Fly a tank?, Inspiration from the A-team! Options

[crash2029]

Simply becasue of the total awesomeness of the move I would allow it in my game. Then again my game is all about over the top shenanigans.

Also, I loved the movie. I think it is a worthy successor to a great show.

[svenftw]

I stand corrected. Here is a video of a C5 dropping 4 Sheridans from high altitude:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibPtRAkmkk8

Still, there's been no tank since then that has been dropped using that method and I think it's safe to assume that the Sheridan was the heaviest tank capable of this kind of deployment. At least in 2010.

However, it makes the "what ifs" more viable. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[Sengir]

In real life dropping an Abrams from a C-130 wouldn't work for a simple reason: The C-130 has a cargo capacity somewhere around 20t, an Abrams weights three times as much. Even the Stryker is a really tight fit.

[KarmaInferno]

I don't think it was an Abrams. There was only one top hatch, the Abrams has two.



-karma

[MJBurrage]

As far as I can determine, the M551 was capable of both, Low-Altitude Parachute Extraction (LAPE), and Low Velocity Airdrop Delivery System (LVADS). LAPE is the the vehicle being pulled out of the back while skimming the ground. In LVADS the vehicle actually parachutes down from altitude. The minimum altitude is 500-feet to allow the parachutes time to slow descent, but it can be a higher drop.

EDIT: I really need to compose my responses faster, see the video above.

[KarmaInferno]

I grabbed some screenshots from the trailer.

Definately not an Abrams.




-karma

[Saint Sithney]

I wouldn't expect players to try and save the tank.
I'd expect them to rig themselves to the remaining chute and cut the tank free.

[Sengir]

I grabbed some screenshots from the trailer.

Definately not an Abrams.




-karma

Right, the that is an airmobile fighting vehicle...forgot the name, but if memory serves it was part of some failed programme to replace the Sheridan


PS: Note that "airmobile" does not equal "air drop", although dropping a vehicle in the 20 ton range should be feasible.

[Chance359]

Having just watched the movie, I'm sitting here wondering when they'll use models to try this on Mythbusters.

[MJBurrage]

My error on the tank ID from the film.

It was a digital model of the never-deployed M8 Armored Gun System.

Apparently the M8 would have come in two versions, the light armor version would have been fully air-drop capable, as shown in the film (discounting the steering by gun of course).

Source: A-Team's Tank-Dropping VFX: Gallery

[darthmord]

Steer: maybe. But only a small amount. You'd have to be over the lake already, and even then you'd probably still clip the small boat that was directly under you at the time (so instead of killing everyone on board you instead only sink their craft).

Slow down: almost certainly not. The recoil isn't enough force, or sustained enough to make a noticeable difference (I doubt you could fire the tank cannon full auto). The terminal velocity of a tank is quite fast. The mass of a tank is also fairly large. The muzzle velocity and mass of a cannon round compared to the tank is on the order of throwing golf balls while careening down a hill on a bike in a (futile) attempt to slow down.

Hate to burst your bubble but Terminal Velocity for a tank is no different than the terminal velocity of a bowling ball.

Objects in freefall are equally affected by gravity. I remember an experiment in High School. We dropped a rubber ball and a bowling ball off the roof of the building. Despite there being several pounds difference (not to mention the difference in mass), they both fell at the same speed and hit the ground at the same time.

[Saint Sithney]

So long as they have the same coefficient of drag, sure, they fall at the same rate.
However the force produced by gravity on the heavier object will be considerably more in relation to the drag forces.

[Draco18s]

Hate to burst your bubble but Terminal Velocity for a tank is no different than the terminal velocity of a bowling ball.

Objects in freefall are equally affected by gravity. I remember an experiment in High School. We dropped a rubber ball and a bowling ball off the roof of the building. Despite there being several pounds difference (not to mention the difference in mass), they both fell at the same speed and hit the ground at the same time.

*Facepalm*

Terminal Velocity
In fluid dynamics an object is moving at its terminal velocity if its speed is constant due to the restraining force exerted by the air, water or other fluid through which it is moving.

A free-falling object achieves its terminal velocity when the downward force of gravity (Fg) equals the upward force of drag (Fd). This causes the net force on the object to be zero, resulting in an acceleration of zero.

