Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A jetbike has a whole 3rd dimension of benefit over a normal bike. You can ride it low down, but you can also pop up to see over cliffs and trees, or fly over chasms or ascend otherwise inaccessible locations.

If you think of a jetbike as a helicopter that can also fly so low as to conceal itself behind tiny terrain features, fly through forests and not be as loud as a helicopter, then I think you've got something pretty valuable. Stick a 50cal on it and use it to scout, harass and call in airstrikes/artillery.

But everything is gonna be robots/drones soon enough anyways.

I could see a mobile local operator/controller/observer for drones being valuable. Someone able to move with them fast over terrain on a hover-bike/small vehicle who can then act as a local relay. Perhaps being a back up in case communication over longer distances gets interrupted; or providing eyes-on feedback to drone controllers. Even being able to retrieve drones that fall in the field or such (outside of the main battle zone) and such.

Or even allow them to carry a few drones and operate with short range radio signals which might be easier to mask/harder to hack/interrupt.

I can't think of a more feasible way to bring swiftly the Raven Sword within decisive striking distance of a heretic's neck.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I can't think of a more feasible way to bring swiftly the Raven Sword within decisive striking distance of a heretic's neck.

Stick it on a drone?

Jetbikes are probably more reliable than regular motorbikes at least. No risk of shooting off the tyres, and the anti-grav engine can be protected by armour.

 Insectum7 wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I can't think of a more feasible way to bring swiftly the Raven Sword within decisive striking distance of a heretic's neck.

Stick it on a drone?

While we might trust them with a bayonet, no mere flying servitor is wielding the Raven Sword.

It's kind of an impossible question, since it entirely depends on the capabilities of said jet bikes. It's like asking 'how feasible are wheeled vehicles in war?'

As a trooper in communications, boy do I love to read people dismissing the use of super mobile bikes. In seriousness, I can't think of a single officer who wouldn't jump at joy at the prospect of getting their hands on such tech.

Naturally you don't use them offensively, just like you don't charge enemy positions with bicycles. You use it for its ability to move specialist stuff, expert people and messages around quickly and unnoticed. Dodging radar alone is a great asset in comparison to traditional aircraft. Beyond the obvious spec op team insertions, the sheer utility of it for various officers like company commanders in inspecting positions would be highly valuable.

Also, if anyone thinks bikes aren't used by armed forces, have a read of the Millenium Challenge where the US got immediately crushed so badly they had to restart the whole wargame and force the opfor commander to stick to a script for them to have a chance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
Utilizing outdated equipment and not relying on your latest tech won the conflict. Turns out your critical messages are pretty hard to intercept if you're not sending them out on the airwaves

^That was a fascinating read, thanks!

Again, depends on the capabilities of the jetbikes.

Are they simply replacing regular dirt bikes? There'll be uses, but limited.

Are they wholesale replacing troop-transport helicopters, combat rubber raiding boats, even mid-sized boats and landing crafts, air-to-ground-aircraft potentially, predator drones? Get in special forces silently and under the raider instead of an helicopter or boat and be later remote controlled to double-function as air-support for the team as drones? Etc.., etc..

 Sherrypie wrote:

Also, if anyone thinks bikes aren't used by armed forces, have a read of the Millenium Challenge where the US got immediately crushed so badly they had to restart the whole wargame and force the opfor commander to stick to a script for them to have a chance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
Utilizing outdated equipment and not relying on your latest tech won the conflict. Turns out your critical messages are pretty hard to intercept if you're not sending them out on the airwaves

Another one is repairs and upkeep. If you're using dirt bikes or cars or basic equipment in the field and something breaks you've more chance of finding a spare battery or other basic resources that you could repair your equipment with. If you're using fancy state of the art gear, suddenly any damage or wear and tear becomes more difficult to repair if you're not able to drag it and yourself back to a well supplied base of operations.

And yeah that wargame sounds like something out of a film. It was fine to restart it, but to then make the opposing side follow a script was totally daft, rather than have the US side use what they'd learned in the first day, they just reinforced doctrine that clearly didn't actually work. Or which only works if the opposing side "plays by the rules".

