Can-Am Spyder Cyclone Armour and a Horizant Idea

[Rimmerdal]

A few Robotech ideas to run up the flag pole...

Silverback with EOD systems and Armature
Can-am Spider EoD Cyclone
Special equipment: Armature and small robots to disable and scout remotely

Find robotics expert and EoD personnel for exact needs of suit. EoD extension course is not sufficient to design suit.

Design note: Treads instead of tires (for better stability on sand, snow and other non-paved terrain. Three sets (2 front and 1 in the rear)

Can-am Spider Communications Cyclone (Soundwave Cyclone)
Special Equipment: Comm gear and relay gear. Jamming and extensive as possible electronics. Customizable based on mission preferred
Design note: Treads instead of tires (for better stability on sand, snow and other non-paved terrain. Three sets (2 front and 1 in the rear)

Audio-Video Helmet Vizor: A camera and screen built in to the helmet of the Cyclone can display information or Video feed to better facilate communications. Arm plates have sensor and relay panels to send/receive transmissions and satellite transmissions.

Can-am Spider Tank Cyclone? ("Megatron" Cyclone)
Special gear: Arm Weapon and two forward mounted on board weapons. Forward mounted are shoulder mounted in armor mode.
Weapons suggested..Heavy weapons such as grenade/rockets used by infantry in case cyclone destroyed/damaged beyond transformation. Grenades and rockets can also provide non-combat assistance such as Cameras, flares, riot control and other non-lethal incendiary rounds as well.

Design note: Treads instead of tires for better stability on sand, snow and other non-paved terrain. Three sets (2 front and 1 in the rear)?

Satellite Beta:
Beta with Com suite and stabilizer boosters. Jet or Guardian mode should have boosters and jets to help it modify its orbit and position. Works in conjunction Comm Cyclone. possibility of deploy-able ground drone in bomb bay a possibility worth looking into.

-Gun nest Horizant cargo pods:
Each crate holds one gun team equal to AC-130 gun crew and enough weapons to start World War XXV.....

[glitterboy2098]

not that a 3 wheel cyclone wouldn't be interesting, but what about the roles you suggested make them require a 3 wheeler instead of a variant of one of the VR-030, or 050 models? or that of a Silverback?

Cyclones already have a deployable "camcorder" screen for displaying certain types of video, sensor, and targeting data.. and it seems likely that some degree of in helmet projection is already in use, given some of the scenes in the show.

and the Beta's built in jet system make it transatmospheric, which is more than enough thrust to let it adjust its orbit. no need for extra thrusters.

the idea of a deployable drone or sensor package module for the bomb bay is not a bad one.. instead of a "sattelite" designation, such an extra sensor system would qualify it for an "E" added to it's designator instead of the "B".. that is, the Electronic warfare designator code instead of the bomber one. a Drone would probably make it an "R" for recon.

and all mecha already work in conjunction with all the other mecha.. that is what the combat networking abilities of 2nd ed mecha do. they have radio sytems designed to share computer information on sensor stuff, targeting, and so on between units. basically similar to the LINK-16 systems that have been in use for military vehicles since the 1970's. command units like the VFA-6H 'blue' Alpha, or the VF-1S Valkyrie just carry extra computers which can do more with that information, and feed it back to the other units to improve combat abilities and awareness (similar to what the AWACs and command center planes do today, only much smaller in size). but even two regular mecha can share video, sensor info (like radar), and basic targeting data. (like one plane being able to spot for missile shots fired from other planes)

[Rimmerdal]

three wheel is more stable and give it more room for add ons. That frankly it would perform better in snow, sand and other places two wheels may not. The Y-frame also allows for more armament too.

I was thinking more a display capability to show others what your seeing..to show people maps, read outs or images on your face plate external surface for others to see.

That is right on for the designation for the Beta..an E and/or R for it fits. Even if not in full orbit and only at High altitude it would serve as satellite of sorts. Just need sort out if it should be a ground or Air drone. The smart way to go would design one each and I may do just that.

I'm aware of the shared info. saw a few episodes of Future Weapons and other shows on that. I was thinking the E/R Beta might well serve as a dedicated com relay and visual recon more than a third eye Target. I did have the thought of the beta carrying a set of drop and remote pilot cruise style missiles for the times you want reach out an touch some one.

[ShadowLogan]

A camera and screen built in to the helmet of the Cyclone can display information or Video feed to better facilate communications. Arm plates have sensor and relay panels to send/receive transmissions and satellite transmissions.

Cyclones already have the pop-up display unit in the shoulder as previously mentioned. The camera system Sue Gram uses in "Reflex Point" also is the unit for the Cyclone's recon suite, and in the show it is shown to have holographic projection capabilities (mentioned in the RPG writeup). So there is no need for this as the hardware is already in use on the recon model (and the camera is portable enough any Cyclone could probably use it if need be). So basically if the camera can see something (or be made to see it), then it can project it.

three wheel is more stable and give it more room for add ons. That frankly it would perform better in snow, sand and other places two wheels may not. The Y-frame also allows for more armament too.

But that only really works for motorcycle mode. In Power Armor/Battloid mode the mecha is still reduced to two feet for surface area, and now it is even heavier even before you put in place the additional add-ons, weight distribution could also be an issue killing stability in Battloid mode. I'm not sure if the Cyclone needs more armament (that isn't to say it couldn't do with more effective) at one time either.

If one is looking for more gear and stability, the sidecar system would seem to be easier to implement than redesigning the Cyclone to have a Y-frame. Battloid mode portability is an issue in the known examples, but that can be addressed I think w/o requiring a redesign of the cyclone.

I'm not sure I see why the Cyclone needs the Y-frame to handle EOD. I would think they would use Battloid/Power Armor mode for those functions, and just use the cycle mode for transportation to/from, equipping the Cyclone with manipulator arms and other EOD gear in the armshields or sidecar (or if VR-041 based: the chest pods).

[jaymz]

A camera and screen built in to the helmet of the Cyclone can display information or Video feed to better facilate communications. Arm plates have sensor and relay panels to send/receive transmissions and satellite transmissions.

Cyclones already have the pop-up display unit in the shoulder as previously mentioned. The camera system Sue Gram uses in "Reflex Point" also is the unit for the Cyclone's recon suite, and in the show it is shown to have holographic projection capabilities (mentioned in the RPG writeup). So there is no need for this as the hardware is already in use on the recon model (and the camera is portable enough any Cyclone could probably use it if need be). So basically if the camera can see something (or be made to see it), then it can project it.

three wheel is more stable and give it more room for add ons. That frankly it would perform better in snow, sand and other places two wheels may not. The Y-frame also allows for more armament too.

But that only really works for motorcycle mode. In Power Armor/Battloid mode the mecha is still reduced to two feet for surface area, and now it is even heavier even before you put in place the additional add-ons, weight distribution could also be an issue killing stability in Battloid mode. I'm not sure if the Cyclone needs more armament (that isn't to say it couldn't do with more effective) at one time either.

If one is looking for more gear and stability, the sidecar system would seem to be easier to implement than redesigning the Cyclone to have a Y-frame. Battloid mode portability is an issue in the known examples, but that can be addressed I think w/o requiring a redesign of the cyclone.

I'm not sure I see why the Cyclone needs the Y-frame to handle EOD. I would think they would use Battloid/Power Armor mode for those functions, and just use the cycle mode for transportation to/from, equipping the Cyclone with manipulator arms and other EOD gear in the armshields or sidecar (or if VR-041 based: the chest pods).

Dave Deitrich did an Engineering model in Third Invid War.

I think a Y frame can work but not if the paired wheels are in front. It would work better as a more traditional Trike set up.

in the end though, Shadow is right. It's really unneeded. Especially with the use of the Silverback.

[Rimmerdal]

A camera and screen built in to the helmet of the Cyclone can display information or Video feed to better facilate communications. Arm plates have sensor and relay panels to send/receive transmissions and satellite transmissions.

Cyclones already have the pop-up display unit in the shoulder as previously mentioned. The camera system Sue Gram uses in "Reflex Point" also is the unit for the Cyclone's recon suite, and in the show it is shown to have holographic projection capabilities (mentioned in the RPG writeup). So there is no need for this as the hardware is already in use on the recon model (and the camera is portable enough any Cyclone could probably use it if need be). So basically if the camera can see something (or be made to see it), then it can project it.

three wheel is more stable and give it more room for add ons. That frankly it would perform better in snow, sand and other places two wheels may not. The Y-frame also allows for more armament too.

But that only really works for motorcycle mode. In Power Armor/Battloid mode the mecha is still reduced to two feet for surface area, and now it is even heavier even before you put in place the additional add-ons, weight distribution could also be an issue killing stability in Battloid mode. I'm not sure if the Cyclone needs more armament (that isn't to say it couldn't do with more effective) at one time either.

If one is looking for more gear and stability, the sidecar system would seem to be easier to implement than redesigning the Cyclone to have a Y-frame. Battloid mode portability is an issue in the known examples, but that can be addressed I think w/o requiring a redesign of the cyclone.

I'm not sure I see why the Cyclone needs the Y-frame to handle EOD. I would think they would use Battloid/Power Armor mode for those functions, and just use the cycle mode for transportation to/from, equipping the Cyclone with manipulator arms and other EOD gear in the armshields or sidecar (or if VR-041 based: the chest pods).

Dave Deitrich did an Engineering model in Third Invid War.

I think a Y frame can work but not if the paired wheels are in front. It would work better as a more traditional Trike set up.

in the end though, Shadow is right. It's really unneeded. Especially with the use of the Silverback.

a silver back is a bit big to be running around in tight spaces. and I a wide added side car would be equally problematic as well. And I see it fitting better than a traditional 2 wheel easier park and you can install an auto pilot. Last I checked motorcycles with 2 wheels don't stand on there own. Also a sliver back takes a lot space up in transport...I'm looking minimize that and still get the special gear where its needed

But shadow...you do inspire a thought. VF's in various series get armor packs..in place of a side car...maybe a system like that for cyclone. Weight can be redistributed and balance re-orientated easy enough that isn't a major concern.

Jamyz, a traditional Y-frame does have limits..I could put the wheels in back and use a more specifically set up armor system. that make look more like a mini-tank rather than a bike...but could work. Will consider that and going with fur wheeler as well.

shadow the, arms is for digging and placing mines at safer distances as well as practical uses a soldier can think. the arm could easily be modded for construction or other uses as well now that I consider it. Plus having reactive armor with angles to help deflect blast and being lower to the ground makes it a bit safer. The EoD variant will likely end up with remotes to defuse as well. spider, wheeled or treaded to assist as scouts/or remote hands to go in spots the operator can't reach. And shadow I didn't forget about the Arm shields...I got plans for them need to read up on few items first.

[jaymz]

Actually once you go to a y-frame you will start taking up significantly more room than a traditional cyclone. Example, that Spyder is almost as big in footprint as a smart car. The silverback really isn't that big when compared to a Spyder. It is bulkier but not THAT much bigger and can better do the thing you want a Y frame Cyclone can do and then some.

If you want to see what kind of size a Y-frame cyclone might be check out the MODAT/GARLAND from Robotech the untold story better known as Megazone 23. Thats the kind of bike size you'd be looking at for what you really want to do.

[jaymz]

Oh and to comment on the Horizont.....I did up a Gunboat variant of the Horizont for my own games. Sort of as a assault and escort craft to larger ships and other Horizonts.

