============ OGREverse list, Aug 29th (Last: Aug 25th) ============= ===== BPC manufacture and damage From: Alan E and Carmel J Brain From: Servitor@aol.com From: Jpattern@aol.com From: Garrett Briggs From: Roby Sherman From: Patrick Odonnell ===== Anti-Artillery shell weapons From: "John D. Gwinner" ===== Bolo Stories From: Dave Flitton ------------------------------ From: Alan E and Carmel J Brain Subject: BPC manufacture and damage > From: Steve Jackson > As we work on designing the next generation of Ogre minis, a detail-minded > sculptor asks: How is BPC produced; how are the parts assembled? He was > thinking about showing the rivets, and then wondered: ARE there rivets? > [My conception is that BPC is composed of sheets of woven bucky-ball > threads stacked and glued together with something nasty. -HJC] My own ideas are similar: Buckeytubes woven together, similar to the graphite used in today's composites. But the matrix is another phase of Carbon, ie Diamond. Possibly doped with Buckeyballs embedded in it with molecules of high-neutron-cross-section (boron?) to intercept high energy neutrons. This should give similar properties to pre-stressed concrete or epoxy-graphite, just multipled by a few orders of maginitude. It also fits in with the "BPC" acronym. As for how its fitted together - it's cast in a very similar method to fibreglass. Repair ditto, it's patched (like fibreglass). http://www2.dynamite.com.au/aebrain aebrain@dynamite.com.au <> <> How doth the little Crocodile | Alan & Carmel Brain| xxxxx Improve his shining tail? | Canberra Australia | xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM abrain@cs.adfa.edu.au o O*OO^^^^OO*O o oo oo oo oo By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale ----- [Hmmm... Diamond can't be formed at ordinary pressures because the graphite type "flat" bonds (as used in Buckyballs) are stronger than the 3D bonds used in Diamond. Diamond is more compact and so is favored at very high pressures. -HJC] ----- From: Servitor@aol.com Subject: BPC manufacture and damage << From: Steve Jackson << As we work on designing the next generation of Ogre minis... >> YAY!! << a detail-minded sculptor asks: How is BPC produced; how are the parts assembled? He was thinking about showing the rivets, and then wondered: ARE there rivets? I always believed that it was cast in very big units. But some parts can't be BPC and must be fastened on somehow. Weld? Glue? Rivet? >> I think rivets would "clutter" the minis too much. "Molecular" bonding glue makes for good psuedo-science engineering. The result would be lots of "panel" lines, mostly uniform (but see below). << And what does damage look like on BPC? It's a biphase material . . . it is more likely to look TORN than shattered. Of course, it could melt, or it could be crushed. Thoughts? >> Anyone remember Dennis Loubet's Ogre/G.E.V. art? He definitely went for the "shattered" look. Almost every story (and all of the flavor text in the games) seemed to indicate "torn and melted" damage. Crushing was mention in J.D.'s story "G.E.V." (The Ogre Book). Which is right? I say ALL of them. Hits by missiles would tend to spall armor (of nearly any type) unless they were AP warheads of some sort. LARGE missiles (i.e. cruise) would tend to melt and crush by dint of their huge nuke fireballs. While kinetic penetrators (railguns) would, I'm guessing, tend to tear armor (well, the exit point anyway.) Of course I'm completely unqualified to speak knowledgeably about this. My point is that nearly any type of damage should be appropriate in the OGRE universe battlefield. This brings me back to panel lines. I hope the minis will show (mostly) uniform panel lines with a small amount of patchwork in random locations as this would reflect repairs of spalled/torn armor panels. (And why not have some minis with "minor" hull damage on them?) Don't bother with any line of "destroyed" tanks. A ballpeen hammer works just fine to create hulks. best, flunky ----- [Please don't mention destroying the minis after it's taken this long to see them created! -HJC] ----- From: Jpattern@aol.com Subject: Re: BPC manufacture and damage Steve Jackson asked about BPC. As Henry wrote in his reply, I've always imagined BPC as looking like a mish-mash of many different "exotics" and technologies that are currently available, such as Fiberglas, Kevlar, Teflon, Chobham armor, space shuttle tiles, high-tech aircraft parts, and the like, taken to a higher level. Specifically, again as Henry wrote, I, too, envision woven sheets of BPC threads glued together with some super-epoxy, probably in some hideously complicated and expensive manner, laminated into huge sheets, then cut and glued onto the basic vehicle chassis. Seams would be covered with thinner, more flexible sheets of the stuff, glued in place. Color in its raw state could be a charcoal or graphite gray, since it's carbon-based. The super-epoxy used to laminate and apply the BPC could be any color, but based on current use it probably wouldn't be a pretty color; more like industrial green, yellow, gray, or some combination of the above. So a complete, unpainted vehicle would probably show mostly the dark gray of the BPC, with patches and joints showing the epoxy color. Primer coats of paint may or may not be necessary. There's certainly no need to worry about rust (BPC Never Rusts!), but on the other hand regular paints might not stick to BPC very well (like Teflon). In that case, the vehicles might be factory-primed with a special paint (could be any color) that adheres to the BPC, then camo-painted (or dayglo-painted, as the case may be) with regular paints on top of that, either at the factory, at a mobilization point, or in the field. Then again, there may also be special paints developed to help mask IR signals, reflect lasers, and such, and they might need to be applied in the factory or in special conditions. Since most of the units in the OGRE universe are slab-sided rather than rounded, I suspect that BPC is easier to create, apply, or repair in flat sheets, rather than smooth curves, or maybe it's simply more effective in large flat sheets rather than curved sheets. Curved surfaces would be more effective ballistically, I believe, but then again, in a world of tac nukes, would ballistic effectiveness of that sort be a moot point? Damage done to BPC would probably look like that done to Fiberglas or Kevlar armor today: No huge cracks or splits, but