Mortars

Monkeying around tonight and came up with this, opinions welcomed

MORTARS
Due to the nature of ground force operations they can rarely count on Starship based phasers to do much work for them. Be it because the ships must patrol away from the world or they may have even have left the system the ground force need a weapon to give constant indirect support. While artillery would be the best choice, ground force artillery units are few and far between and many companies end up relying on traditional mortars either using ultritium or photon grenade rounds.

Currently 2371, the ground forces use a ultritium mortar at the platoon and company level and a photon mortar at the battalion level. A typical mortar squad consist of 5 men, a squad leader (a sergeant) a Gunner (a corporal) assistant gunner (a lance corporal) and two loaders (both privates) with one mortar. Each member of the squad carries four rounds with them when entering combat

A mortar section consist of two mortar squads the 1st squad commanded by a Sergeant and the 2nd squad by a lance sergeant acting as squad leader. The Mortar platoon consists of 3 mortar sections commanded by a platoon sergeant who also commands the 1st mortar squad instead of the normal sergeant ( a full sergeant commands the 2nd squad in this section).

Typically a mortar section is found in a line platoon or a full squad at the company level; a mortar platoon is assigned at the Battalion level either independently or as part of the battalions heavy weapons company.

Starfleet Security procedures
Normally Starfleet security does not have mortars aboard ships or stations however their component parts are entered in the ships ordnance replicator and are able to be produced when needed. The parts are then assembled into a functioning mortar which can use either photon or ultritium grenades which are kept in the starships arsenal.
A typical medium sized ships security detail of up to forty personnel will have the needed personnel to form one well trained mortar section(Mortar detail). They well train using various methods including holo-deck training programs to keep their skills sharpened. Many such mortar details will fine themselves beamed down to militarily threaten colony’s in need of their services to strengthen local militia and security forces.

Types of Mortars in Use by Starfleet Ground Forces

Photon Mortar (Same as Descibed in The Price of Freedom: The UFP Sourcebook on page 100)

Ultritium Mortar (Standard)
Range: (50)1200/2400/6,000
Size: Barrel length 1.28m and 8.1 cm in diameter, with disc base
Mass: 12.9 kg for mortar, 2.7 kg for round
Duration: Standard ammo carried per squad is 20 rounds
Enter Use: 2342

Ultritium Round
Damage: 30 + 4d6 , with a blast radius of 2 meters with a drop off of 10 meters thereafter

A Ultritium mortar can not fire a photon round

Looks good. Mortars have always been the infantry's organic artillery since their introduction in the Mid-20th Century. A well thought out write-up, Eric.
One suggestion, though; I suggest developing a variety of shells for special tasks. Guided Overhead Armor Peircing Shells for anti-armor use (don't laugh, the U.S. Army is developing them now.), starshells for illumination or signalling, cluster munitions for anti-infantry etc...

Mortars will ruin your whole day. How about a magazine fed mortar? What does the thing look like? I hope it looks better than the one Kirk and Spock used against the Gorn. I suppose if you use the same sort of tech used in a photorp launcher, ie the mortar holding multiple rounds, you could program them to detonate in a spread to do the most damage to your target.

With the technology of the 24th century, why not develop a gun-mortar? Using railgun-style tech his weapon can be set to either fire at low velocity (for indirect fire) or high-velocity (for direct fire). You could also fit it with a micro-transporter, like the TR-116, and be magazine-fed. Such a weapon can be built in a variety of models ranging from a man-portable model (silmilar to a grenade launcher) to larger models fitted on a drone platform for infantry support to vehicle mounted models. The weapon could fire a variety of munitions, from ultritium explosive rounds to photon warheads to kinetic direct fire rounds (think shotgun or armor-piercing round). Such a weapon could easily be an integral part of the 24th century's military arsenal.

I suspect that by TREK standards, the differences between artillery and anti-tank weapons will be mostly ammo. There could easlily be a LAW-type weapon with a bipod that could allow it to be used for indirect as well as direct fire.

Biggest problem I can see with this from a TREK standpoint is for the soldier to be able to withstand such weapons on the 24th century battlefield. A couple of rounds could probably wipe out an entire infantry division.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg:
Biggest problem I can see with this from a TREK standpoint is for the soldier to be able to withstand such weapons on the 24th century battlefield. A couple of rounds could probably wipe out an entire infantry division.

---

There are methods to counter such weaponry: [list=1][*]Having counter-battery capability to take out these weapons.[*]Stealth: Using camoflauge to prevent detection from Threat forces.[*]Mobility: using 24th century APC's for movement and limited protection.[/list=1] My thinking ts that in 24th century warfare, like today, whoever shoots first, kills first.

I believe that 24th century warfare is not like today. Since starships can provide pinpoint support fuire from orbit, I suspect that 24th century ground warfare is probably something completely different from what we think of as ground warfare.

Historically, every so often the rules of the battlefield change. They way we fight now is very differnt from the way the Normans fought, or the Romans.

I saw something recently that showed what the 21st century US soldier was going to be wearing. Camoflague/stealth body armor, laser range finder, and uplink to artillery support.

By STAR TREK's time not only will the TECH be obsolete, but the method of fighting as well.