[ShadowLogan]

shadow the, arms is for digging and placing mines at safer distances as well as practical uses a soldier can think.

I can see what the arms are for, but I don't see why the Y-Frame is necessary to make use of it. A side car is going to be just as effective if you want to mount and use the extension arms only in 'cycle mode. While the Y-frame examples have better front angle protection, they don't appear to do much for side/underside/rear/top protection.

a silver back is a bit big to be running around in tight spaces. and I a wide added side car would be equally problematic as well. And I see it fitting better than a traditional 2 wheel easier park and you can install an auto pilot. Last I checked motorcycles with 2 wheels don't stand on there own.

If the MT-21 Dauntless (NG SB) is anything to go by a sidecar is only going to double the width (roughly: 1.2m v 0.55m), which means the sidecar on a Cyclone will be similar, and will take up less space than the Y-Frame in width (they have similar lengths) at ~1.5m vs ~1m on the units I looked at on that website and in the 2E RPG. So the Sidecar equipped version can go into tighter spaces than the Y-Frame, and has less wasted space in comparison in a simple park compared to both.

Do you really need an autopilot? And using a Sidecar you get the 3rd wheel, so there is no need for the costly Y-Frame development. A 2-wheel Robot cycle is possible, DARPA had an entry a few years back in one of their challenges. (Given that Cyclones also have thrusters, it would not be to hard to see them stand up if on their side by using vectored thrust).

[Rimmerdal]

shadow the, arms is for digging and placing mines at safer distances as well as practical uses a soldier can think.

I can see what the arms are for, but I don't see why the Y-Frame is necessary to make use of it. A side car is going to be just as effective if you want to mount and use the extension arms only in 'cycle mode. While the Y-frame examples have better front angle protection, they don't appear to do much for side/underside/rear/top protection.

a silver back is a bit big to be running around in tight spaces. and I a wide added side car would be equally problematic as well. And I see it fitting better than a traditional 2 wheel easier park and you can install an auto pilot. Last I checked motorcycles with 2 wheels don't stand on there own.

If the MT-21 Dauntless (NG SB) is anything to go by a sidecar is only going to double the width (roughly: 1.2m v 0.55m), which means the sidecar on a Cyclone will be similar, and will take up less space than the Y-Frame in width (they have similar lengths) at ~1.5m vs ~1m on the units I looked at on that website and in the 2E RPG. So the Sidecar equipped version can go into tighter spaces than the Y-Frame, and has less wasted space in comparison in a simple park compared to both.

Do you really need an autopilot? And using a Sidecar you get the 3rd wheel, so there is no need for the costly Y-Frame development. A 2-wheel Robot cycle is possible, DARPA had an entry a few years back in one of their challenges. (Given that Cyclones also have thrusters, it would not be to hard to see them stand up if on their side by using vectored thrust).

And that's the problem..the arm is usable ONLY in Cycle mode..for it truly be useful is should be available in ALL modes, not just motorcycle. If the Y-frame can hold the gear as well and is going to be as wide it still makes sense..more space and in one piece to reduce the issue of connecting mechanics going wrong. I can give up the size reduction as the same size restriction will apply to the side car anyway. Now to answer mobility and turn issue treads should be able to sharpen the turn radius and time. Might be even better than wheels. With treads it can turn on the spot more easily.

I did consider an a shell to protect the pilot at first and thought it would look too much like a mini-tank...but I need a compartment to protect said pilot unless a better option comes to mind. That would mean its more a small tank than Cyclone...again..I can live with that. Tank-clone? that sounds cheesy...LOL!

[Rimmerdal]

Actually once you go to a y-frame you will start taking up significantly more room than a traditional cyclone. Example, that Spyder is almost as big in footprint as a smart car. The silverback really isn't that big when compared to a Spyder. It is bulkier but not THAT much bigger and can better do the thing you want a Y frame Cyclone can do and then some.

If you want to see what kind of size a Y-frame cyclone might be check out the MODAT/GARLAND from Robotech the untold story better known as Megazone 23. Thats the kind of bike size you'd be looking at for what you really want to do.

I'll try and find those on line. I recall a site had something similar to it. Much appreciate the reminder.

[ShadowLogan]

And that's the problem..the arm is usable ONLY in Cycle mode..for it truly be useful is should be available in ALL modes, not just motorcycle.

The Cyclone's normal battloid mode arm IS the operator's limb in CVR-3 powered body armor basically, so it is available, just not in the manner you want it. So any extra limbs (be in sidecar or hub/fa) would be available in two out of 3 modes (storage-box being #3 and I don't think anyone expects functionality in that mode). Nothing prevents the packages on the hub from being used, though only the EP-40 is shown to fire from that position (CADS-1 where never used in the show, and the GR-97 use was done exclusively in PA mode IINM) in Cycle mode during the NG arc.

The Sidecar actually allows for the arm(s) to be built stronger, more durable, and with a longer reach than if mounted to the Y-Frame or even the regular 2-wheel hub I would think. A sidecar arm doesn't have to share as much of the available space as a Y-Frame would mounting the arm in front.

If the Y-frame can hold the gear as well and is going to be as wide it still makes sense..

If one really needs more room, then it makes more sense to move up to the Silverback or go with a simpler sidecar setup. And the Sidecar will only see the width doubled, as opposed to tripped with a Y-Frame. The Y-Frame itself will also require additional gear to make it work I would suspect (shocks, struts, frames, brake cables, etc, plus transformation gear), so you may not have as much actual extra room as you think when compared to a sidecar.

more space and in one piece to reduce the issue of connecting mechanics going wrong.

They already have the basics worked out form the other sidecars that are said to exist. So plugging in specialized sidecars would be faster, simplier, and cheaper to produce since you can now configure any Cyclone model to handle specialized roles (or just modify the Silverback). And it wouldn't require alterations to the Cyclone itself to compensate for all the changes the Y-Frame will likely result in.

I did consider an a shell to protect the pilot at first and thought it would look too much like a mini-tank...

At which point you are basically dealing with something trying to compete with a Silverback, and the Silverback can carry far more armament than the stock Cyclone or even one with a Y-Frame. It sports 4 hub stations to the Cyclone's 2. It has a heavy weapons mount on a rear turret (Y-Frame or not, the Cyclone can not compete here, even with a sidecar). And some models trade "saddlebags" for missile launchers (equal to 2 pair of GR-103s found only on the VR-041).

Size is an advantage, but the Y-Frame will result in a larger mecha than a 2-wheel Cyclone (it has more physical volume to account for), so it still can't go places the regular model can.

There just doesn't appear to be any real advantage in the UEEF producing an new design for an intermediate step between the regular Cyclone and the Silverback, which is what the Y-Frame basically is. These are specialist roles you are targeting, and two of them are already handled by existing models of the Silverback and/or Cyclone, leaving the EOD role. Which can be taken over by the existing Silverback/Cyclone families with minimal modifications to the existing infrastructure.

[Damian Magecraft]

design question
on 2 wheel bike in battoid mode the wheels fit around the shoulders so wheres the third wheel go?

[Rimmerdal]

design question
on 2 wheel bike in battoid mode the wheels fit around the shoulders so wheres the third wheel go?

Took a bit thinking there but I have that sorted. The two front treads will go to feet as there already near the riders feet already. If I go wheels they will end up on shoulders still. the rear tire will be a small set 2 or 4 and go at the base of the back. A set of full sized in the back I thought about but went smaller to compact the design a little. (Edit: and that small of the back tread could be a winch system as well for rope, cable and such.

I even toyed with the notion of having the 4 rear wheels be roller blades...but that was a little much for a military design and just more mechanisms to need work.

[Sgt Anjay]

To me, the room for a passenger greatly increases the Silverback bulk and isn't always adding very much; a one-man design with added room and stability for heavy weapons could have a niche.

Also, a worthwhile look might be made at the three-wheeled cyclone-that-almost-was. Namely, the "prototype cyclone" for the Sentinels (there's a picture in Robotech Art 3) that, after Sentinels fell through, was adapted and used by Tatsunoko along with other Sentinels material in the anime Red Photon Zillion. The transforming one-in-front-two-in-back trikes (called tri-chargers) were a pretty solid mecha design.

[Rimmerdal]

And that's the problem..the arm is usable ONLY in Cycle mode..for it truly be useful is should be available in ALL modes, not just motorcycle.

The Cyclone's normal battloid mode arm IS the operator's limb in CVR-3 powered body armor basically, so it is available, just not in the manner you want it. So any extra limbs (be in sidecar or hub/fa) would be available in two out of 3 modes (storage-box being #3 and I don't think anyone expects functionality in that mode). Nothing prevents the packages on the hub from being used, though only the EP-40 is shown to fire from that position (CADS-1 where never used in the show, and the GR-97 use was done exclusively in PA mode IINM) in Cycle mode during the NG arc.

The Sidecar actually allows for the arm(s) to be built stronger, more durable, and with a longer reach than if mounted to the Y-Frame or even the regular 2-wheel hub I would think. A sidecar arm doesn't have to share as much of the available space as a Y-Frame would mounting the arm in front.

If the Y-frame can hold the gear as well and is going to be as wide it still makes sense..

If one really needs more room, then it makes more sense to move up to the Silverback or go with a simpler sidecar setup. And the Sidecar will only see the width doubled, as opposed to tripped with a Y-Frame. The Y-Frame itself will also require additional gear to make it work I would suspect (shocks, struts, frames, brake cables, etc, plus transformation gear), so you may not have as much actual extra room as you think when compared to a sidecar.

more space and in one piece to reduce the issue of connecting mechanics going wrong.

They already have the basics worked out form the other sidecars that are said to exist. So plugging in specialized sidecars would be faster, simplier, and cheaper to produce since you can now configure any Cyclone model to handle specialized roles (or just modify the Silverback). And it wouldn't require alterations to the Cyclone itself to compensate for all the changes the Y-Frame will likely result in.

I did consider an a shell to protect the pilot at first and thought it would look too much like a mini-tank...

At which point you are basically dealing with something trying to compete with a Silverback, and the Silverback can carry far more armament than the stock Cyclone or even one with a Y-Frame. It sports 4 hub stations to the Cyclone's 2. It has a heavy weapons mount on a rear turret (Y-Frame or not, the Cyclone can not compete here, even with a sidecar). And some models trade "saddlebags" for missile launchers (equal to 2 pair of GR-103s found only on the VR-041).

Size is an advantage, but the Y-Frame will result in a larger mecha than a 2-wheel Cyclone (it has more physical volume to account for), so it still can't go places the regular model can.

There just doesn't appear to be any real advantage in the UEEF producing an new design for an intermediate step between the regular Cyclone and the Silverback, which is what the Y-Frame basically is. These are specialist roles you are targeting, and two of them are already handled by existing models of the Silverback and/or Cyclone, leaving the EOD role. Which can be taken over by the existing Silverback/Cyclone families with minimal modifications to the existing infrastructure.

I haven't ditched either the Silver back or Cyclone. Just looking for middle ground. I'm sure a Y-frame will work out..just in process of figuring out. If the Y frame were popular when robotech was made...it would be one. I do appreciate the ideas your inspiring and the posts so don't think I'm arguing to just for the sake of it.