"The more compact and dense the object, the higher its terminal velocity will be. Typical examples are the following: raindrop, 25 ft/s, human being, 250 ft/s." Soure: Bueche, Fredrick. Principles of Physics. New York: McGraw Hill, 1977: 64.

Terminal velocity of a car?
Assuming atmospheric conditions density of air being 0.0765 pounds/cu. ft. and assuming the car weighs 4000 lbs with dimensions of 6'x15'x5', with a drag coefficient of approximately 0.2...

The terminal velocity of a car under these conditions would be about 52 mph. This is assuming it's falling flat. If the car was falling pointing down, the terminal velocity would be something more like 90mph. Obviously this answer will vary by changing the assumptions.

3. Even if they only shaved a few MPH off there decent with the shooting it was still a few MPH.

If you are traveling at terminal velocity and slow your decent by 1 foot per second and can do this once every 3 seconds you're making no progress, as every second you speed back up 32 feet per second up to a maximum of your terminal velocity. So. Using the above numbers for the falling rate of a human...

1: 250
2: 249 //slow your decent
3: 250 //accelerate due to gravity
4: 250
5: 249 //slow your decent
6: 250 //accelerate due to gravity
7: 250

You would need to supply constant force that exceeds that of gravity (32 feet per second per second) otherwise you're doing nothing.

[Railgun]

It might have made more sense if the cannon fire was to keep the tank stabilized to avoid having it upend. Falling flat would cause significantly more drag.... Either way, it seems highly impractical.

[crash2029]

*Facepalm*

Terminal Velocity
In fluid dynamics an object is moving at its terminal velocity if its speed is constant due to the restraining force exerted by the air, water or other fluid through which it is moving.

A free-falling object achieves its terminal velocity when the downward force of gravity (Fg) equals the upward force of drag (Fd). This causes the net force on the object to be zero, resulting in an acceleration of zero.

"The more compact and dense the object, the higher its terminal velocity will be. Typical examples are the following: raindrop, 25 ft/s, human being, 250 ft/s." Soure: Bueche, Fredrick. Principles of Physics. New York: McGraw Hill, 1977: 64.

Terminal velocity of a car?
Assuming atmospheric conditions density of air being 0.0765 pounds/cu. ft. and assuming the car weighs 4000 lbs with dimensions of 6'x15'x5', with a drag coefficient of approximately 0.2...

The terminal velocity of a car under these conditions would be about 52 mph. This is assuming it's falling flat. If the car was falling pointing down, the terminal velocity would be something more like 90mph. Obviously this answer will vary by changing the assumptions.



If you are traveling at terminal velocity and slow your decent by 1 foot per second and can do this once every 3 seconds you're making no progress, as every second you speed back up 32 feet per second up to a maximum of your terminal velocity. So. Using the above numbers for the falling rate of a human...

1: 250
2: 249 //slow your decent
3: 250 //accelerate due to gravity
4: 250
5: 249 //slow your decent
6: 250 //accelerate due to gravity
7: 250

You would need to supply constant force that exceeds that of gravity (32 feet per second per second) otherwise you're doing nothing.

Did you moonlight as a writer on Numb3rs?

[IKerensky]

You forget one important part of the SPLAT element :

The actual people into the Tank will go SPLAT against him as soon as it hit the ground. The impact velocity will definitely not be slow enough for them to survive the concussion. And I doubt tanks have anti-concussion sittings and rollcages.

And if my players are stupids enough to try to survive a plane crash by jumping in a tank they deserve to die.

Heck, the TRUE A-Team would have disengaged the Drag-chute from the tank and build an ULM from it before jumping off (taking the time to drug Mr T. before hand of course). THAT would have been Purple Mohawk.

I never let my players go into a situation where certain death is a solution without providing a decent way out of it. If the player try something really stupid and insist on doing so they deserve to die, not to be saved so they can try something even more stupid next time and campaign is ruined because it become a stupid series of silly stunt...

[nezumi]

The actual people into the Tank will go SPLAT against him as soon as it hit the ground.

Mr. T is a few steps above 'actual people'.

[KarmaInferno]

As was stated earlier.