I'm thinking of ground warfare with transporters, force shields and other TREK gear.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tonyg
I believe that 24th century warfare is not like today. Since starships can provide pinpoint support fuire from orbit, I suspect that 24th century ground warfare is probably something completely different from what we think of as ground warfare.

Historically, every so often the rules of the battlefield change. They way we fight now is very differnt from the way the Normans fought, or the Romans.

---

Well As I have said before you may not always have a starship orbiting a planet to provide a constant fire support (Fleets sitting around a planet are too much a target for the other guys fleet i.e. the French at the Nile in 1799 and the US Navy around Gundalcannel in 42) nor will it always be able to help you out when there is 100's of other calls for such support. And yes Warfare does change every so often but then it tends to settle down fo periods where it stays relatively the same for example linier warfare lasted roughly from 1500 to 1900 thats four hundred years but yet technology continued to make in evolve within its own limits. Now mechinized Warfare is evolving in the same manner and you could take a French Tank Company commander form 1940, update him on the new equipment and technology and he can still rely on his previous expierence to help him command, however a French Infantry captain form the Napoleanic wars would be so totaly out of his depth in Mech warfare he couldnt hope to adapt but he would have fit right in at Sedan in 1870.

Quote:

---

I saw something recently that showed what the 21st century US soldier was going to be wearing. Camoflague/stealth body armor, laser range finder, and uplink to artillery support.

---

No if it is the same crap I have been seeing it is not what the 21st century soldier will be wearing. The test run produced horribel results the equipment being too heavy and slowing down the average soldier, the soldier was overloaded with information and he felt detached from his environment. Now the army is back tracking to a lighter system which will retain the communications capabilities but do away wih a lot of the "Star Wars" tech in the end he will resemble his late 20th century counterpart in appearence than one would think but have a better sense of his place on the battlefield.

Quote:

---

By STAR TREK's time not only will the TECH be obsolete, but the method of fighting as well.

I'm thinking of ground warfare with transporters, force shields and other TREK gear.

---

The Transporter would not radically change the battlefield itself, troops transporting from one place to another will not happen, scabblers will make sure of that, however their ability to resuply frontline troops behind the lines, large operational level redeployments and the rescueing of trapped troops. will make an impact.

For example how a 24th century battle might play out think of this:

Afganistan = Planet
US Navy Carriers = Starfleet vessels
US Aircraft = Phasers
US Crusie missiles = Photon torpedoes
Northern Alliance = local insurregents (i.e. Bajorans, betazed resistence etc.)
US Special Forces = Rapid Reaction Troops/Rangers
US Rangers = Starfleet Ground Troops
Heliochopters/parachutes = Transporters

Now review the last month with that in mind.

This message has been removed on request by the
poster

One thing that I would do is to use drones as mounts for heavy support weaponry like mortars. This would have several advantages: [list=1][*]Infantry could travel lighter and faster.[*]Increased mobility for faster deployment.[*]If attacked, it poses less risk to personnel.[/list=1] So what does everyone think?

Eric,

The stuff I saw looked workable. It weighs about half of what the current battle guard does, and has intergrated a lot of the components. For exmple the laser-range finder is built into with the rifle rather than being an add-on. Likewise the cameras are very small and built into the gass-maks faceplace, rather than being seperate components.

If the tech actually works as advertised (the big if) I could see if being used.

The point I was trying to make it that we really don't know how ground warfare in conducted in the 24th century. While It has stabiled at times in the past, it does change when new technology gets introduced. In the past things such as the horse, the longbow, gunpowder, artillery, the machinegun, the tank, the airplane, and the helicopter have all resulted in big changes in ground warfare.

I think ground troops in the 24th century would probably need to be much more mobile than current troops. Possibly by using specilized shuttles for transport and fire support.

Hoss, you weren't thinking of letting the drones fire their own mortars, were you? I really don't like the idea of programming machines to kill. After its experience with the M-5 computer and the Arsenal of Freedom, I don't think the Federation would field any weapon system that doesn't have a sentient being in the decision loop.

Quote:

---

Originally quoted by Sarge: Hoss, you weren't thinking of letting the drones fire their own mortars, were you? I really don't like the idea of programming machines to kill. After its experience with the M-5 computer and the Arsenal of Freedom, I don't think the Federation would field any weapon system that doesn't have a sentient being in the decision loop.

---

I was thinking more of a remote-controlled weapon on an anti-gravity platform, similar to the drones in the DWS. It would have some intelligence but it would be controlled by a human operator. It would definitely not fire on its own volition, but only on the order of a human operator. The idea is to reduce the load of security troops, not turn out a Nomad wanna-be.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Highway Hoss
Looks good. Mortars have always been the infantry's organic artillery since their introduction in the Mid-20th Century. A well thought out write-up, Eric.
One suggestion, though; I suggest developing a variety of shells for special tasks. Guided Overhead Armor Peircing Shells for anti-armor use (don't laugh, the U.S. Army is developing them now.), starshells for illumination or signalling, cluster munitions for anti-infantry etc...

---

How about guided mini-probes. With the enemy actively jamming tricorders and other sensors, a directed probe to scan and transmit data would be extremely valuable to a ground combat unit. Especially if their orbital support had to leave orbit to take care of other business.