I did target specialist roles first..as an all purpose unit it would serve as a heavy support cyclone along side to supplement the Silverback. Either way I'm pretty sure treads and not tires will be used. With all the weight and some of the options I'm considering for the combat variants I may need them.

and Sgt. that was what I was thinking..a heavy weapons version to serve as mobile artillery unit. the Cyclone unit being both canon and mini-tank. the EoD and comm variants would be an ideal support unit to it. Like the VF I don't see a need for a straight combat craft to have a second seat. the comm and EOD version..maybe. still debating that.

[ShadowLogan]

I haven't ditched either the Silver back or Cyclone. Just looking for middle ground.

I get that the Silverback & Cyclone haven't been abandoned and you are looking to create an intermediate design that occupies the middle.

I did target specialist roles first..as an all purpose unit it would serve as a heavy support cyclone along side to supplement the Silverback.

Except as pointed out the Y-Frame roles are already occupied by existing Cyclone/Silverback in nearly all cases. And if the Cyclone needs more room, it has the option of creating a specialized sidecar with similar or better performance than a Y-Frame (unless you think you can get 6+ SRMs out of the extra space like one of the known sidecars).

E.O.D is not a current (assigned in the RPG) mission, but that does not mean that role and others aren't filled in by these two platforms already, or something else entirely (a veritech may not be ideal for every role, and we know RT forces still use conventional & non-variable designs).

a heavy weapons version to serve as mobile artillery unit. the Cyclone unit being both canon and mini-tank. the EoD and comm variants would be an ideal support unit to it.

Given the small size though, that mobile artillery unit and mini-tank are going to be more limited in the caliber of the weapon(s) they can bring to bare, which would limit their effectiveness and could certainly be more effective if done on a straight Silverback (larger size, a heavy weapons turret) or other platform.

We also know that the UEEF/UEDF/ASC/REF/RDF do kill/end programs due to cost. The YF-4, VF-X-5 Condor, and the VR-041 are all examples where cost is a known issue that killed programs or limited production in the 2E RPG. So it is entirely possible that the UEEF/REF will not commit the resources for so little gain when other platforms exist that can do the missions more effectively.

[Rimmerdal]

Except as pointed out the Y-Frame roles are already occupied by existing Cyclone/Silverback in nearly all cases. And if the Cyclone needs more room, it has the option of creating a specialized sidecar with similar or better performance than a Y-Frame (unless you think you can get 6+ SRMs out of the extra space like one of the known sidecars).

E.O.D is not a current (assigned in the RPG) mission, but that does not mean that role and others aren't filled in by these two platforms already, or something else entirely (a veritech may not be ideal for every role, and we know RT forces still use conventional & non-variable designs).

I get you think it should be on a silverback..as you have stated many times.

Given the small size though, that mobile artillery unit and mini-tank are going to be more limited in the caliber of the weapon(s) they can bring to bare, which would limit their effectiveness and could certainly be more effective if done on a straight Silverback (larger size, a heavy weapons turret) or other platform.

Given the current state of weapons in the robotech universe size should not be an issue. Several weapons on the Silverack and Cyclone can easily be modified to fit the role fast moving artillery.

We also know that the UEEF/UEDF/ASC/REF/RDF do kill/end programs due to cost. The YF-4, VF-X-5 Condor, and the VR-041 are all examples where cost is a known issue that killed programs or limited production in the 2E RPG. So it is entirely possible that the UEEF/REF will not commit the resources for so little gain when other platforms exist that can do the missions more effectively.

I'm not an idiot,, don't need to repeat that you think the UEEF would call it a failure or not worth the cost to. I'm looking to get something that does work because hey...I want to try and see what I can come up with for Y Frame Cyclone as an experiment. and it just might turn out to be workable.

[Sgt Anjay]

Something the size of a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger should be capable of a weapon as big as anything on a Silverback; a lot of a Silverback's bulk is just room for a passenger.

And while Robotech does demonstrate that the United Earth's military does kill/end programs due to cost, of your three examples the YF-4 was produced in limited numbers before being deemed too expensive for mass production, the VF-X-5 Condor was converted into an assault battloid that entered mass production, and the VR-041 fully entered service as the main cyclone before being superseded by the -50 series. None of that precludes a three-wheeled alternative or competitor to the Silverback with a limited production run as a plausible niche design, especially for any group within the Expeditionary Forces not especially impressed with a light infantry mecha carrying a passenger.

And that's not the only option; I'll again point out the tri-charger in Robotech Art 3 is listed as "prototype cyclone". The RPG text mentions YVR-010 and YVR-020 series. Those would be very limited in number, but...there's no particular reason there couldn't have been three-wheeled vehicles in the -10 and -20 series. It would be an interesting nod to Robotech's development history, which I know is not everyone's cup of tea, but kinda neat conceptually at least.

Or one could go whole hog and use trikes as both early series prototypes and as perennial limited-run competitors to the two-wheel cyclone and the Silverback lineages throughout the Expeditionary Force's history.

[Rimmerdal]

To me, the room for a passenger greatly increases the Silverback bulk and isn't always adding very much; a one-man design with added room and stability for heavy weapons could have a niche.

Also, a worthwhile look might be made at the three-wheeled cyclone-that-almost-was. Namely, the "prototype cyclone" for the Sentinels (there's a picture in Robotech Art 3) that, after Sentinels fell through, was adapted and used by Tatsunoko along with other Sentinels material in the anime Red Photon Zillion. The transforming one-in-front-two-in-back trikes (called tri-chargers) were a pretty solid mecha design.

Also had notion if the two front treads were on the arm shield they could be two other points for a winch system. Using a Side car for parts to make an armored Canopy and mounting for said weapon in motorcycle mode and the added canapy armor can be used as added armor in battloid mode.

[Rimmerdal]

Looked it up and the wheels were bulging out or would need to be smaller than an ATV would have. But treads will do as double duty as tool/Winch and for other uses like climbing/rappelling.

My concern will be how well treads do in non-tank terrain like inside buildings and such. the other than that I like the concept. with minimal hassle the unit can take on more specialized roles as needed. Such that EoD. Ammo handling and salvage with kits modded for specific jobs like comm and even an explorer or science kit as well. but first I need a base model.

[Rimmerdal]

Something the size of a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger should be capable of a weapon as big as anything on a Silverback; a lot of a Silverback's bulk is just room for a passenger.

And while Robotech does demonstrate that the United Earth's military does kill/end programs due to cost, of your three examples the YF-4 was produced in limited numbers before being deemed too expensive for mass production, the VF-X-5 Condor was converted into an assault battloid that entered mass production, and the VR-041 fully entered service as the main cyclone before being superseded by the -50 series. None of that precludes a three-wheeled alternative or competitor to the Silverback with a limited production run as a plausible niche design, especially for any group within the Expeditionary Forces not especially impressed with a light infantry mecha carrying a passenger.

And that's not the only option; I'll again point out the tri-charger in Robotech Art 3 is listed as "prototype cyclone". The RPG text mentions YVR-010 and YVR-020 series. Those would be very limited in number, but...there's no particular reason there couldn't have been three-wheeled vehicles in the -10 and -20 series. It would be an interesting nod to Robotech's development history, which I know is not everyone's cup of tea, but kinda neat conceptually at least.

Or one could go whole hog and use trikes as both early series prototypes and as perennial limited-run competitors to the two-wheel cyclone and the Silverback lineages throughout the Expeditionary Force's history.

Not planning on giving up on the idea. I'm a bit tougher skinned since joining these forums. LOL!

and the unit will be for specific unit for field testing if any get built. Just tired of the same old cyclone.

[drewkitty ~..~]

I made up a few more "cargo pod" types when the RT:SC book came out.
(Stats are removed to comply with board rules.)
Horizont Accessory Pods
These pods were first made for the Horizont-T shuttle to convert them into tactical assets or Q-ships. Most of the pods developed were missile based, with very few directed energy weapon variants.
AMMLP-001 Anti-mecha Mine Pod
While this pod was developed it was never put into production because of launch order errors. The pod could not reliably distinguish between friendly mecha and hostile w/o an IFF beacon on the friendlies.
ASMLP-002 Anti-Ship Mine Pod
This pod was produced in good quantity early on, its was not replenished by further production by the UEEF. The pod it was developed to occupy starships when they defold, to give the defenders a little bit of time to get to their GQ stations. Built in the same basic concept as the SBP-004 with each missile in a individual break away cowlings. Unlike the SBP-004, these pods had their own sensors and were networked with each other. This was to let each of the pods fire at individual ships as their primary targets. Firing their LRMs, in waves of 100, twice per melee. To accommodate the extra sensor equipment in the pods, their payloads are 100 less then the SBP-004 which uses the on-board sensors of the LC-12T, LCA-12T, or MTSS-12 for their initial directions.
The the major difference between the armaments, is that that once with in 30 miles of the targets the Multi-warheads launch their payloads of MRL's, once this volley is launched it homes in on the
PDP--003 Point Defense Pod (& Mine sweeper)
Not certain what they would encounter at the Master's homeworld this pod was developed and produced in limited numbers. This pod was outfitted with active sensors that could give the LC-12T a hull map of a starship at 3 light seconds. This was obstinently to burn threw any cloaking materials that might be employed on long duration mines. But the effect was to be able to fry a missile's guidance sensors. However, this pods were almost useless when battling the Invid, who didn't use missiles. Its short range missile launchers were the only thing that saved them from being scraped and recycled.
Using 36 SRM launchers, mounted 90 degrees off bore. (much like vertical launch tubes on today's missile cruisers) The secondary plan was to have LC-12's or it variants to fly a close screen to intercept MRM's and LRM's launched against the starship they were protecting.
SBP--004 Strategic Bombardment Pod
This Pods was developed to counter a large fleet of Capital Ships. Given the data gleaned from the zentraedi data banks, these pods were made to give the Horizont-T the ability to attack the Master's capital ships. Even if only to delay them while the SDF-3 and the other Capital ships took care of immediate threats first. The Long Range Missiles housed in break away launchers can ether be set lock onto capital ships (default) or mecha sized spacecraft. The long range missiles are fire in groups of 100 vs capital ships and in groups of 10 vs mecha sized spacecraft, in random fire mode.
These pods were made in greater quantity then the TDP-008's and were used up during the same initial battles with the Regents Invid Hoards. However, these were never replaced till recently, due to the loss of most of the Fleet's capital ship at the betrayal of the haydonites.
TBP-008 Tactical Bombardment Pod
This pods was developed to to meet a overwhelming hoard of mecha with a rain of medium range missies. Planers did not think this pod would ever be used, so there were only a few of them manufactured before the departure of the Pioneer Mission. However, it was a godsend when encountering the Invid Battle Fleets that used massed mecha to destroy it's enemies. All of the initial pods were used in the first few battles with the Regent's Invid hoards. Only a few of these pods were replaced once the Tirol''s shipyards were set up, because they consume significant numbers of Medium Range Missiles. The missiles are housed in break away launchers of 5 mdc each.
The down side to this pod's force multiplier is that all the missiles are fire off in random fire mode. With each missile randomly homing in on a target using it's on board sensors, attacking the closest targets first. These tend to be mecha sized targets.
MMBP-120 Mobile Maintenance Pod
These pods were developed to give access to the damaged hull of the ship to make repairs to them in the case that shipyard space was unavailable and to make emergency repairs to the hull if the ship was damaged to much to make a fold jump to a shipyard. While this pod was not on a top priority like new ships with the brass, but it was pushed through development by hook and crook by Lang and dr. Penn. It was also produced by siphoning funds from other padded projects. Lang's and Penn's foresight was wise indeed, for the UEEF had some trouble retooling the Fantoma shipyards for UEEF ships. Meanwhile, the Invid attacks kept coming in damaging even more ships. By the time the shipyards were retooled, every ship in the fleet ether had been repaired using these pods as mobile shipyards or had the contents of these pods acting as semi-permanent patches to their hulls.
This pod is not much more then a bunch of interconnecting plats that when activated expand and form shapes input by the system's operator. The plates' default forms are that of geodesic spheres/domes, but can be formed into other shapes. The intended uses were to form pressure tight work area about hull ruptures so the work could be done using light environmental suits, rather then full normal suits. However, many other applications were discovered through necessity and laziness. Once a net of sensor platforms were deployed, maintenance was first done in normal suits, till a crew who hated to suit up brought along a MMBP-120 to surround the platform with a maintenance area and got done with it's routine maintenance in a quarter of the time. And after a few battles it became standard to affix a pod to the hull to make emergency repairs and just collapse the plates in place till a real hull fix is done.
Each pod has 578, 10 MDC triangular plates that can make up a sphere 200 feet in diameter. Multiple pods can be joined together to make larger constructs, constructs with airlocks, with the only shape limitation being the imagination of the operator. The physical limitations is that it is only useable in micro gravity because it is 5 times the weight of a fully loaded assault cargo pod. Not recommended for multiple fold jumps, nor combat repair. A hull patch has 40 mdc per one layer of 10'x10' section.
PCP- 142 Particle Cannon Pod
This pod started out as a Test bed for the SDCL/CVE Garfish's new plasma cannon. Based off the SDF-1's main gun, this cannon would of been the first step to reengineer the technology for repairing the SDF-3's main gun if not for the introduction of the synchro cannon. As it was the tech was only scaled up for use on the Shimakaze class BC/CVL. However, this pod needs ether the PP-122 or the PP124 for it to fire more then once ever other melee.
PP-122 & PP-124 Power Pods
This pod was made to fill the role of portable power generation for military bases and and other heavy power use applications. The PP-122 is a pure protoculture power pod intended for use during the Fight against the masters. However, this pod was quickly replaced by the PP-124 that while using a bit of Protoculture for start up and power conversion, it is a fusion power generator that has a lower protoculture signature then an operational Alpha, but it only delivers half the power a PP-122 does. However, it's Hydrogen bunker can be refueled on-site from any water source once a separator plant (MP-125 Hydrogen generator pod) is set up.