If your campaign is clearly headed toward Pink Mohawk, you can either roll with it or be a wet blanket.

So either the characters are just dead, GM is grumpy for the campaign de-railing, and players are annoyed.

OR

You have an epic crazy evening that will be talked about for years.

Evaluating the wants and needs of your players is as much a part of being a GM as plotting and running the adventure.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)



-karma

[CanadianWolverin...]

I stand corrected. Here is a video of a C5 dropping 4 Sheridans from high altitude:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibPtRAkmkk8

Still, there's been no tank since then that has been dropped using that method and I think it's safe to assume that the Sheridan was the heaviest tank capable of this kind of deployment. At least in 2010.

However, it makes the "what ifs" more viable. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Followed the link you provided and found a "blooper" reel in the suggested vid links. I suppose it could give some ideas on the results of glitches for this insanity perhaps?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DopZgJaWstk

[hobgoblin]

heh, the jeep or whatever that ends up hitting the ground rolling could be seen as a tactic rather then a blooper (if one can find someone crazy enough to ride it with the motor running).

and my sympathies to the soldiers having close encounters with trees and vehicles, and to those that "volunteered" to clean up after it all.

[Draco18s]

heh, the jeep or whatever that ends up hitting the ground rolling could be seen as a tactic rather then a blooper (if one can find someone crazy enough to ride it with the motor running).

Unlikely. They'd also take a couple G's from hitting the ground too and be pretty shaken up (not injured, just rattled).

[hobgoblin]

like i wrote, crazy enough (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[DireRadiant]

No Dice roll required, just pizza for the GM.

[Pepsi Jedi]

I saw the movie. It was great fun.
People are 1) Trying to get a bit too scientific with it and 2) Aren't factoring in everything.

Bottom line, if your C130 blows up around you, you're dead. Sure. Hiding in a moble gun isn't going to change that. The explosion that took out the plane 10 times that size would pretty much kill you too.

But where's the fun in that?

So the gun falls and deploys it's 3 chutes. Slows down to 'safe' decent speed. Face pops the hatch and gets on the .50 and takes out a UAV. Said UAV blows up and slices the cables holding two of your 3 chutes.

So you're descending again. But here's something many are missing. You've still got one chute. So you're not falling as fast as you could be. You're hanging pendulum style from the last chute.

The gun is pivoted to the left and fired. Falling though the air, the recoil of the shell is not mitigated by the gun being on the ground and set on it's tracks with it's weight acting as downward force. So yes the Recoil would move it.

How much? I've no clue. But a bit. It's basically dangling at the end of a cord that's hooked up to the chute reducing the downward force on the gun.

Looking though the targeting scope, the lake was pretty much under them the entire way down. After a few shots to 'move um over a bit' they turned the turrent forward. They fired.

The thing didn't "Stop" in the air. But it 'kicked' You'd see the chute's inflation billow a bit before the tank again sped up.

They're shooting straight down into the lake. boom boom boom. The shells DO hit the lake before the tank. Why is this important you ask? It breaks the surface tension of the lake itself to let the hydrodynamics and physics of the water differ.

Short version. falling from height into calm water is worse than earth, earth can compact (( how ever minimally)) Water will not. Disturb the surface of the water and you can enter the water and use it to slow and ease your fall.

So. Tank is falling at less than 'safe' falling speed, not terminal velocity. The chute is applying drag, jsut not as much as 'three' chutes. The physics of the way chutes work though, doesn't mean you're getting 1/3rd the effect. Once you have a chute, adding more chute isn't a 1:1 ratio of slowing your fall. I don't have the math in front of me (( nor will I look it up and crunch numbers for an "Ateam" Maneuver)) but we can guess around 'half' the drag of the three chutes.

So she's going slower than she could be. Falling into disturbed water, that will also lesson the impact.

Does this mean that the people will live and roll out askng the way to Berlin?

Probably not.

But in my game? I'd totally allow it. Fun>Physics most of the time. It was a 'workable' plan. It was good thinking and it was ____FUN____

Best part of that entire movie. lol

[Shinobi Killfist]

On a note about the rolling out and asking directions. Unless that tank(and I don't know of any) was built for it going underwater means it aint going anywhere. But it was an awesome scene so I'd roll with it.