissipation and absorption. Ceramics used on the space shuttle aren't red hot when it clears the upper atmosphere. Since the British have managed to build a tank that uses ceramics and steel, I couldn't see why the drop pod could use materials technology.


Dropping out of the sun (which wouldn't work for night drops BTW ;)), that would only interfere with visual sensors due to light intensity (that's what blinds you - the rods and cones in the eye overload, not any heat), and even if it does interfere with IR sensors, any defender with any sense will have calibrated their sensors to account for it anyway - even if it's just an extra array of sideways looking sensors as part of the normal sensor clusters, angled to look under the sun.
That comment was just pointing out that IR can be confused. To be honest... without radar picking up the drop pod, IR would be difficult to use. You'd need a lot of IR systems to cover the whole sky. So you'd need IR systems at every military installation that cover the whole sky. If IR systems were linked.... even then I'm sure a bombardment would be sure to target them to disrupt them.


They're called lasguns aren't they? ;)
I was saying that Laser range finders make modern IR more reliable. If the 40k universe didn't have them.. the whole point about IR would be mute.

However, I can't think of any fluff that alludes to any force using thermal goggles (Night vision yes). So IR in the 40k universe maybe pointless.


As to the point about knowing where they're dropping because you know where the dropping vessel is, that's certainly true - a drop orbit is going to have to be low (to minimise the time they're spending in transit), and would be difficult to alter once begun. However, it's possible that a vessel may make a number of "drops", some of which are just bombing missions, a couple of which are decoys to draw enemy troops away, and that a full company drop may happen, but spread over three or four targets.
Slowing their descent at any point could change their trajectory. While I can agree this is a mute point, I'd go back to the point that drop pods are undetectable as said in IA:2. The only given i can agree too is that IR could be used to detect them but probably wouldn't be effective. IR can be fooled and heat signatures can be reduced. But again, they'd have to watch every part of the sky and have to be sensitive enough to detect them in the upper atmosphere.
Unlike radar, IR can be interfered with due to atmospheric conditions.



Then it comes down to the ground commander to assess which of the targets are the ones they're going after, and which are decoy strikes. He gets it right, and the marines will have a very bad day, he gets it wrong...
That's why they are marines :D.... they only have bad days... and give everyone else worse days.

Sai-Lauren,
I'm not in the camp that drop pods cannot be shot down... I am merely saying that drop pods are difficult to shoot down. I think the real element to drop pods being shot down is the element of surprise which is what marines do possess (shock troops). Without knowledge of where they are and where they are heading, AA guns wouldn't be much use as they need time to be manned and pointed in the right direction. Since this knowledge typically would come from radar (which is said to be useless against pods) the defenders don't have much time to shoot down the pods.

Again... I'm not saying the pods can't be shot down, I'm saying it is difficult.

Inquisitor Redclaw
27-08-2008, 17:54
In the Marine codex as well it mentions i think that the drop pod "Death from above" tatic is started by an orbital bombardment, before the drop pods are even released so any defendersare running around trying to find cover against the marine strike cruiser or BB bombardment cannon. I agree that the pods can be shoot down but the defender would have to be insane to stay at their AA station while the target area he may well be in is being bombarded by orbit.
Also as stated before arent the deathwind variants first on the ground so just after the bombardment is stopped the deathwind land and set up a wall of fire around the dropsite :)

Slaaneshi Slave
27-08-2008, 18:01
He's have to be insane NOT to try and stay as his post and shoot them down. :p

Sai-Lauren
28-08-2008, 10:15
Geez, just when I thought I've made peace someone has to come and stir the pot.

Hey, it's what I'm here for... :D



Like a plasma flare maybe?!

I can live with that. All the ports on the underside aren't necessarily thruster nozzles.



Not necessarily. Depends on how the material on the outside deals with heat dissipation and absorption. Ceramics used on the space shuttle aren't red hot when it clears the upper atmosphere. Since the British have managed to build a tank that uses ceramics and steel, I couldn't see why the drop pod could use materials technology.