FB-330 "WitFit" Pod
At the Altares Research base the main focus of the one of the projects was to find ways of miniaturizing fold drives, with the goal to make fold drives that could be installed into Beta's. They did have some success with the Fold drives that had been installed in the Garfish A CL's. When the news about Space Station Liberty and the Haydonites' betrayal came to Altares Base, everyone was shocked. Projects were re-prioritized and the great minds of the base went to work trying to figure out two things, what components were effected by the hydonite disrupter beams, and how to replace the world wrecking Neutron S Missiles.
During this time of reorganization a group of fold drive techs were lost in the shuffle, and became extremely board. To keep busy, they decided to make something to blow up on of the numerous asteroids in the star system the base was in.
After 'liberating' a few prototypes of the current test type of fold drive, the techs went to work modifying it. Knowing they would need some means of transporting the drive, the rebuilt it inside one of the new Hroizont-V cargo bunkers. During these rebuild and installation, the group removed most of the fail-safes and limiters for the drive, modifying the programing to their own spec's. As they progressed, they documented the work they were doing along with making backups of the programing, the group were following the procedures they had ingrained into them working with scientists so they could make another one.
Half way through their project the crack they had been lost in closed up and were assigned maintenance duties. One of the duty rotations was perfect for a side trip to set off their fold bomb. Once it came to be the group's turn on rotation in servicing the systems remote sensor platforms, they finagled a Horizont-V for the transport.
Bribing the pilot to make a side trip wasn't hard, and the group landed their pod on a largish asteroid and set the countdown. Backing off to what they thought was a safe distance the group, now including the H-V pilot, eagerly awaited the fireworks. Not much happened but some sudden flashes of light. Disappointed, the group went about their duties blissfully unaware of the beehive of activity they caused.
One of the projects that hadn't been shuffled about after the Space-station Liberty news was the Fold Sensor Research Project, that was developing new sensors that could detect the FTL gravity waves associated with entering and exiting hyperspace. The research group detected 42 emergencies from hyperspace, the techs monitoring what was to be a calibration run on empty space decided to alert the base command chain. The base was taken into em-con and fighters launched from the stationed CVE's to investigate the disturbances. When the fighters didn't find anything, the base launched recon-equiped conbats, they swept the area fearing the hydonites has come to the system. It was during this time that the FTL sensor data was being reviewed that they discovered a fold out readings that had preceded the defolds and was located near the center of the cluster of defolds. The readings from the fold were strange, and after a while they began to think that the what they were seeing was an unstable fold bubble.
Meanwhile, the group of techs discovering all the base activity they had caused on their return from the maintenance run. Wanting to lay low, they decided to not set off another fold bomb any time soon.
But as with how these things happen, the techs got board again and started assembling a second fold bomb making a few alterations to it, replacing the pure protoculture power source with an old protoculture fusion reactor and tweaking the emergence algorithms so the defold windows would tend to be drawn to physical masses. Even though they replaced the power source with larger equipment they were able to eliminate or reengineer bits of the drive to make it smaller. Thus they were able to make it fit into a stripped out Horizont-T Cargo Pod. One of the tech 'found' a a unused conbat recon pack and 9 recon drones, he jury-rigged the recon pod into a second H-T pod, as well as improvising launch mounts for the drones in the same pod. His rationalization was 'to get a better look at the fireworks as they happened'. Thus, when duty rotations turned about again to their turn for the system sensor maintenance, they called in some favors for the same pilot to fly the mission and the use of a Horizont-T, loading up their pods, & launching with out any trouble.
After leaving the base's sensor range they diverted to one of their pre-selected asteroids test subjects, and set up their fold bomb pod, arming it for remote activation. After setting the fold bomb, they launched their drones while racing to get back on course for their first maintenance stop. After finishing the work at the first stop and on course of the second, the group set up the recon pod's sensors and activated the fold bomb. They were quite pleased with the firework display, this their second try, that resulted in several fireballs. Thirty-eight of the forty-two defolds interpolated with existing masses, causing near cosmic scale explosions. To their enjoyment, 6 of the recon drones were close enough to the explosions to be short lived.
Unbeknownced to them, the R&D head and base security had found them out, following the trail of missing items used in their first test. However, by the time the R&D head found them out, they had already started making their second bomb. Conferring with the head of security, both decided that these techs were not about to blow up the base so let them proceed with their putting together their project. Wanting a better look at the resulting test, intentionally misplaced several recon drones where they would be found by the techs, and using her clout to smooth the way for them to get the transport they wanted. By the time the techs, now called group 5 in the R&D budget and security files, were on there way to test their new fold bomb, the R&D sensor crews had piggy-back hacked group 5's recon drones and their ship's sensors. So while group 5 watched the sensor feeds from the ship, the sensor techs from R&D were getting the same data through a telemetry patch through the Horizont-T's transponder. So while group 5 was high fiving each other and breaking out the beer, the R&D techs assigned to the task were working hard trying to figure out how group five did the impossible.
When group 5 returned to base, they were immediately escorted to security and grilled, then set to bake in isolation for a week. Each of group 5 accepted a deal, they would work 1000 hours of 'community service' in their off duty hours helping out develop the fold bomb, called the WitFit Bomb by the R&D techs. When debriefed on their construction methods, the questions of how they got it through defold and why there were always 42 parts. The questions were answered, that previous testing of the micro-fold drives determined that it took 0.1 sec for the fold bubble to fail completely, so they set the fold duration to 0.1 sec.. However, in that time the fold bubble would already start to fracture during that time and setting that to a specific number would let the drive cycle completely before totally disintegrating itself. "I figured that the Hydonite disrupter beam cycled at a multiple of 42 hertz so I used the unlimited answer for the divisions so if hit by a disrupter beam, the energy would be used to power the device instead of causing it to blow up."

[Rimmerdal]

I like that Maintenance pod a lot. those bombing and missile pods too. Much cleaner than Gun crewed pods I had in mind.

[Chris0013]

You interest me....would need to see pics of both modes as well as transformation sequence to make up my mind.

As for the comment on wanting to see different types of Cyclones look up Robotech Class Reunion if yo have not see int...there is slightly different design...sort fo like the Saber in the front end/chest area, different rear thruster set up and a big honkin' cannon on the arm.

[Rimmerdal]

not the best artist..but I can try to get images drawn. but for now though. (So far a cross between Jungle Viper and megatron...)
battloid:
-The leg will be covered with portions of heavy armor intended to protect them fragmentation and impact. (They look more like megatron's)

-the main gun will be forearm usable and can stow on the back pack and can extend out from 'pack' where that little flower shape on top of Jungle viper's camo pack.

-two smaller treads in front will be on the forearm or the feet (Still deciding which). the rear tread will be at the small of the back. All three will double as winch system to help salvage, act as a stabilizer for others to climb or what ever else it may be needed for. (Went treads because there smaller and easier on transformation.

-the Canopy armor for the most part is shoulder. It will move to a degree to serve as camo or help deflect blast damage and small arms. Sort of like Jungle vipers Camo-blades it will also serve as a camo net. Considering have the canopy able to change color to evade air search and temperature to hide from thermal..that or have it just cover the back like an armored cape

Motor cycle mode will be a Can-am with canopy over the pilot and the weapon (or Mission gear) on top of the canopy. it can stow in the back portion of the canopy by putting it in side the behind the pilot.

other than having an armored shell around the pilot and treads instead of wheels the plan is it will pretty close to the tank version of the spyder with the missile pod of a standard clone in the spyders shell.

In other words an ugly little cyclone that was probably beaten like a red headed step brother..LOL!

[ShadowLogan]

I'm not an idiot,, don't need to repeat that you think the UEEF would call it a failure or not worth the cost to. I'm looking to get something that does work because hey...I want to try and see what I can come up with for Y Frame Cyclone as an experiment. and it just might turn out to be workable.

I never said you where an idiot, just reminding you of factors involved in how the UEEF operates. The UEEF may or may not consider it a performance failure, but it could still be a cost failure if it is to high for what they get out of it compared to other options to meet those needs.

Given the current state of weapons in the robotech universe size should not be an issue. Several weapons on the Silverack and Cyclone can easily be modified to fit the role fast moving artillery.

Which begs the question why they would need to develop a new platform, when existing platform(s) can be adapted to do the same job.

Something the size of a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger should be capable of a weapon as big as anything on a Silverback; a lot of a Silverback's bulk is just room for a passenger.

That bulk though allows for several advantages for the Silverback over the the MODAT/Garland and Tri-Charger (or Y-Frame):
-A Turreted Main Weapon. That would give the weapon better firing arc in Vehicle and Battloid modes. That isn't to say those others could not mount the same weapon, but the ability to transform (IMHO) may prevent it from using it in a turret due to their smaller size and need to transform in such a small package.
-it can carry a full reload for each missile launcher and the HRG-140 (granted it requires manual reloading) that goes on the turret, I doubt those other examples can do the same
-the two man crew allows it to engage multiple targets simultaneously, or engage one and defend against others. A single crewed platform can't do that as effectively.

f your three examples the YF-4 was produced in limited numbers before being deemed too expensive for mass production, the VF-X-5 Condor was converted into an assault battloid that entered mass production, and the VR-041 fully entered service as the main cyclone before being superseded by the -50 series.