smaller rips and tears around the central hole, maybe some frayed edges flapping in the nuclear breeze. Would BPC melt and flow around the edges of the hit, like a metal or plastic, or would it simply char and vaporize, like armor made of wood? I suspect the latter. Therefore, damage from a tac nuke would be a big hole with frayed and charred edges, but no sign of melting. As Henry wrote, repairs in the field would probably entail mixing up some super-epoxy, slapping it into the "wound", cutting sheets of BPC to fit, slapping them on top, and continuing to build up layers until the hole is closed. Much easier than repairing WWII armor in the field. Then again, you'd still need welding facilities for repairs to the basic chassis, running gear, and so on. Does that sound logical to everyone? Any obvious errors? Jeff Moore jpattern@aol.com ----- From: Garrett Briggs Subject: BPC manufacture and damage Use a thermal bonding material simular to that they use on the tiles of the space shuttle. The actual armor plates can have the adheasive applied on or a strip tacked on it to make the material stick to another surface. That way, its light and easy to replace by applying either the same temperature or a chemical reaction. If the armor is ever going to get chipped away over use, it could be scrapped and you can see some interesting custom vehicles from scrapped armor. THERMAL BONDING AGENT STEVE :) gcb ----- [Um, if the OGRE's armor is held on with space shuttle glue, wouldn't it have to be careful with small bumps in the road? -HJC] ----- From: Roby Sherman Subject: BPC manufacture and damage Here are my ideas... coming from left field, of course. :) Not to steal too much from the world of LEGO Technic, but couldn't the pieces all snap-together in a similar or perhaps large-tabbed fashion? The only other idea I have at the moment is to invent some new form of ultra-durable BPC glue. :) > And what does damage look like on BPC? It's a biphase material . . . it is > more likely to look TORN than shattered. Of course, it could melt, or it > could be crushed. Thoughts? So are you envisioning that a piece of BPC material intentionally bent would appear to fracture in a fashion similar to that of fiberglass? I'm new to this feed, so I have to ask... Any guesstimates on when the public might be seeing some of these new designs? --Roby ----- From: Patrick Odonnell Subject: BPC manufacture and damage > From: Steve Jackson > <...> ARE there rivets? In reality? Highly unlikely. On a model? Do you really have to ask? <...> Weld? Glue? Rivet? Again, in reality I think that the parts not made of BPC would simply be built into place as the armor was being built up layer for layer. In other words they start building the chasis from the ground up and when they get to a spot where something needs to be they form a cradle with each successive layer. When the cradle is finished the non-BPC part is put into place and then BPC is formed around it. In the OGREverse of course they just rivet that puppy on. <...> Thoughts? I think Mr. Cobb covered this one quite well. ====== From: Henry Cobb > [One meter isn't much time at those speeds. VT is very helpful. -HJC] > Fine 1.5=>2 meters then. Its average of averages Mr. Cobb. They have been doing it since at least WWII. If you want VT great. It is a very COOL idea and certainly reaks of dead sexy high-tech. But, as already noted you will be caught in the measure/countermeasure spiral. That means money. PJ ------------------------------ From: "John D. Gwinner" Subject: Anti-Artillery shell weapons > [One meter isn't much time at those speeds. VT is very helpful. > -HJC] True, but a major impact for high angle. Most artillery units know EXACTLY what the elevation is, or at least to several meters. Remember, field artillery calculations take the spin of the earth into account when calculating firing data. The only reason why you use VT is for simplicity (set and forget) and high angle attacks. They are expensive, so you want to use mechanical timers as much as possible. With high angle attacks (i.e. more than 45 degrees up), the mechanical timers don't work as well, partly due to the shell spin and partly because you are heading down at a steep angle and the slightest timing problem magnifies itself. VT is more accurate, but it would be no big deal to switch over to mechanical timers. BTW, even in VietNam they had anti-armor shells -- DPICM is what's used nowdays (Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions), 'bomblets' that either pop up in the air and go off (like a bouncing betty) OR burn through a tanks thinner top, depending on if their shaped charge hits dirt or metal. That's what they taught us, but I always wondered how that worked. They are a small 'canister' with a streamer on the end to make the business end point downward. Also, todays artillery can rage out as far as 30Km using certain rounds (depending on the artillery tube size, of course) and is fairly mobile. The Artillery units in OGRE always seemed a bit strange to me; too static and short ranged. Of course, missles had a similar range also, and the best thing is, no matter what it 'is', IT WORKS . Well, it did work until GEV came along anyway. And yes, Steve, I do own original copies of all the OGRE material. *I* paid for all of it. Looking forward to a reissue of course. BTW, I'd love to discuss/bid on a computer game version using modern 3D terrain rendering. Sort of like BattleZone but with Ogres. I'm not going to bore the list with qualifications, but just wanted to ask where the best place to discuss this would be? == John == ------------------------------ From: Dave Flitton Subject: Bolo Stories Unless they come up with a good BOLO - > bad BOLO, or "our's against their's" story, (they did have > one, but it was kind of weird). "The Traitor", kind of a Bolo tragedy where one must die even as both are serving humanity. Yes, there was that one (a good one), but it wasn't a their's against ours story, more ours against another ours. There was another story about a machine (enemy bolo) that took incoming fire, analyzed it, then returned the same type of fire back to the good guys. The only way to defeat it was to have the bolo rush in and self-destruct. Dave ----- [Isn't the best cure for Ifurita to send Makoto in? -HJC] Henry J. Cobb ogre@sjgames.com http://www.io.com/~hcobb All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 1999, by Steve Jackson Games.