NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #3

[Altito Asmoro]

Why no seats?

It's a light infantry/mountain gun. So it's smallish and seating would be redundant. Just stand behind it.

How long the progress of your own aircraft?

[Purpelia]

It's a light infantry/mountain gun. So it's smallish and seating would be redundant. Just stand behind it.

How long the progress of your own aircraft?

It's going. These things take time. Weeks at least...

[Altito Asmoro]

How long the progress of your own aircraft?

It's going. These things take time. Weeks at least...

Wait, it has not finish yet until now?

[Purpelia]

It's going. These things take time. Weeks at least...

Wait, it has not finish yet until now?

Wait, which aircraft are talking about here? I have 5 in the works currently.

[Altito Asmoro]

Wait, it has not finish yet until now?

Wait, which aircraft are talking about here? I have 5 in the works currently.

The first one, I think. From the NS Military Thread #2.

[Purpelia]

Wait, which aircraft are talking about here? I have 5 in the works currently.

The first one, I think. From the NS Military Thread #2.

Can you be a tad more specific?

And what ever it is, aircraft are difficult to do and I can't make any serious progress before my exams end anyway.

[Altito Asmoro]

This one.

Alright, back to my questions with an update. Read this text please, comment and correct me if I made any mistakes.

Purpelia is MT, pure MT. So the year is 2013. My air force today is going to, like all the other serious air forces out there be transitioning from 4th to 5th generation craft. As such, it is still going to have a large arsenal of 4th gens to field. And for this to happen I definitively have to design said 4th gens. The two aircraft I intend to design are as follows. One heavy fighter (F-15 / Su-27 equivalent). This one is going to require paved runways, have a heavy weapon loads and a nice mix of electronics from both sides of the iron curtain. It's primary role at the moment it is designed is going to be air superiority. With a secondary role being ground attack and interdiction. The second fighter is going to be a lighter ground attack aircraft of some sort. I am not yet certain just what to do with this one. But I intend to make it something between the Mig-29 and Su-25. A very good ground attacker that can take off and land from bad runways and bomb the living hell out of enemy troops on call. And that can still hold its own in some way against enemy fighters. Since most 4th gens entered service in the early 80s and were first thought off half a decade prior the same will go for my craft. I will be using 1977 and 1983 as the design/field years. The aircraft are with upgrades to be in use today.

Now, how does this plan sound to you?

[Purpelia]

This one.

Alright, back to my questions with an update. Read this text please, comment and correct me if I made any mistakes.

Purpelia is MT, pure MT. So the year is 2013. My air force today is going to, like all the other serious air forces out there be transitioning from 4th to 5th generation craft. As such, it is still going to have a large arsenal of 4th gens to field. And for this to happen I definitively have to design said 4th gens. The two aircraft I intend to design are as follows. One heavy fighter (F-15 / Su-27 equivalent). This one is going to require paved runways, have a heavy weapon loads and a nice mix of electronics from both sides of the iron curtain. It's primary role at the moment it is designed is going to be air superiority. With a secondary role being ground attack and interdiction. The second fighter is going to be a lighter ground attack aircraft of some sort. I am not yet certain just what to do with this one. But I intend to make it something between the Mig-29 and Su-25. A very good ground attacker that can take off and land from bad runways and bomb the living hell out of enemy troops on call. And that can still hold its own in some way against enemy fighters. Since most 4th gens entered service in the early 80s and were first thought off half a decade prior the same will go for my craft. I will be using 1977 and 1983 as the design/field years. The aircraft are with upgrades to be in use today.

Now, how does this plan sound to you?

Ah, the Skeletor. Twin engined jet aircraft. Modern radar. Fun stuff.
Yea, that one is in the works but I had to pause it as it is a large project and my current exams take up a lot of my time. As in, I can draw a field gun or a rifle in at most 3-4 hours worth of work. Especially if I am doing them (like this one) on sketches and a writeup that I have had for ages. But for the aircraft I actually have to write a lot of text, draw several images from different angles, design the radar and all the weapons, design the engines, draw the engines. So that won't be happening until the end of next month when all my exams are done.

[Altito Asmoro]

This one.

Ah, the Skeletor. Twin engined jet aircraft. Modern radar. Fun stuff.
Yea, that one is in the works but I had to pause it as it is a large project and my current exams take up a lot of my time. As in, I can draw a field gun or a rifle in at most 3-4 hours worth of work. Especially if I am doing them (like this one) on sketches and a writeup that I have had for ages. But for the aircraft I actually have to write a lot of text, draw several images from different angles, design the radar and all the weapons, design the engines, draw the engines. So that won't be happening until the end of next month when all my exams are done.

