Can-Am Spyder Cyclone Armour and a Horizant Idea

[Sgt Anjay]

A trike would be bigger than a Cyc, smaller than a Silverback, and have particular advantages and disadvantages versus either of those two designs.

Agree about the size for the Cyclone/Silverback, but the problem with Trikes is they come in a variety of sizes. The Can-Ams Rimmerdal points to are basically the same as a Cyclone (main difference being ~x3 the width), but something in the MODAT size is another matter.

I looked up the size stats for the MODAT/Garland (as the Sent/Zillion bikes aren't readily available), and compared them to the Silverback (in clean configuration). They are w/n ~1 meter in any direction, so I would say that qualifies as the same size-range, for the actual mecha (not counting mounted weapons).

Silverback (veh): 3.9m long x 2.1m wide (clear hub) x 1.95m tall(w/o turret), with weapons height/width increase by ~0.5m
MODAT (veh): 3.96m long x 1.9m wide x 1.2m tall
Silverback (bat): 4.2m tall (no turret) x 2.7m long x 3.4m wide, with turret an extra 2.1m height, it is optional though
MODAT (bat): 3.85m tall x 1.72m long x 2.6m wide

Well, for one, where did you look up the stats on the Garland? What I got here for the Garland maneuver craft mode is: overall length 3.96 meters (so that one, at least, is the same), overall width 1.35 meters, overall height 0.94 meters.

I'll also point out a meter is several feet; just because you term it "less than a meter" doesn't make the size difference insignificant due to the scale of the meter as a unit of measure.

And, in fact, being several feet smaller in two out of three dimensions is a significant reduction in the amount of volume the Garland takes up, which is what's important since you generally need to store all three dimensions of something, not just one or two.

For the Silverback, you get a volume of 15.97 cubic meters. If we use the measurements you pulled up, that gives a volume of 9.03 for the Garland, or less than two-thirds. Use the ones I pulled, and you get 5.025 for the Garland. ONE-THIRD.

I stand by my assertion.

Why, that varies quite widely. Again, I've already provided examples in the real world of limited run vehicles used by special groups within the military despite the fact that other more ubiquitous designs were developed/adopted or even already in use.

Agree it can vary, but if the design fails field testing it stands to reason that it would not remain deployed in any capacity.

That is true, a design that failed testing wouldn't remain deployed. The problem with your statement though is that just because a design isn't chosen to be mass-produced doesn't mean it failed field testing. It just means it wasn't the one the military picked to order mass quantities of.

A design superior in every way that isn't as cost effective to order lots of will be turned down in favor of its competition despite being superior; it is a very, very long-standing joke among soldiers that they get the gear from the lowest bidder, not the best bidder. Also, a successful design that is more specialized may lose out to a more jack-of-all-trades design.

However, a more expensive or specialized design may very well still be used, in limited quantities, where the necessity for that superior capability overrides the expense, or you don't need it to be a jack-of-all-trades but do need the special capability the more specialized design brings to the table. This tends to be the case for elite smaller groups, as I keep saying.

Being a space force, the UEEF may be more reluctant to use LE runs as space on any spaceship is going to be at a premium.

(1) As I've shown, something the size of a Garland, the upper edge of what we're talking about, takes up significantly less volume than the Silverback. An elite group would need space for equipment regardless; using something that size or smaller for an elite group HELPS, not HURTS.
(2)As I keep saying, several scenarios for the origin of a trike design would be pre-Silverback or even Cyclone, so it wouldn't even be a choice between using space for the ubiquitous design or the specialized design: its a choice between the specialized design or giving your elite troops nothing.
(3)The fact that despite space on U.S. Navy ships likewise being at a premium, both the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Navy SEALS use specialized limited-run equipment, negates that as a dis-qualifier.

[ShadowLogan]

Well, for one, where did you look up the stats on the Garland? What I got here for the Garland maneuver craft mode is: overall length 3.96 meters (so that one, at least, is the same), overall width 1.35 meters, overall height 0.94 meters.

uRRG. They have the bikes from MZ23 to appear in RT:TUS, plus a few others they cribbed from the source material.

I'll also point out a meter is several feet; just because you term it "less than a meter" doesn't make the size difference insignificant due to the scale of the meter as a unit of measure.

I am well aware of how large a meter is in the English system (A meter is equal to ~39inches, or ~3.25feet). The difference may be significant at our end of the size spectrum, but as we look at larger and larger mecha it means less.

I would also point out that Palladium's rules for IMU construction allow for a 6 foot difference in height (which likely means other dimensions are not the same) and still be regarded as compatible. So by Palladium's IMU rules, the mecha would need to be in the same size range of +/- 6ft to be compatible.

1) As I've shown, something the size of a Garland, the upper edge of what we're talking about, takes up significantly less volume than the Silverback. An elite group would need space for equipment regardless; using something that size or smaller for an elite group HELPS, not HURTS.

For being an intermediate in size (MODAT/Garland compared to the Cyclone & Silverback), it demonstrates a lack firepower in comparison to the others that really does not place it as an intermediary. It would be easier to target than a Cyclone, but not as easy as a Silverback. And the Cyclone can certainly be configured for overall firepower, and the HRG-70 (and missile sidecars) allows a Cyclone to use heavy weapons comparable to those found on Silverback turret by extension of known examples.

The MODAT's trapazoidal layout in vehicle mode means that more space will be wasted in storage of the unit, than a Cyclone or Silverback (in similar mode) which are more rectangular. Their height differences mean little here since they are likely stored in areas for a person to walk around in on one level as see in the VHT bay in TRM saga, and Cyclone bays in NG/TSC.

The only advantage it seems to really have is in the higher speeds available compared to a Cyclone and Silverback, but that is likely over open prepared level terrain, possibly even in stripped down state (w/no weapons). In an off road situation it may not be any faster. So I'm not seeing any overall superiority of the MODAT over the Cyclone or Silverback.

2)As I keep saying, several scenarios for the origin of a trike design would be pre-Silverback or even Cyclone, so it wouldn't even be a choice between using space for the ubiquitous design or the specialized design: its a choice between the specialized design or giving your elite troops nothing.

You don't need to give your elite troops nothing. They may actually favor other options, such as a mix of nt-battloids/powersuits and conventional platforms instead of over reliance on a Veritech system. In the period you are looking at though, the VHT-2 is around in that size category (by Palladium's reckoning of being w/n +/- 6ft) with very attractive features. And as the UEDF:ASC elite troops (TC: Special Forces) show in that period, Veritechs are not that attractive to them (by the standardized MOS skills package, favoring use Power Armor or nt-Battloids over veritechs except by the TC:RP and even then it is optional) which would give us a clue to the UEEF forces in that same period.

(3)The fact that despite space on U.S. Navy ships likewise being at a premium, both the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Navy SEALS use specialized limited-run equipment, negates that as a dis-qualifier.

True, however the US Navy Ships have it a bit easier in comparison IMHO. It is much easier for them to acquire fresh water and air supplies in comparison than say a spaceship out in deep space, which likely is going to have extraction equipment (can't depend on every world having it readily accessible) and some margin to deal with losses from inefficient recycling or losses due to damage/leaks that they will have to compete with for room that they didn't before on planetary navy ships.