The VF-X-5 Condor though never entered production as a Veritech beyond the prototypes. It was redesigned into a non-transformable unit before entering production. So the Veritech Condor still stands as an example where cost was a factor that killed it, that doesn't mean something couldn't be done to recoup the investment (like the spin-off) from the experimental stage, but the end result may not look like the original (non-transforming instead of original transforming).

[Rimmerdal]

Why a Tri-wheel cyclone?
Simple answer, logan, is tech evolves and such changes do happen..new concepts get tested made all the time. and its actually a more logical step than going FAV. FAV would be a role taken by battloids

why no the Silver backs second pilot:
A two man crews are not necessarily better...why did they eliminate the VF's second seat? they don't need it because the tech allows one person to do that job and that means that back seat pilot is better served in his own VF. Same with cyclones which begs the question why even have a silver back when battloids can do the job, and a simple size up grade on current cyclone would accomplish the same? More importantly one guy piloting means no debates or having to keep your passenger in line.

there are few jobs you want a backseat driver for...Medical and EW chief among them. I like two person craft too..but a Cyclone is not a place you want one in..that second guy could be bringing more fire power to the table an not just taking space that be put better use. It you want a rescue craft or a salvage truck..the Silverbacks fits..bit in straight fight give a mobile and group cyclones any day. And this Heavy cyclone would be part of that squad for the role of tactical support..Leave the silverback to clean up the mess, scout and support armor/battloids and do parameter/guard duty as well as major Demo work (Which I planned on it doing.)

the field demo work will be the heavy cyclones role. Field engineer, Demo personnel, some rescue personnel and such can go with the Can-am for small things the squad needs.

Which begs the question why they would need to develop a new platform, when existing platform(s) can be adapted to do the same job.

because the silver back is not a cyclone its an FAV. and I'd rather have a cyclone doing direct combat. for reasons above. I do like the silverback, but it should be treated as an FAV..and be working with armor or in FAV packs..not as Cyclone support. The Cyclone is best suited to operate in Cyclone only packs..therefore a heavy cyclon to support them makes more sense

[Sgt Anjay]

Something the size of a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger should be capable of a weapon as big as anything on a Silverback; a lot of a Silverback's bulk is just room for a passenger.

That bulk though allows for several advantages for the Silverback over the the MODAT/Garland and Tri-Charger (or Y-Frame)

The Silverback does have some advantages. And some disadvantages. But this isn't an either-or situation; it isn't required to invalidate the Silverback for a 3-wheeler to exist. To use an analogy, just because Humvees are the mainstay vehicle of the U.S. military doesn't mean there are no other vehicles in the U.S. military. For example, Army Rangers use these, the Marines use these, the SEALS use these, and so forth.

f your three examples the YF-4 was produced in limited numbers before being deemed too expensive for mass production, the VF-X-5 Condor was converted into an assault battloid that entered mass production, and the VR-041 fully entered service as the main cyclone before being superseded by the -50 series.

The VF-X-5 Condor though never entered production as a Veritech beyond the prototypes. It was redesigned into a non-transformable unit before entering production. So the Veritech Condor still stands as an example where cost was a factor that killed it, that doesn't mean something couldn't be done to recoup the investment (like the spin-off) from the experimental stage, but the end result may not look like the original (non-transforming instead of original transforming).

And all together your examples show that even programs eventually killed can produce designs that were used by the Expeditionary Forces, leaving open the possibility of a trike design as a limited-run mecha.

[Colonel Wolfe]

I'm hoping one day Tommy will give us more on these units....
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j16/C ... lone01.jpg
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j16/C ... lone02.jpg

[jaymz]

Yeah I've been thinking on those hover cyclones more of kate

[ShadowLogan]

Simple answer, logan, is tech evolves and such changes do happen..new concepts get tested made all the time. and its actually a more logical step than going FAV. FAV would be a role taken by battloids

I know tech evolves and changes happen, etc. Actually the logical step would seem to be adapting the Cyclone's sidecar to enhance its capabilities OR a Silverback variant OR a non-transforming option (possibly a combo) before moving up to a completely new design.

Same with cyclones which begs the question why even have a silver back when battloids can do the job, and a simple size up grade on current cyclone would accomplish the same? More importantly one guy piloting means no debates or having to keep your passenger in line.

The Silverback doesn't require a two person crew, at least in how I interpret the writeup, the gunner is optional (sense he/she can also be a simple passenger that would indicate they are not required).

The same question can be asked about any Veritech platform, considering non-transformable options exist (or derived) that would be better for a given mission, and that goes for Cyclones as well as it does for VFs. The ASC had power armor back in early 201x's, and by the 2020s the UEEF was producing man-size transformable suits, so the UEEF can certainly produce a non-transforming power armor to replace Cyclones in the infantry role (just like nt-battloids can replace the Silverback).

that second guy could be bringing more fire power to the table an not just taking space that be put better use.

You could put two guys in two Cyclones OR two guys in 1 Silverback. The result is the Silverback can be configured to bring equivalent or greater firepower depending on the model and configuration than a pair of Cyclones.

Cyclones (2 stock of a given model & package, some do have open slots or could trade slots in some cases based on the Silverback)
-VR-038L has 2 RL-6s
-VR-041H has 2 pair of GR-103s & CADS-1 (could also use a hand-held weapon, not standard)
-VR-052T has 2 EP-40s
-VR-052F has 4 GR-97s and 2 EP-37s (though downpilots don't get the EP-37)
-VR-057 has 2 GR-97s and 2 H-260 and 2 HRG-70

Silverback (1):
-4 Hardpints that can mount any combination resulting in 4 of (2 are standardized): RL-6, EP-40, GR-97 (1 is stanard on all), EP-37, CADS, H-260 (1 is standard on L/E), HRG-70 (1 is standard on the H) PLUS the heavy weapons mount (HRG-140, AAC-11, 2 sidecars worth of SRMs, MRMs, Mini's Missile launcher equal to 4 GR-103s, can also be used for a sensor package plus carrying a full reload for this system)
-one version can also mount the equivalent of 2 pair of GR-103s for extra firepower on top of the above.

.and be working with armor or in FAV packs..not as Cyclone support

Unfortunatly that is how the Silverback is used as it is shown working as Cyclone support. And it is possible to upgrade the existing Cyclone for the role of heavy support (armor has improved over models, and as the GR-103s show you can expand the firepower without external mountings, which the HRG-70 shows can support a fairly large weapon). So really there is no need for an intermediate between the Cyclone and Silverback as you suggest.

And all together your examples show that even programs eventually killed can produce designs that were used by the Expeditionary Forces, leaving open the possibility of a trike design as a limited-run mecha.

True, but the result isn't always wide spread (and/or lengthy) adoption (or even in the original form in the case of the Condor) even though they are supposedly superior platforms to what they get replaced by. As the adoption of Shadow Technology, the development of the Beta (VFB-9 is based on the shelved VFB-7), the Cyclone (VR-041 uses the same frame and powertrain as the VR-038), and Bioroid Interceptor show the UEEF is more likely to evolve an existing design than start from scratch at this point. The only exception seems to be the Silverback in 2034 (though being the VM-9 it is possible it evolved from an earlier VM-# we don't know about).

The Silverback does have some advantages. And some disadvantages. But this isn't an either-or situation; it isn't required to invalidate the Silverback for a 3-wheeler to exist. To use an analogy, just because Humvees are the mainstay vehicle of the U.S. military doesn't mean there are no other vehicles in the U.S. military. For example, Army Rangers use these, the Marines use these, the SEALS use these, and so forth.

I know it isn't an either/or situation, and that other vehicles are in use. The question/objections I have is it necessary to have a completely new design in this case? A Silverback easily has the room to handle growth into the two areas (E.O.D and mini-tank) no problem, even the Cyclone's sidecar allows room for growth to handle those missions as well as a Y-Frame IMHO.

[Rimmerdal]

Rimmerdal wrote:
.and be working with armor or in FAV packs..not as Cyclone support

Unfortunatly that is how the Silverback is used as it is shown working as Cyclone support. And it is possible to upgrade the existing Cyclone for the role of heavy support (armor has improved over models, and as the GR-103s show you can expand the firepower without external mountings, which the HRG-70 shows can support a fairly large weapon). So really there is no need for an intermediate between the Cyclone and Silverback as you suggest.

Would rather avoid a separate sidecar for the fact a modular system can be pulled in a fight. if I 'm a zent and I see a sidecar..I can target it and remove that effect from play. as built in feature..that advantage is tougher to take out of play.

Now you wanted to know why a three wheel....In combat I'd like to go to bike and robot mode with out stopping. Hence in motion transformation..to and from battloid mode. and two wheels won't allow that as easily. more and more I'm starting to see a Y farm as more effective. for little reasons I did not see at first.

Size wise its bigger, its a little more specialized...sure. but all advantages have a price.

But Logan, you do inspire a use for a side car...How does a side car that changes to an extra layer of armour and/or weapon system for the cyclone in battloid?

Rimmerdal wrote:
.and be working with armor or in FAV packs..not as Cyclone support

Unfortunatly that is how the Silverback is used as it is shown working as Cyclone support. And it is possible to upgrade the existing Cyclone for the role of heavy support (armor has improved over models, and as the GR-103s show you can expand the firepower without external mountings, which the HRG-70 shows can support a fairly large weapon). So really there is no need for an intermediate between the Cyclone and Silverback as you suggest.

And that was part of thought. The silverback is not a cyclone...its an FAV and should be treated as such. Operating in pairs and fours like tanks. It will make a better stand alone or armor support than a cyclone support. as urban gunship so to speak sure..but in a squad I'd stick with all proper cyclones.

As for weapons I plan using a more versatile range than JUST energy weapons. weapons on the Spyder will be geared to infantry support, recon and more subtle uses.

[Sgt Anjay]

And all together your examples show that even programs eventually killed can produce designs that were used by the Expeditionary Forces, leaving open the possibility of a trike design as a limited-run mecha.

True, but the result isn't always wide spread (and/or lengthy) adoption (or even in the original form in the case of the Condor) even though they are supposedly superior platforms to what they get replaced by.

Just because a trike design wouldn't be one with widespread and/or lengthy adoption doesn't mean its not worth speculating over. After all, to repeat my analogy, just because this and this and this aren't as ubiquitous as the Humvee doesn't mean they don't exist or aren't worth bringing up in a discussion of military vehicles.

As the adoption of Shadow Technology, the development of the Beta (VFB-9 is based on the shelved VFB-7), the Cyclone (VR-041 uses the same frame and powertrain as the VR-038), and Bioroid Interceptor show the UEEF is more likely to evolve an existing design than start from scratch at this point.

Here you are assuming such a design would have to be new, from scratch, and dating to after the Silverback already exists. Not so.

In fact, it could be an evolution of a pre-cyclone design (remember, the trike design from Robotech Art 3 is called a "prototype cyclone", and the RPG lists a -10 and -20 series as prototypes and test-beds prior to the -30 series Cyclones).