Actually, the shuttles tiles are still incredibly hot, but because of their very low heat conductance, you can supposedly hold one in your hand.

I've located an IR image of the shuttle landing here (www.fas.org/irp/imint/docs/rst/Sect9/Sect9_9.html) - unfortunatly I couldn't see a scale saying how hot the red/white areas are.

They look pretty warm though, and don't forget, the shuttle glides around a lot on re-entry to lose a lot of it's velocity, which would also allow it to cool off significantly (IIRC, at the altitude it gets enough air under it's wings to create the Bernouli effect and provide lift, it's still doing about Mach 30), otherwise it would rip it's undercarriage off the moment it opened the doors.
Wheras drop pods come straight in with their backsides on fire. :p



That comment was just pointing out that IR can be confused. To be honest... without radar picking up the drop pod, IR would be difficult to use. You'd need a lot of IR systems to cover the whole sky. So you'd need IR systems at every military installation that cover the whole sky. If IR systems were linked.... even then I'm sure a bombardment would be sure to target them to disrupt them.

Not really - you just put yourselves in the enemies shoes for a second and look at what you would attack to achieve as quick a victory as possible, then based on that information, you look at where you'd place your defences to protect the highest priority targets, then repeat. You force them to land at sites either of your choosing, when you can spring an ambush, or at a distance from their target, which means they have to travel to the target and you have a chance of getting troops to them.

Of course, in a lot of cases, Imperial Intelligence may be able to supply personality/psychological assessments of the ground commanders, which marines will use to determine how they think, and adjust their strategy accordingly (Know thy enemy, know thyself...), however, a commander may know this, and reassess his own plans accordingly, and back around the loop we go, until someone overlooks something...

They may be able to pick their target, but you can effectively deal from the bottom of the deck, and push them towards the decision you want them to make.



I was saying that Laser range finders make modern IR more reliable. If the 40K universe didn't have them.. the whole point about IR would be mute.

Sorry, I was referring to the old 40k joke: What do you call a lasgun with a laser sight? Twin-linked.



However, I can't think of any Fluff that alludes to any force using thermal goggles (Night vision yes). So IR in the 40K universe maybe pointless.

IIRC, auto-senses in Power Armour is supposed to have all sorts of vision enhancement, which would presumably include IR, and I would guess Eldar armour includes all sorts of sensor packages, including psychic ones. But on the other side of the argument, most armies will probably have IR signiture reduction technologies - even if it's as basic as Orks covering themselves in mud. And so the arms race continues, between sensors and sensor baffles



Again... I'm not saying the pods can't be shot down, I'm saying it is difficult.

Actually, if you look back over some of my other posts, you'll see that I agree, it will be very difficult to shoot them down.

But still not impossible (as an example, not in 40k, but the Quartz Zone Massacre in the backstory of the 2000AD series Rogue Trooper basically had a drop pod assault that got obliterated on it's way down - and for those that are about to mention the Traitor General, yes they were sold out, but they still had to track and shoot the pods as they fell).

Master Stark
28-08-2008, 11:09
Not really - you just put yourselves in the enemies shoes for a second and look at what you would attack to achieve as quick a victory as possible, then based on that information, you look at where you'd place your defences to protect the highest priority targets, then repeat. You force them to land at sites either of your choosing, when you can spring an ambush, or at a distance from their target, which means they have to travel to the target and you have a chance of getting troops to them.

Of course, in a lot of cases, Imperial Intelligence may be able to supply personality/psychological assessments of the ground commanders, which marines will use to determine how they think, and adjust their strategy accordingly (Know thy enemy, know thyself...), however, a commander may know this, and reassess his own plans accordingly, and back around the loop we go, until someone overlooks something...

This is really the most interesting part of the discussion. Unfortunately, it requires us to make a few assumptions, because we simply don't know everything. How strong, and under what system do void shields operate? Do they form a physical barrier, or do they react to projectiles or energy blasts? Could a drop pod fall through one? How long can they resist an orbital bombardment?