Oh no, someone brought up Millennium Challenge...

There's a lot of nuance with that which isn't really explained well on Wikipedia. If anyone wants details pm me, I don't want to derail the thread but there is a lot more nuance than most single articles can convey.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Oh no, someone brought up Millennium Challenge...

There's a lot of nuance with that which isn't really explained well on Wikipedia. If anyone wants details pm me, I don't want to derail the thread but there is a lot more nuance than most single articles can convey.

Naturally, it's a complicated and highly amusing mess (especially towards the end). In regards to this topic, the simple version works fine as a counterexample for various dismissals of the usefulness of quick ways to get individuals around. Hell, runners will probably be used as long as there are soldiers with evolutionary functional legs, but zipping around with an all-terrain speeder would be so much easier.

As a follow up on the drone issue, Boeing (here in Arizona) is already working on the nextgen Apache which only has one occupant and his/her job is simply weapons control and drone support (which the apache will fly into the combat zone and deploy). No pilot. The drones can be configured for offensive, defensive and/or surveillance. Don't know what number of drones it will carry, but obviously this is a long ways from deployment.

Sherrypie wrote:Also, if anyone thinks bikes aren't used by armed forces, have a read of the Millenium Challenge where the US got immediately crushed so badly they had to restart the whole wargame and force the opfor commander to stick to a script for them to have a chance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
Utilizing outdated equipment and not relying on your latest tech won the conflict. Turns out your critical messages are pretty hard to intercept if you're not sending them out on the airwaves

Unit1126PLL wrote:Oh no, someone brought up Millennium Challenge...

Ah, yes, MC02. The event where General Riper, with a chip on his shoulder the size of the state of Arkansas, destroyed the US Navy with such forward-leaning and asymmetrical tactics as... Using instantaneous radio comms for the event but declaring that they couldn't be jammed because they were 'actually' bicycle couriers, simulating anti-ship missiles carried by fishing trawlers that weighed less than the weapons they supposedly carried, and exploiting a simulator error to materialize a horde of jetskis-with-Termits out of thin air right next to the CVBG that due to real-world constraints had to be positioned unrealistically close to shore and with most of its anti-ship defenses disabled.

The Wikipedia article (like most other popular reporting) breathlessly describes his 'tactics' while leaving out that in the context of the wargame, most of them weren't actually implemented and were merely used as justifications to cheat the wargame; his antics destroyed any possibility of it actually being used as a worthwhile training exercise until they re-floated the fleet and put a leash on him.

So I can think of better examples of bikes used in warfare than the event where they weren't actually used, but instead were invoked as a fictional contrivance to deny US electronic warfare capabilities without actually imposing any of the limitations (eg time delay) of relying on bike-borne comms.

Heh, that description reminds me of Hannibal Brooks

https://youtu.be/EFTPK2wvzVA?t=3059

Horribly, ridiculously impractical.

Which is to say, *perfect* for 40k

Consider that paratroopers are in use today and pose relatively obvious slow moving aerial targets on their way down. Obviously they have to be used under certain circumstances to minimize their exposure.

Jet bikes would have a ton of utility as a delivery tool for troops into locations where it would be incredibly dangerous or impossible to land safety. Or in remote areas where there are no roads or bridges. They can hug the ground or skim above the trees. They aren't bound by roads and bridges.

I mean, if you told the army they could have hover tanks that ignored terrain conditions I'm pretty sure they'd be all over that. If you told them you could equip troops with motorcycles that fly I think they'd find a suitable mission.

Things will continue to get lighter, quieter, faster, and stronger. It seems safe to assume this would apply to jet bikes.

The other question nobody is asking is how expensive will these jetbikes be? After all, the US has ended many a development program after simply deciding that the cost to switch wasn't justified by the increase in capability.

So the question boils down to if we get jetbikes that are capable, cheap, and arrive before we automate things beyond the need for a human operator.

Heeeeeeey….. I said that on page 1 dagnammit!