As you yourself point out, the Silverback is the VM-9, leaving open the possibility of unknown predecessors of unknown lineages and designs since the Silverback is an outgrowth of the Cyclone lineage.

Or a trike could be the latest iteration of a series of designs that have been developed in limited numbers as alternatives to the Cyclone for special circumstances dating back to the -10 and -20 series days; it wouldn't be a "from scratch" design at all, having a history of limited use for decades (Pioneer mission is in space by 2015 at the latest; Silverback doesn't come out till 2034).

The Silverback does have some advantages. And some disadvantages. But this isn't an either-or situation; it isn't required to invalidate the Silverback for a 3-wheeler to exist. To use an analogy, just because Humvees are the mainstay vehicle of the U.S. military doesn't mean there are no other vehicles in the U.S. military. For example, Army Rangers use these, the Marines use these, the SEALS use these, and so forth.

I know it isn't an either/or situation, and that other vehicles are in use. The question/objections I have is it necessary to have a completely new design in this case? A Silverback easily has the room to handle growth into the two areas (E.O.D and mini-tank) no problem, even the Cyclone's sidecar allows room for growth to handle those missions as well as a Y-Frame IMHO.

Well, I'll note the MODAT/GARLAND and Tri-Chargers offer more protection than a Cyclone in battloid, and the weapons that would be left behind on a Cyclone's side-car when transformed can continue to be carried, like so. Also, by having full robotic limbs allows greater physical strength for such a unit as opposed to the limited power-enhanced frame + CVR-3 a Cyclone provides. So no, a side-car does not necessarily make a Cyclone equal to the capabilities of a larger unit like a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger.

And if the Silverback didn't exist when a possible trike design was developed and/or went into service, then the Silverback and its capabilities are irrelevant to whether a trike design might have been developed and seen service.

[ShadowLogan]

Would rather avoid a separate sidecar for the fact a modular system can be pulled in a fight. if I 'm a zent and I see a sidecar..I can target it and remove that effect from play. as built in feature..that advantage is tougher to take out of play.

I don't see it as an issue. That the system can be "pulled" is meaningless when consider that the RL-6, EP-37 and Alpha Gunpods can all be dropped/disarmed (and the list gets longer when you consider other mecha to use gunpods). A sidecar system is less an issue if the Zentreadi can't operate it's controls to discharge the weapon (at least not without taking time to modify it) as said controls are going to be very small (if non-mechanical), so it would be more of a tiny club or rock to a full-size Zent rather than a "derringer".

Now you wanted to know why a three wheel....In combat I'd like to go to bike and robot mode with out stopping. Hence in motion transformation..to and from battloid mode. and two wheels won't allow that as easily. more and more I'm starting to see a Y farm as more effective. for little reasons I did not see at first.

While I find a lot of poor design features with the Cyclone, at the root it is not a result of it being a two-wheeler. Let me put it this way, is the Cyclone the only approach one can use to transform a 2-wheel motorcycle? The reality is that it is not the only way, and I certainly would NOT describe it as the BEST way.

you do inspire a use for a side car...How does a side car that changes to an extra layer of armour and/or weapon system for the cyclone in battloid?

I'm actually working out and revisiting similar concepts in this manner currently.

Just because a trike design wouldn't be one with widespread and/or lengthy adoption doesn't mean its not worth speculating over.

I don't object to the speculation per say that it would be researched, but I do object more to the idea it would be adopted for use. There are countless examples of research vehicles that never make it to production (or even intended for production) in the real world and I don't see Robotech as being any different.

Well, I'll note the MODAT/GARLAND and Tri-Chargers offer more protection than a Cyclone in battloid, and the weapons that would be left behind on a Cyclone's side-car when transformed can continue to be carried, like so. Also, by having full robotic limbs allows greater physical strength for such a unit as opposed to the limited power-enhanced frame + CVR-3 a Cyclone provides. So no, a side-car does not necessarily make a Cyclone equal to the capabilities of a larger unit like a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger.

The Cyclone's protection level is an issue, but it is not the result of being a two wheeler IMHO, but rather the design compromises that went into it to meet various requirements (one of which appears to be part of a pilot's survival gear). A Heavier version of the Cyclone, one that doesn't need to meet some of the more demanding requirements (pilot survival gear) would allow one to beef up the overall frame to provide better protection to the limbs (which are lacking in coverage) as the torso is well armored (compared to the rest of the body).

As for the sidecar issue, it is present in known examples, but it is also certainly something that can be addressed without the need of creating a new and highly complicated platform. I also suspect that the known weapon sidecars are more a result of being intended to be exhausted before transformation is engaged (not unheard of in RT when you consider restrictions on the Logan, Beta, and a VF-1 w/GBP-1S) instead of as a FAST-Pack or other system. Nor does the sidecar have to be big enough for a person to ride IN (ON like a bike is another matter) as is traditional in design.

[Sgt Anjay]

Just because a trike design wouldn't be one with widespread and/or lengthy adoption doesn't mean its not worth speculating over.

I don't object to the speculation per say that it would be researched, but I do object more to the idea it would be adopted for use. There are countless examples of research vehicles that never make it to production (or even intended for production) in the real world and I don't see Robotech as being any different.

And there are countless examples (I've already provided three from the U.S. military in this thread) of specialized vehicles adopted in small numbers for specific units in the real world and I don't see Robotech as being any different.

Well, I'll note the MODAT/GARLAND and Tri-Chargers offer more protection than a Cyclone in battloid, and the weapons that would be left behind on a Cyclone's side-car when transformed can continue to be carried, like so. Also, by having full robotic limbs allows greater physical strength for such a unit as opposed to the limited power-enhanced frame + CVR-3 a Cyclone provides. So no, a side-car does not necessarily make a Cyclone equal to the capabilities of a larger unit like a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger.

The Cyclone's protection level is an issue, but it is not the result of being a two wheeler IMHO<snip>

Clearly not. The MODAT/GARLAND is a two-wheeler and offers better protection.

But again, it doesn't matter whether or not the Cyclone or the Silverback are a good designs with advantages. No one is trying to invalidate either the Cyclone or the Silverback. Those designs having good points doesn't negate the fact that niche roles filled by limited-run vehicles is a standard military practice, even when one or more other military vehicles manage to become near-ubiquitous.

This is compounded by the fact that the developmental history of the Cyclone and Silverback leaves open the options that a trike mecha could have likely been developed at many points in the timeline, some of which negate objections by virtue of the fact that they predate the mecha being held up as the reason a trike wouldn't have been developed.

They could have been developed and fielded pre-Cyclone; after all, the -30 series is stated in the RPG as a product of the late 2020s, by which time the Pioneer expedition was well underway and the ASC had developed all sorts of mecha in that time. Or a trike design could have been one of the Cyclone predecessors, as it is in Robotech Art 3, the RPG even mentions -10 and -20 series predating the -30 Cyclones. It personally tickles me using a concept from Art 3 that didn't get a chance to come to fruition. And with either of those two options, what the Cyclone can or can not do is doubly irrelevant, as there would have been no Cyclone when the trike design was developed and procured.

Another option is to simply not make the assumption, as you are making, that the Cyclone or Silverback were developed without anyone else ever coming up with a design to compete against it during testing. That's not very true to how designs tend to be adopted in real life. So a trike could have been developed concurrently with the cyclone possibly as a competitor design, post-cyclone/pre-silverback either as an upgrade attempt or competitor to either the -40 series or -50 series, or concurrently with the Silverback as a possible competitor to that design.

Though clearly in those scenarios the trike design would have lost out for the spot as the mainline mecha, at that point the possibility exists for a smaller group within the military to latch on to it as good for its specific needs over the more ubiquitous main design...bringing things neatly full circle, since I've already provided three examples from the U.S. military alone of vehicles adopted in small numbers for specific units despite the existence of the ubiquitous Humvee in service in the real world.

[ShadowLogan]

Clearly not. The MODAT/GARLAND is a two-wheeler and offers better protection

So do some of the various MOTO-SLAVE modelss from Bubblegum Crisis. Though with a biforcating wheel during transformation in both series, it is hard to say if it is a true two-wheeler or actually some type of three-wheeler.

They could have been developed and fielded pre-Cyclone; after all, the -30 series is stated in the RPG as a product of the late 2020s, by which time the Pioneer expedition was well underway and the ASC had developed all sorts of mecha in that time. Or a trike design could have been one of the Cyclone predecessors, as it is in Robotech Art 3, the RPG even mentions -10 and -20 series predating the -30 Cyclones. It personally tickles me using a concept from Art 3 that didn't get a chance to come to fruition. And with either of those two options, what the Cyclone can or can not do is doubly irrelevant, as there would have been no Cyclone when the trike design was developed and procured.

I doubt they have the miniturization technology before the Cyclone, Power Armor examples that pre-date the Cyclone are ~10ft tall (not much different than a the actual 2030s Silverback really as the optional turret adds an extra ~7ft) from the 2010s. So a trike design from this period is going to be in the same rough size category as a (baseline, ie no turret) Silverback or ASC PA (not to mention the smallest known Veritechs from the 2010s are ~16ft tall in Battloid). That would limit it's versatility to support Cyclones as it can't go every place the other can if it pre-dates the Cyclone (and Rimmerdal does want the design to support Cyclones, so this is very relevant).

I suspect that the -10/20 series Cyclones (if we are ever shown them) that they will be closely related to the later units given that the VR-041 uses some of the same parts and such from the -38. There isn't any real indication about the -50 series in relation, but given the huge number of similarities it is unlikely they started fresh here. That lineage strongly points to them all being more closely related in design, meaning they are probably all two-wheelers.

Keeping in mind the Sentinels Bike was designed and named prior to the Silverback, it is entirely possible such a design may see a reclassification/renaming in the current continuity that takes it away from the VR-# Cyclone if it is even used.

So a trike could have been developed concurrently with the cyclone possibly as a competitor design, post-cyclone/pre-silverback either as an upgrade attempt or competitor to either the -40 series or -50 series, or concurrently with the Silverback as a possible competitor to that design.

I don't object to the design as a pure research & development example or even unselected competitor, merely that it was moved into production/adoption.

at that point the possibility exists for a smaller group within the military to latch on to it as good for its specific needs over the more ubiquitous main design..

True, but the problem here is that we know the UEEF/UEDF operate w/n a finite set of resources. So what does the UEEF/UEDF do in regard to acquisition? Likely it will result in short-changing in some manner (be it at the expense of some other group or groups overall, or aspects of the group itself) if they go with the more costly option. What we may see, is that the necessary mission hardware is adapted for a more main stream design as an upgrade or new model.

I'm not convinced that the Can-am/Trike design really offers more space for hardware than a Sidecar. While they certainly increase the width of the vehicle more (x3 instead of x2 for sidecar), they don't fully utilize that increase for the other two dimensions (sidecars come in variety of sizes, some of which are nearly as long as the bike itself). A rough eye-ball it looks like the Can-am only actually uses ~ 1/3 of the possible length, so the end result may actually favor a sidecar to give more room to a Cyclone for a given mission than going with a Can-Am/Trike as ~2/3 of the space generated really isn't used fully, where the sidecar (depending on actual real word example size used as actual representation of a sidecar for the Cyclone is missing) is the reverse. Now I recognize the sidecar does have a known short coming in the known examples, but it seems to be assumed that said issue is unresolvable, when it may not be.