I mean, Marines are pretty much only ever going to arrive in-system on a battle barge or strike cruiser. Either way, they've got a ship with bombardment cannons in orbit.

What are the most important targets to strike? Depends, really. You don't really want to strike the head off the snake, IMO, because without organised leadership there will be no one to organise the surrender (assuming a world has turned renegade, rather than being openly hostile). Better to strike soft targets that convince the planetary leadership that surrender is the only option.

Of course, if you have to actually conquer the planet because surrender is not an option (capturing an alien or chaos held world) that changes things.

How expensive are void shields to maintain and manage? Could you feasibly cover every major military installation on the planet with one? Could you keep them running all the time? And even if you could, would you?

Of course, these questions hinge around the assumption that the only thing that can prevent an orbital bombardment from scouring the crust off of a planet are void shields.

Sai-Lauren
28-08-2008, 14:40
How strong, and under what system do void shields operate? Do they form a physical barrier, or do they react to projectiles or energy blasts?

I'd say a energy field that creates a physical barrier. Reaction seems a little too high tech for the imperium, although Ork Gargant Belly Gun ball rounds were described as slow, and used to ignore shields in 1st edition epic, which seems to indicate some kind of inertial reaction.



Could a drop pod fall through one?

I'd say no, although...
Back in RT, you could have Power Fields on tanks, dreadnoughts, robots etc, but they couldn't be fired through - not only by the enemy, but also by the vehicle which had one. You had to choose whether to have it active, or switched off and be able to fire.
So when they re-did the dreadnought construction rules, they introduced a new piece of kit, the Power Field Synchroniser, which allowed you to shoot through it, but the enemy had a chance of shooting back through the field whilst it was flickering off and on, meaning you hit the model at it's basic toughness value, not the T10 of the field.

Void shields must in theory have something similar, however, I would say that, as there's no similar "shoot through" rule, a Void Shield would likely be a concentric ring of shield bubbles (think of one of those Russian dolls that have a smaller doll inside them, and a smaller one inside that and so on...), and when you fire, they flicker off and on outwards (maybe even only over the weapon itself, although I don't think that the weapons muzzles are somehow outside the shields, that runs the risk of a shot causing munitions cook off), so that there's always at least one shield ring active to absorb any incoming fire. And any drop pod getting through the first ring when it's down would just almost certainly just impact on the second one.



How long can they resist an orbital bombardment?

Longer than a titan or starship could resist the same amount of fire - they've got effectively unlimited space for spare generators, energy sinks, power supplies and capacitors, especially when compared to a starship. Even a Ramiles star fort would have less shield capacity available than a 40k city the size of somewhere like Leeds or Manchester.

You could bring one down with extended periods of concentrated fire (RT-era power fields had a radius of 1" for each instance of the field that you'd bought - so buying 5 could give you a 5" field, a 3" and a back up 2", 5x1" and so on - but you could only have one on at a time), and shrank 1" per point of damage, if you got it to 0 or less, then it was destroyed, but it returned to full strength in the next turn), but you're better off trying to interupt it's power supplies, or getting an infiltrator team in to switch it off or sabotage it - especially when you consider it's likely to have orbital range defences around to stop you maintaining position over it.



I mean, Marines are pretty much only ever going to arrive in-system on a battle barge or strike cruiser. Either way, they've got a ship with bombardment cannons in orbit.

They do have escort vessels, which probably do most of the chapters' patrols. Even a strike cruiser is a considerable asset to use on a simple patrol mission (Chapters don't even had double figures worth of them IIRC, and they'll be the flagships of small battlegroups, rather than acting independantly), they'll more likely be used in less secure systems, and for "fly the flag" missions and the like, to remind the local governor who they're responsible to.



What are the most important targets to strike? Depends, really. You don't really want to strike the head off the snake, IMO, because without organised leadership there will be no one to organise the surrender (assuming a world has turned renegade, rather than being openly hostile). Better to strike soft targets that convince the planetary leadership that surrender is the only option.

