NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #3

[Yes Im Biop]

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.

Rocket's would, Would Ram and Scram? That and the air is 78% Oxygen so forest fires are more like fire storms.

[Purpelia]

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.

Rocket's would, Would Ram and Scram? That and the air is 78% Oxygen so forest fires are more like fire storms.

Think of it this way. Any form of jet engine requires that you take in air, compress it, heat it and eject it out the back. The more pressure you have on the intake the more heat your engine is going to have in the compressor. So ramjets might be interesting...

And with 78% oxygen what is supposed to breathe this? Giant roaches?

[Yes Im Biop]

Rocket's would, Would Ram and Scram? That and the air is 78% Oxygen so forest fires are more like fire storms.

Think of it this way. Any form of jet engine requires that you take in air, compress it, heat it and eject it out the back. The more pressure you have on the intake the more heat your engine is going to have in the compressor. So ramjets might be interesting...

And with 78% oxygen what is supposed to breathe this? Giant roaches?

... ... ... Yes... And spiders to... I said the animal's here are dangerous.

White hot flame's shooing out during warmup?...What was it the X-43? It was made from some super heat resistant carbon, The Mach 7 Test...

[Purpelia]

... ... ... Yes... And spiders to... I said the animal's here are dangerous.

What about say people? Or you know, something, anything with opposeable thumbs?

White hot flame's shooing out during warmup?...What was it the X-43? It was made from some super heat resistant carbon, The Mach 7 Test...

I am more worried about getting in the air in the first place. Something tells me that between 3x drag and 2x gravity early aviation pioneers would have ended up looking rather flat.

[Yes Im Biop]

Big people, Strong muscle and Bone build, And with a nonexistant resistance to radiation, The Draconian's have a slight resistance from the iron in their outer skin, but most are simple very large people.

Yeah, less Biplane and more B-2, I'm re writing some part's of my History at the moment for that

[Registug]

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?

Much interdasting.

You need to think though... when would it ever be used? How often do naval invasions happen in MT?

[Yes Im Biop]

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?

Much interdasting.

You need to think though... when would it ever be used? How often do naval invasions happen in MT?

Modern shore Invasion's are usually done with huge hovercraft loaded with Marines and Vehicles if I remember right

[Registug]

Much interdasting.

You need to think though... when would it ever be used? How often do naval invasions happen in MT?

Modern shore Invasion's are usually done with huge hovercraft loaded with Marines and Vehicles if I remember right

In modern IRL setting... it's usually against undefended shorelines.

[Yes Im Biop]

Modern shore Invasion's are usually done with huge hovercraft loaded with Marines and Vehicles if I remember right

In modern IRL setting... it's usually against undefended shorelines.

Okay just add a Guided missile cruiser, some jet's and a few Mine thrasher's to that load out.

[Immoren]

Most preferable method would be landing on friendly harbor and doing overland march from there.
Naval invasion is something you do as last option.

[Purpelia]

Big people, Strong muscle and Bone build, And with a nonexistant resistance to radiation, The Draconian's have a slight resistance from the iron in their outer skin, but most are simple very large people.

I am not certain that biology works that way. As in I am not sure that primates or anything primate like could function in such an atmosphere. Dinosaurs might. But again...

Yeah, less Biplane and more B-2, I'm re writing some part's of my History at the moment for that

Last time I checked you have to learn how to fly with plywood and canvas before you do it with jet fuel and titanium. On the plus side with 3x the atmospheric density balloons and airships should have 3x the lift. And they do not need engine power or a fixed minimum speed to stay afloat. So they get 3x the lift without needing 3x the engine power to achieve it. So overall jet powered airships might be more economical than aircraft.

Hell given that your air is more dense I wonder how it would behaves in regard to wind. You might benefit from having sail driven airships.

[Lubyak]

-snip-

Much interdasting.

You need to think though... when would it ever be used? How often do naval invasions happen in MT?

While the flexibility of landing forces enables them to do more of the 'land wherever the hell we want' type invasion, there is still a need to put troops ashore. The same flexibility and mobility that allows a landing force to strike wherever means the the defender will likely be able to strike wherever as well. Yes, the days of D-day style landings on beaches studded with pre-planned concrete bunkers are gone, but it'd be foolish to assume that you will always have the luxury of landing on an undefended beach.

Even in lower level insurgency type conflicts, these type of ships could be used to get very heavy firepower to the support of light units ashore, ala US destroyers in Vietnam.

The main issue I've seen leveled against the use of battleships for close in NGS in NS war is that they'd be too expensive to risk losing, with the points to their armour being ineffective against AShMs being used mainly to emphasize that it would be risky to send the battleships in close. Reducing the cost factor might help make a dedicated shore bombardment ship worthwhile.

[Yes Im Biop]

Big people, Strong muscle and Bone build, And with a nonexistant resistance to radiation, The Draconian's have a slight resistance from the iron in their outer skin, but most are simple very large people.

I am not certain that biology works that way. As in I am not sure that primates or anything primate like could function in such an atmosphere. Dinosaurs might. But again...