So it is in hiatus now?

[Purpelia]

Ah, the Skeletor. Twin engined jet aircraft. Modern radar. Fun stuff.
Yea, that one is in the works but I had to pause it as it is a large project and my current exams take up a lot of my time. As in, I can draw a field gun or a rifle in at most 3-4 hours worth of work. Especially if I am doing them (like this one) on sketches and a writeup that I have had for ages. But for the aircraft I actually have to write a lot of text, draw several images from different angles, design the radar and all the weapons, design the engines, draw the engines. So that won't be happening until the end of next month when all my exams are done.

So it is in hiatus now?

Sadly. Along with anything else that requires more work than quickly drawing a model over existing sketches.

[East Vlaricstan]

Would it be fine if I created 5 cruiser-sized ships, armed with nothing but missiles and 2 16in guns. It's main use would be for coastal bombardment.

[The Akasha Colony]

Would it be fine if I created 5 cruiser-sized ships, armed with nothing but missiles and 2 16in guns. It's main use would be for coastal bombardment.

That's not something you'd really create something new for given the relatively limited utility. An existing warship will already be capable of carrying the missiles, so all you need are the guns (which are of dubious use anyway). If you've got old battleships or cruisers in storage, knock yourself out. If not, it's not really worth the expense.

[Onekawa-Nukanor]

I've been thinking about cavalry mounts from the period 1100-1300 AD medieval period in regards to technological progress and cavalry armament, and although it may be more realistic to use breeds from that era, the real lack of any worthwhile information on specific breeds from that timeframe, I've decided to use breeds that come from the modern area 'wholesale' rather than bothering to try and make specific changes. Although I will not be using breeds developed in the US, Australia and so forth as a concession.

Largely, I've been thinking that I'll be employing Andalusian, Percheron and possibly the Friesian, although there may be very minor numbers of various other breeds as a general rule. I was also considering Shire horses as well, but I'm still not sure. Despite the fact that pretty much all these breeds have backgrounds as warhorses, I was curious as to whether someone would be able to comment why such breeds may not be suitable, and whether someone could make any other recommendations.

I am also curious of whether or not having, my men riding stallions exclusively maybe an issue. Such a policy would primarily be for cultural reasons (men ride realmale horses), but I was wondering if this would have severe impacts on my ability to replace stocks.

Just making sure this doesn't get lost because of the new page.

[East Vlaricstan]

Would it be fine if I created 5 cruiser-sized ships, armed with nothing but missiles and 2 16in guns. It's main use would be for coastal bombardment.

That's not something you'd really create something new for given the relatively limited utility. An existing warship will already be capable of carrying the missiles, so all you need are the guns (which are of dubious use anyway). If you've got old battleships or cruisers in storage, knock yourself out. If not, it's not really worth the expense.

I'll scrap it, and fit my Slavas with a 16-cell VLS.

[Altito Asmoro]

I've been thinking about cavalry mounts from the period 1100-1300 AD medieval period in regards to technological progress and cavalry armament, and although it may be more realistic to use breeds from that era, the real lack of any worthwhile information on specific breeds from that timeframe, I've decided to use breeds that come from the modern area 'wholesale' rather than bothering to try and make specific changes. Although I will not be using breeds developed in the US, Australia and so forth as a concession.

Largely, I've been thinking that I'll be employing Andalusian, Percheron and possibly the Friesian, although there may be very minor numbers of various other breeds as a general rule. I was also considering Shire horses as well, but I'm still not sure. Despite the fact that pretty much all these breeds have backgrounds as warhorses, I was curious as to whether someone would be able to comment why such breeds may not be suitable, and whether someone could make any other recommendations.

I am also curious of whether or not having, my men riding stallions exclusively maybe an issue. Such a policy would primarily be for cultural reasons (men ride realmale horses), but I was wondering if this would have severe impacts on my ability to replace stocks.

So the horses will be used as a cavalry force for surprise attacks, cavalry force for direct charge, or as armed horses protecting an armored carriage?

[Republica Newland]

How plausible would it be to have my entire fleet of combat AFVs based around just 2 platforms? Can the same platform be wheeled or tracked or are there significant differences between the two?

The same platform would be available in different lengths, payload capacities, armor levels, etc. to fulfill different roles.