Of course, if you have to actually conquer the planet because surrender is not an option (capturing an alien or chaos held world) that changes things.

How expensive are void shields to maintain and manage? Could you feasibly cover every major military installation on the planet with one? Could you keep them running all the time? And even if you could, would you?

Of course, these questions hinge around the assumption that the only thing that can prevent an orbital bombardment from scouring the crust off of a planet are void shields.

Well, I don't think marines would be worried about having someone left to formally surrender (and might even see it as an insult to their honour that someone survived), that would be the realms of the Imperial Diplomatic Corps. There is that piece of fluff in the 3rd edition codex where an Inquisitor calls in some marines, who ignore what he says, trash a load of defensive systems to kill the rebellious governor, his accomplices and a load of PDF officers who weren't really involved, and then swan off, rendering the planet leaderless, defenceless and suffering from energy shortages, leaving everyone else to pick up the pieces - the Inquisitor all but lodges a formal complaint against them.

But, there in lies the crux of the matter (and why you can't just do as Ellen Ripley suggested ;)) - what are you after down there? If you destroy all the power plants, thereby bringing down all the shields and disabling the defences, will that allow you victory, or will someone come along and take the planet from you again before you've rebuilt them, will you have to suppress civilian riots caused by power shortages or have to find the listed production capacity of the planet somewhere else because the factories can't work? If the enemy take shelter in the factories and processing plants that are the reason for the planet being there, can you really afford to blast them from orbit? If it's an agricultural world, and you just bombard it indescriminantly, it may never produce food for export in your lifetime (even if you are a marine who'll live nearly another millenia), so the local hive world will probably start to have food riots, which the marines are probably going to wind up getting ovolved in to help supress them (if the philosophers are correct, and we really are only two meals from anarchy, then the average hive world's probably only a mouthful of water away ;)).
More likely, the thing stopping the planet being scoured clean is the resources on it, not any defences.

Cost of installation and maintenance? High. Power demands? Also high, but in times of conflict, you can impose martial law and divert nearly all the power to the defensive facilities from civilian use (save hospitals, law enforcement and emergency service buildings, and civilian shelters, all of which probably have back-up generators anyway).

Terra probably has the equivalent of a full planetary shield, with multiple redundant layers, plus localised shields in case the main ones fail. But most worlds would probably only shield the capital city, the governors palace, the more important defensive facilities and possibly the biggest cities and the spaceports. Defensive turrets/silos would probably have their own shields as well, but only covering themselves and possibly a small area around (say a couple of hundred feet at most).

Slaaneshi Slave
28-08-2008, 14:47
Reminds me of Supreme Commander. :P

dookie
28-08-2008, 18:25
Im going with the retro rockets thingi, its in all the fluff, and it will slow them down.

Also, remember that the bottom of a Drop Pod has a massive surface area and therefore will not shoot into the ground but instead will stop suddenly (with a huge crater of dirt) And its made out of stuff which can withstand the heat and pressure of atmospheric velocity, so it should be fine.

Oh yeah, also, its not real, its made up. BAM!

Sai-Lauren
29-08-2008, 09:30
Also, remember that the bottom of a Drop Pod has a massive surface area and therefore will not shoot into the ground but instead will stop suddenly (with a huge crater of dirt) And its made out of stuff which can withstand the heat and pressure of atmospheric velocity, so it should be fine.

And the soft, organic, squishy bits inside (otherwise known as a squad of marines)? The pod might survive 100g, but when the doors open, you've basically got 10 cans of tomato soup inside.

That's what we've been discussing - how to allow them to survive the deceleration and still come out fighting.



Oh yeah, also, its not real, its made up. BAM!

Ok, rip down the entirity of the Background forums, I guess depleted deuterium is a possible material for bolter rounds to contain, along with all the other dumb things GW have put in over the years... :rolleyes:

It may be made up, but half the fun comes from working out how to do it for real (the other half from ripping into GW for coming up with stupid concepts that wouldn't work in the first place ;)).