Yeah, less Biplane and more B-2, I'm re writing some part's of my History at the moment for that

Last time I checked you have to learn how to fly with plywood and canvas before you do it with jet fuel and titanium. On the plus side with 3x the atmospheric density balloons and airships should have 3x the lift. And they do not need engine power or a fixed minimum speed to stay afloat. So they get 3x the lift without needing 3x the engine power to achieve it. So overall jet powered airships might be more economical than aircraft.

Hell given that your air is more dense I wonder how it would behaves in regard to wind. You might benefit from having sail driven airships.

And you people mocked me for liking Airships!... O gods I just realized how effective my firebomb airship would be...

[Purpelia]

And you people mocked me for liking Airships!...

Didn't know your air was so thick.

O gods I just realized how effective my firebomb airship would be...

It really would not. It would be 3x slower due to the extra drag. Your best bet would actually be some sort of large slow artillery carrier or missile boat. And not something that relies on speed to be able to reach a target and land on it.

[Yes Im Biop]

And you people mocked me for liking Airships!...

Didn't know your air was so thick.

O gods I just realized how effective my firebomb airship would be...

It really would not. It would be 3x slower due to the extra drag. Your best bet would actually be some sort of large slow artillery carrier or missile boat. And not something that relies on speed to be able to reach a target and land on it.

I just realized how much it would effect things honestly. and yeah... Shit now I have to write this down to... Airships... Wonder if you could make something near super carrier size...

[Purpelia]

Didn't know your air was so thick.


It really would not. It would be 3x slower due to the extra drag. Your best bet would actually be some sort of large slow artillery carrier or missile boat. And not something that relies on speed to be able to reach a target and land on it.

I just realized how much it would effect things honestly. and yeah... Shit now I have to write this down to... Airships... Wonder if you could make something near super carrier size...

Not unless your air is 400x more dense. 3x more dense means you get to strap a flak88 or two on the Hindenburg. Not that you get to fly continents around.

[Yes Im Biop]

I just realized how much it would effect things honestly. and yeah... Shit now I have to write this down to... Airships... Wonder if you could make something near super carrier size...

Not unless your air is 400x more dense. 3x more dense means you get to strap a flak88 or two on the Hindenburg. Not that you get to fly continents around.

Mind you a Flak88 is a big gun. I'm just thinking. Yeah Airplane's will not exist in Biop. Airships are my new toy's./

[Purpelia]

Not unless your air is 400x more dense. 3x more dense means you get to strap a flak88 or two on the Hindenburg. Not that you get to fly continents around.

Mind you a Flak88 is a big gun. I'm just thinking. Yeah Airplane's will not exist in Biop. Airships are my new toy's./

Tell you what. I can't find decent stats on actual airships but I found this thread on the draftroom about someones concept design. How about we use that one as an example to see how feasible using them would be?
http://z4.invisionfree.invalid.com/NSDraftroom/ ... 11682&st=0

His airship nets out to roughly 73 tons of load. So using your atmosphere that is 220 tons roughly with the same volume. Now you propose how you would kit it out. Start with the fuel and more powerful engine.

[Yes Im Biop]

Mind you a Flak88 is a big gun. I'm just thinking. Yeah Airplane's will not exist in Biop. Airships are my new toy's./

Tell you what. I can't find decent stats on actual airships but I found this thread on the draftroom about someones concept design. How about we use that one as an example to see how feasible using them would be?
http://z4.invisionfree.invalid.com/NSDraftroom/ ... 11682&st=0

His airship nets out to roughly 73 tons of load. So using your atmosphere that is 220 tons roughly.

So with air at 3x pressure it would be able to life 3.6 kilo's per meter?
2-3 ton's for ... Wait... Propeller's driven by gas engines would work right?

[Purpelia]

Tell you what. I can't find decent stats on actual airships but I found this thread on the draftroom about someones concept design. How about we use that one as an example to see how feasible using them would be?
http://z4.invisionfree.invalid.com/NSDraftroom/ ... 11682&st=0

His airship nets out to roughly 73 tons of load. So using your atmosphere that is 220 tons roughly.

So with air at 3x pressure it would be able to life 3.6 kilo's per meter?

Is that how the math works out? Length is usually meaningless in terms of lift since lift has to do with density which requires you to know the volume.

[Yes Im Biop]

So with air at 3x pressure it would be able to life 3.6 kilo's per meter?

Is that how the math works out? Length is usually meaningless in terms of lift since lift has to do with density which requires you to know the volume.

I have no Idea man Math is not my strong suit

[Purpelia]

As for engines, remember that 3x density means you need 3x the power to move the same mass at the same speed. Your airship has 3x the mass in cargo so it needs 9x the engine power to move at the same speed.

Edit: note that this is an oversimplification as there are other factors other than air resistance in play when calculating speed...

[Yes Im Biop]

SO 900+ horsepower gas engines and 4 or 6 bladed propellers?

[Purpelia]

SO 900+ horsepower gas engines and 4 or 6 bladed propellers?

As said, note that there are other things at play when calculating speed. You would ideally need to just find out what formula to use, plug your desired speed in and go.

[Yes Im Biop]

SO 900+ horsepower gas engines and 4 or 6 bladed propellers?

As said, note that there are other things at play when calculating speed. You would ideally need to just find out what formula to use, plug your desired speed in and go.

AT the moment I just want it to be able to counteract the wind and then work from there