How modular do modular vehicles actually get?

[Vitaphone Racing]

How plausible would it be to have my entire fleet of combat AFVs based around just 2 platforms? Can the same platform be wheeled or tracked or are there significant differences between the two?

Considering the vastly different drivetrain layout that the two would require, I'll go out on a limb here and say it can't be done. Even if it could, there'd be heaps of wasted space from extremely inefficient packaging of the drivetrain. [/quote]

How modular do modular vehicles actually get?

The chassis is rarely altered. For body-on-frame design, the sky is the limit.

[Yes Im Biop]

Question.

A Planet with 3 times the earth's atmosphere and 2 times the gravity, Would it be much harder for planes (Propeller's or otherwise) To get off the ground or easier because the air is much thicker?

[Vitaphone Racing]

Question.

A Planet with 3 times the earth's atmosphere and 2 times the gravity, Would it be much harder for planes (Propeller's or otherwise) To get off the ground or easier because the air is much thicker?

It's something that's going to vary for different applications. With three times the atmosphere and two times the gravity, most aircraft we see today would not be possible in these conditions.

[Yes Im Biop]

Question.

A Planet with 3 times the earth's atmosphere and 2 times the gravity, Would it be much harder for planes (Propeller's or otherwise) To get off the ground or easier because the air is much thicker?

It's something that's going to vary for different applications. With three times the atmosphere and two times the gravity, most aircraft we see today would not be possible in these conditions.

You would need 5+ Thousand horsepower engines for one probably

[Lubyak]

From the discussions both here and in the main Military Realism thread, I've had an idea on the topic of the 'shore bombardment' ship. It seems that a lot of people put big guns on MT ships (by 'big' I'm talking about battleship level 14"+ guns) for reasons of 'shore bombardment'. They use the need for shore bombardment as a reason to utilize a MT battleship. The critique is, of course, that a battleship is always going to be a capital ship, and thus be a massive investment of resources. As a result, given modern day coastal defense capabilities, such a ship could not be committed to support the land fighting until the fighting had moved beyond the range of its guns, for fear of hostile shore based AShMs. I recall a proposal that any 'real' shore bombardment ship would have to be a small, dedicated vessel, so that it would be cheap enough to risk without cost.

As such, my thoughts turned to the Royal Navy's monitors. The Lord Clive class monitors were dedicated shore bombardment vessels--a kind of modernization of the bomb ketch concept--and were small, shallow draft vessels intended to use off the shelf technologies and weapons that no longer had an available mounting to cheaply provide shore bombardment vessels. They were originally sent to try and help break the deadlock in the Low Countries during World War I.

Perhaps this style of ship could be used as the basis of a modern shore bombardment vessel? There would be added costs,no doubt, as there wouldn't be spare 14 and 18 inch guns just lying around now, but the vessels small size would be of use. Of course, in the modern world, we'd have to cut down on electronics for the vessel. My question would be, for this type of dedicated shore bombardment vessel, which electronics could we strip? It wouldn't need the big fancy sensor systems of a full destroyer/cruiser, nor would it need the mountings for missile systems. Perhaps only a few CIWS stations to defend the vessel directly, and reliant on other ships/aircraft/ground SAMs for protection.

What do you guys think? Is this a valid proposal for the MT shore bombardment ship idea? Or would it still be too expensive to justifiably risk in a shore bombardment role?

[Purpelia]

It's something that's going to vary for different applications. With three times the atmosphere and two times the gravity, most aircraft we see today would not be possible in these conditions.

You would need 5+ Thousand horsepower engines for one probably

Is the 3x number 3x the amount of air in the same space (3x density) or 3x the depth of the atmosphere?

[Yes Im Biop]

Anything a Battleship can destroy a B-2, B-1B, or a B-52 Can destroy faster and Cheaper.

[Yes Im Biop]

You would need 5+ Thousand horsepower engines for one probably

Is the 3x number 3x the amount of air in the same space (3x density) or 3x the depth of the atmosphere?

333kpa/meter squared I believe. so 3x Density

[Purpelia]

Is the 3x number 3x the amount of air in the same space (3x density) or 3x the depth of the atmosphere?

333kpa/meter squared I believe. so 3x Density

In that case you can't fly. 3x density might mean 3x lift. Might. But it also means 3x air resistance, drag and all the related heat, temperature and flight issues. That alone means your aircraft would have to be ridiculously streamlined and would still not get much in terms of speed. And I am not sure jet engines would work.