[Rimmerdal]

Not more space than the sidecar and two wheel cyclone..just a cyclone with side car that can't be removed as easily or is lost in transformation and a two wheel front means I can explain an in-motion transformation more accurately. With those ideas in mind I'm sold on it. Means the two front treads need to be on the feet in battloid mode..but nothing saying they can be taken off or have a the arm shield carry a winching cable system. so no loss there.

Even if it only gets used by a specific unit. Means of course a wepaon for the heavy weapons variant is needed...have two or three in mind.

1) a mortar (with variable ammo and self loading)

2) a multiple barrel, precision grenade launcher (Something with variable types of grenades ranging form camera and infrared flares to the more lethal types..including scatter bomb types.

3) Mini-/Short range missile launcher type.

[ShadowLogan]

just a cyclone with side car that can't be removed as easily or is lost in transformation and a two wheel front means I can explain an in-motion transformation more accurately.

I don't see how being removed/lost is an issue for the Robotech military when you consider the numerous examples of similar phenomena appear over the 3 arcs:
-Cyclone requires CVR-3 to utilize Battloid Mode transformation
-Cyclone releases the 3 cargo containers in order to transform to Battloid
-Cyclone sidecar releases for transformation to Battloid
-Logan utilize hardpoints that have to emptied for transformation to occur
-Logan Gunpod is blocked from firing in Fighter mode (IINM)
-Beta utilize hardpoints that have to emptied for transformation to occur
-Beta w/attached Alpha Fighter blocks several Beta weapon systems from operation when connected (Forward Centerline Gun, Chest Missile Launchers, possibly even leg intake)
-Beta arm cannons are Battloid mode only weapons
-Beta centerline & intake cannons are blocked in Battloid mode
-Alpha MM-60 does have launchers (on the leg) blocked in Fighter Mode
-Alpha nose lasers don't operate in Battloid mode
-VF-1's GBP-1S (Armored Battloid) add-on system
-VF-1 LE nose lasers don't operate in Battloid mode
-VHT-1 does not have access to all weapons in all modes
-NUMEROUS Mecha utilize gunpods that would be "easy" to remove

That's 8 out of 11 (Cyclone treated by model series) Veritechs known to operate in such a state at some point (and many several different ways) by the 2E RPG. If it was such a concern to the UEDF/UEEF military (at least those who make the calls about procuring such things as opposed to those who actually have to use it) then there Should not be so many examples with the potential to "lose" capacity due to transformation in some manner (admittedly most aren't on the same level of "lose" as the sidecar).

I don't see how a 2 front wheel is easier to explain than 1 front wheel to transform as the work is already done for you.

1) a mortar (with variable ammo and self loading)

2) a multiple barrel, precision grenade launcher (Something with variable types of grenades ranging form camera and infrared flares to the more lethal types..including scatter bomb types.

3) Mini-/Short range missile launcher type.

All of which can be done on the Sidecar AND/OR as mountable weapon to the basic Cyclone. In fact the sidecar already offers the same missile features, and given even you don't think it offers more space than a sidecar, the Can-am will offer no better payload than a sidecar in either case then (and the VR-041 already carries a sidecar's worth of minis) making it questionable if it would be procured for that role. And the RL-6 and GR-80/97 show that you could carry a grenade launcher (even a multi-barrel one) on a basic Cyclone (admit payload maybe an issue).

A mortar could make better use of a sidecar, since the available extra volume (over simple Cyclone) it could use is centralized instead of distributed. That would allow a smaller footprint feed system and a larger payload. Though in this role I suspect a conventional ground vehicle could support the Cyclones just as well in this role.

And a sidecar may not be as lose-able as suggested. While the (only) 3 examples in the 2E RPG are lost and basically useable to Battloid mode, it would not be hard to see specific designs made so the Cyclone could pick them up and use them (in fact Rand/Rook both transform stationary in NG#3 "Lonely Soliderboy", so depending on the GM may or may not take an action to pick them up) or even use them as a heavy weapon emplacement for Battloid mode (regular infantry would be a crew-served weapon that is setup on a tri/bi-pod to fire).

[Rimmerdal]

just a cyclone with side car that can't be removed as easily or is lost in transformation and a two wheel front means I can explain an in-motion transformation more accurately.

I don't see how being removed/lost is an issue for the Robotech military when you consider the numerous examples of similar phenomena appear over the 3 arcs:
-Cyclone requires CVR-3 to utilize Battloid Mode transformation
-Cyclone releases the 3 cargo containers in order to transform to Battloid
-Cyclone sidecar releases for transformation to Battloid
-Logan utilize hardpoints that have to emptied for transformation to occur
-Logan Gunpod is blocked from firing in Fighter mode (IINM)
-Beta utilize hardpoints that have to emptied for transformation to occur
-Beta w/attached Alpha Fighter blocks several Beta weapon systems from operation when connected (Forward Centerline Gun, Chest Missile Launchers, possibly even leg intake)
-Beta arm cannons are Battloid mode only weapons
-Beta centerline & intake cannons are blocked in Battloid mode
-Alpha MM-60 does have launchers (on the leg) blocked in Fighter Mode
-Alpha nose lasers don't operate in Battloid mode
-VF-1's GBP-1S (Armored Battloid) add-on system
-VF-1 LE nose lasers don't operate in Battloid mode
-VHT-1 does not have access to all weapons in all modes
-NUMEROUS Mecha utilize gunpods that would be "easy" to remove

That's 8 out of 11 (Cyclone treated by model series) Veritechs known to operate in such a state at some point (and many several different ways) by the 2E RPG. If it was such a concern to the UEDF/UEEF military (at least those who make the calls about procuring such things as opposed to those who actually have to use it) then there Should not be so many examples with the potential to "lose" capacity due to transformation in some manner (admittedly most aren't on the same level of "lose" as the sidecar).

I don't see how a 2 front wheel is easier to explain than 1 front wheel to transform as the work is already done for you.

1) a mortar (with variable ammo and self loading)

2) a multiple barrel, precision grenade launcher (Something with variable types of grenades ranging form camera and infrared flares to the more lethal types..including scatter bomb types.

3) Mini-/Short range missile launcher type.

All of which can be done on the Sidecar AND/OR as mountable weapon to the basic Cyclone. In fact the sidecar already offers the same missile features, and given even you don't think it offers more space than a sidecar, the Can-am will offer no better payload than a sidecar in either case then (and the VR-041 already carries a sidecar's worth of minis) making it questionable if it would be procured for that role. And the RL-6 and GR-80/97 show that you could carry a grenade launcher (even a multi-barrel one) on a basic Cyclone (admit payload maybe an issue).

A mortar could make better use of a sidecar, since the available extra volume (over simple Cyclone) it could use is centralized instead of distributed. That would allow a smaller footprint feed system and a larger payload. Though in this role I suspect a conventional ground vehicle could support the Cyclones just as well in this role.

And a sidecar may not be as lose-able as suggested. While the (only) 3 examples in the 2E RPG are lost and basically useable to Battloid mode, it would not be hard to see specific designs made so the Cyclone could pick them up and use them (in fact Rand/Rook both transform stationary in NG#3 "Lonely Soliderboy", so depending on the GM may or may not take an action to pick them up) or even use them as a heavy weapon emplacement for Battloid mode (regular infantry would be a crew-served weapon that is setup on a tri/bi-pod to fire).

I did my looking into the weapons. Today we have self loading artillery that is unmanned and that is something that can work nicely. the treads (there are No wheels at all on this trike) can easily support and with stand any shock for any bigger guns I can take a page from the GB and put pylons or something. Would likely use a set three fold up supports if there needed and only if.


As side torn off or lost in transformation may not always be recoverable..especially when your under fire..I'm not going to stop dodging to get a side car. So why have it separate? Its easy to make the built-in side car modular. does the same thing as interchangeable/removable ones. As you have already stated a few times...I'm more than aware you don't like the trike. I get it you think it the Sidecar is awesome...but I don't like it as combat support. rather have it as one piece.

And yes I'm aware of the "losable" gunpods..hence why I'm on this angle..I never saw those as fully practical. they work. but a built in weapon can't be dropped and generally has a larger pay load..hence more effective as an enemy can't pick it up and shoot you with it.

In regards to the transformation...I took out wheels went treads..that from the feet of the Cyclone and the third rear tread helps for balance while changing modes. so the pilot simply stands as the process happens..for both to and from Trike mode. much smoother and it would still need a CVR 3 can change modes while moving forward and not stopping which is far more practical.

[Sgt Anjay]

They could have been developed and fielded pre-Cyclone; after all, the -30 series is stated in the RPG as a product of the late 2020s, by which time the Pioneer expedition was well underway and the ASC had developed all sorts of mecha in that time. Or a trike design could have been one of the Cyclone predecessors, as it is in Robotech Art 3, the RPG even mentions -10 and -20 series predating the -30 Cyclones. It personally tickles me using a concept from Art 3 that didn't get a chance to come to fruition. And with either of those two options, what the Cyclone can or can not do is doubly irrelevant, as there would have been no Cyclone when the trike design was developed and procured.

I doubt they have the miniturization technology before the Cyclone, Power Armor examples that pre-date the Cyclone are ~10ft tall (not much different than a the actual 2030s Silverback really as the optional turret adds an extra ~7ft) from the 2010s. So a trike design from this period is going to be in the same rough size category as a (baseline, ie no turret) Silverback or ASC PA (not to mention the smallest known Veritechs from the 2010s are ~16ft tall in Battloid). That would limit it's versatility to support Cyclones as it can't go every place the other can if it pre-dates the Cyclone (and Rimmerdal does want the design to support Cyclones, so this is very relevant).

So you mean, it'd have to be in the size range of the MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger, which is what I've been saying all along?

And yes, that means there's some places a Cyclone could go a larger trike design couldn't. That would likely be one reason the Cyclone is the mass-production design and the trike a limited design. It doesn't mean the trike concept is useless; its a trade-off for the advantages a larger unit offers.

I suspect that the -10/20 series Cyclones (if we are ever shown them) that they will be closely related to the later units given that the VR-041 uses some of the same parts and such from the -38.

You're free to hold that opinion. And I'm free to point out that the creators of Robotech intended to use a trike design as a precursor to the Cyclones, and so I would call proposing a trike design as a precursor to the Cyclones entirely viable.

So a trike could have been developed concurrently with the cyclone possibly as a competitor design, post-cyclone/pre-silverback either as an upgrade attempt or competitor to either the -40 series or -50 series, or concurrently with the Silverback as a possible competitor to that design.

I don't object to the design as a pure research & development example or even unselected competitor, merely that it was moved into production/adoption.

That's actually not true. You questioned why anyone would ever develop a trike. This is one answer to that question.

And anyway, once a design is fully developed, I'd like to point out the two options aren't production/adoption or cancellation-never-to-be-seen-again. Limited production runs for testing by actual field units before a final design is chosen, or even the use of test-beds and prototypes in actual service, is not unheard of.

at that point the possibility exists for a smaller group within the military to latch on to it as good for its specific needs over the more ubiquitous main design..

True, but the problem here is that we know the UEEF/UEDF operate w/n a finite set of resources.

Funny, because that's the operating parameters of the USMC. As a branch they historically have tended to be pretty inventive in the realm of budget and procurement, since they've been at the mercy of the Navy...which hasn't stopped them from grabbing limited-run vehicles capable of meeting their specific needs rather than just adapting more ubiquitous designs.

I'll also point out the UEDF and UEEF include factory satellites within its finite set of resources and that the Pioneer Expedition was in interplanetary space by 2015 at the latest. Let's not underestimate them too much.

I'm not convinced that the Can-am/Trike design really offers more space for hardware than a Sidecar.

Understood you don't. We're pretty much going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. What I've seen of mecha in the size range I'm speaking of, both two (MODAT/GARLAND) and three wheeled (Tri-Charger), has convinced me that they could carry weapons (or other specialized gear) closer to what the Silverback does in a smaller, one-man package.

And I'll also point out again that sometimes, even in real life, a specialized or elite military unit doesn't want the ubiquitous design jury-rigged to do their mission, they want something built to do their mission, and they get it.

[ShadowLogan]

especially when your under fire..I'm not going to stop dodging to get a side car. So why have it separate? Its easy to make the built-in side car modular

Have you even considered options to address this issue using the modular sidecar? By my estimation there are 6 basic ways to classify how the sidecar/Cyclone can operate together, not just the one in the books, like having the sidecar become a robot drone (some degree of autonomy), use as a heavy weapons emplacement (multi-person tri-pod mounted mobile machinegun teams closest analogy I can think of), or even modifying the sidecar to interact positively with the Cyclone during transformation so one does not have to go back for it.

And yes I'm aware of the "losable" gunpods..hence why I'm on this angle..I never saw those as fully practical. they work. but a built in weapon can't be dropped and generally has a larger pay load..hence more effective as an enemy can't pick it up and shoot you with it.

I'm not much of fan of the hand-held gunpods myself, but they allow for a degree of customization that one can not do with built-in systems. One also has to consider scale of the weapon and it's user. A generic Battloid-size aggressor isn't going to be able to make use of a Cyclone-sized weapon very easily (if at all) beyond club/rock use. One could also make the weapons "smart" to only work for authorized individuals on the fly.

Not to mention there are several instances of limbs/built-in weapons being disabled, so the ability to recover/switch hands for a gunpod is an advantage.

In regards to the transformation...I took out wheels went treads..that from the feet of the Cyclone and the third rear tread helps for balance while changing modes. so the pilot simply stands as the process happens..for both to and from Trike mode. much smoother and it would still need a CVR 3 can change modes while moving forward and not stopping which is far more practical.

You could also swap the wheels on the Silverback/Cyclone for treads (or even hoverjets), so I don't see a need for an all new design just to get treads into the picture.

I am not aware of any balance issues with changing modes on either the Cyclone or Silverback. The two-wheel Cyclone the pilot has to do very little actually during the Bike to Armor mode transformation, and there are two different approaches for the reverse shown, one of which if combined with a short booster jump for initial speed can accomplish the same thing you are looking for.

And yes, that means there's some places a Cyclone could go a larger trike design couldn't. That would likely be one reason the Cyclone is the mass-production design and the trike a limited design. It doesn't mean the trike concept is useless; its a trade-off for the advantages a larger unit offers.

If this Trike offers no real advantage in size and performance over a Silverback, why have both as the Silverback has better growth potential?

And I'm free to point out that the creators of Robotech intended to use a trike design as a precursor to the Cyclones, and so I would call proposing a trike design as a precursor to the Cyclones entirely viable.

While the creators may have intended the Cyclone to have a trike predecessor (design wise it creates ties with RT:TUS movie from that period so shouldn't be a surprise), we do not know how the current creative staff (off-hand) view such a design.

And anyway, once a design is fully developed, I'd like to point out the two options aren't production/adoption or cancellation-never-to-be-seen-again. Limited production runs for testing by actual field units before a final design is chosen, or even the use of test-beds and prototypes in actual service, is not unheard of.

Agree, but how many of those limited runs for field testing (which I lump into the basic research/development/testing stage) actually stay with them once testing is done and the design in question is not chosen?

Understood you don't. We're pretty much going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. What I've seen of mecha in the size range I'm speaking of, both two (MODAT/GARLAND) and three wheeled (Tri-Charger), has convinced me that they could carry weapons (or other specialized gear) closer to what the Silverback does in a smaller, one-man package.

These mecha are still in the same size range as the Silverback though, so it shouldn't be a surprise they can potentially carry weapons of similar size. Said weapons should also fit a Sidecar though. And the Silverback can carry a larger payload, since it is unlikely the others can support carrying a full reload like the Silverback.

[Rimmerdal]

Hmm interesting concept..I'll do the treads on a cyclone well. good concept to test the trike tech for. As for the modular sidecar I'll let you have that thunder. I'm a fair guy. Can't go taking all the good ideas can I? but I will certainly have some available for the guy on two wheels once the trike is done.

that smart weapon idea will work nicely too. so the rogue pilots cant use them..even if they have a cyclone. Might even have a smart system to prevent craft from changing modes.

I know for a fact there are unmanned Artillery units in development. so they no longer need a crew once they go online. A machine gun, grenade and Mortars/ATA-6 style missile launcher will be options. all self loading of course.

[rem1093]

For our Marines we have a Hover version of the Silverback. It is a proven tech, already used by the ASC. When the added with Anti grav tech from the Tirolians, would make for a true, all terrain, all environment craft. Such as Blue water, or planets with different gravity's, environments, ext. I mean who wouldn't want to go Island hopping in the Philippines one week and then running around the Martian desert the next.

The same tech can be used an a Pan am designed Cyclone. Since the Hover bikes already use three jets, moving to two of the jet to the front and one in the back would still work. The Transformation would be basically the same, just that the larger front would be a shell over a more conventional Battler front. The shell would slide back with the hover jets, wile the inner part attaches to the Cyclone chest.

[Rimmerdal]

For our Marines we have a Hover version of the Silverback. It is a proven tech, already used by the ASC. When the added with Anti grav tech from the Tirolians, would make for a true, all terrain, all environment craft. Such as Blue water, or planets with different gravity's, environments, ext. I mean who wouldn't want to go Island hopping in the Philippines one week and then running around the Martian desert the next.

The same tech can be used an a Pan am designed Cyclone. Since the Hover bikes already use three jets, moving to two of the jet to the front and one in the back would still work. The Transformation would be basically the same, just that the larger front would be a shell over a more conventional Battler front. The shell would slide back with the hover jets, wile the inner part attaches to the Cyclone chest.

I have the Southern cross book (Smaller one) I'll give at re-read. Good thought.

[Rimmerdal]

Rimmerdal wrote:
In regards to the transformation...I took out wheels went treads..that from the feet of the Cyclone and the third rear tread helps for balance while changing modes. so the pilot simply stands as the process happens..for both to and from Trike mode. much smoother and it would still need a CVR 3 can change modes while moving forward and not stopping which is far more practical.

Shadowlogan Wrote:
You could also swap the wheels on the Silverback/Cyclone for treads (or even hoverjets), so I don't see a need for an all new design just to get treads into the picture.

I am not aware of any balance issues with changing modes on either the Cyclone or Silverback. The two-wheel Cyclone the pilot has to do very little actually during the Bike to Armor mode transformation, and there are two different approaches for the reverse shown, one of which if combined with a short booster jump for initial speed can accomplish the same thing you are looking for.

For the pilot to stand and stay up moving forward a third tread balance point helps the cyclone out though for. and the third tread may as well be used for more than just a tread and Winch system.

[glitterboy2098]

a silverback ought to be able to use mattracks with minimal changes.

cyclones would have issues, however.

that said.. i'm not sure what kind of advantages you'd gain, given tracks are usually used for soft ground and rugged ground.. two types of terrain the mecha can deal with by transforming..

[Rimmerdal]

a silverback ought to be able to use mattracks with minimal changes.

cyclones would have issues, however.

that said.. i'm not sure what kind of advantages you'd gain, given tracks are usually used for soft ground and rugged ground.. two types of terrain the mecha can deal with by transforming..

Wheels do not do well in snow. That and treads mean tighter turns and no need to transform to transverse said rough terrain. And the reason for no Silverback is I'd rather have real Cyclones not FAV's. Which a silver back is. I did also add treads should facilitate in motion transformation to and from trike mode.

[Sgt Anjay]

And yes, that means there's some places a Cyclone could go a larger trike design couldn't. That would likely be one reason the Cyclone is the mass-production design and the trike a limited design. It doesn't mean the trike concept is useless; its a trade-off for the advantages a larger unit offers.

If this Trike offers no real advantage in size and performance over a Silverback, why have both as the Silverback has better growth potential?

Nowhere do I say or agree with the opinion a trike wouldn't offer a real advantage in size and performance over a Silverback. A trike would be bigger than a Cyc, smaller than a Silverback, and have particular advantages and disadvantages versus either of those two designs. There's also the point I have raised several times and will keep raising that if the trike came into being before the Silverback, or even the Cyclone, then it doesn't matter what the performance of the Silverback is versus a trike.

And I'm free to point out that the creators of Robotech intended to use a trike design as a precursor to the Cyclones, and so I would call proposing a trike design as a precursor to the Cyclones entirely viable.

While the creators may have intended the Cyclone to have a trike predecessor (design wise it creates ties with RT:TUS movie from that period so shouldn't be a surprise), we do not know how the current creative staff (off-hand) view such a design.

I don't care how the current creative staff view such a design, I'm not trying to get the current creative staff to make such a design part of their version of Robotech. Nevertheless, it is possible to include this intent of the original creators without contradicting anything that has come out from the current creative staff.

And anyway, once a design is fully developed, I'd like to point out the two options aren't production/adoption or cancellation-never-to-be-seen-again. Limited production runs for testing by actual field units before a final design is chosen, or even the use of test-beds and prototypes in actual service, is not unheard of.

Agree, but how many of those limited runs for field testing (which I lump into the basic research/development/testing stage) actually stay with them once testing is done and the design in question is not chosen?

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.

Understood you don't. We're pretty much going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. What I've seen of mecha in the size range I'm speaking of, both two (MODAT/GARLAND) and three wheeled (Tri-Charger), has convinced me that they could carry weapons (or other specialized gear) closer to what the Silverback does in a smaller, one-man package.

These mecha are still in the same size range as the Silverback though

No, they're clearly smaller than a Silverback, there's only just enough room for the operator in either a MODAT/GARLAND or Tri-Charger while the Silverback has a passenger seat. They just happen to be big enough to carry weapons of that caliber in part because they have robotic limbs as opposed to just being a frame that attaches to armor the way a Cyclone is.

Bigger than a Cyclone, smaller than a Silverback. The vehicle mode has handling closer to that of the Cyclone, and like the Cyclone is a one-man mecha. Battloid is much more like a Silverback, and can carry that caliber of weaponry, even if the combat endurance might be smaller, as well as robotic strength due to its robotic limbs. The design straddles lines; it could easily find a niche with a smaller group with a narrower focus to their mission, and such groups long have and still do exist within militaries. I don't see that changing.

[ShadowLogan]

For the pilot to stand and stay up moving forward a third tread balance point helps the cyclone out though for. and the third tread may as well be used for more than just a tread and Winch system.

Balance doesn't appear to be a stated issue with the 2-wheel Cyclones though AFAIK.

I don't see why they can't adapt the wheel system to give them a winch setup if it was needed.

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

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 militaries use LE production runs for vehicles is irrelevant to the question asked. 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.