NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #6

[Lyras]

Beat the Longsword in length, NS is now over. Thanks for playing.

There do exist many NS ships longer than the Longsword. And heavier. And deeper and wider and so on. The Longsword was the only supercapital that fielded an OTH radar, and thus is why it's the only one you tend to see around. Others were gigantic battleships, with extremely limited roles, even conceptually.

[Oaledonia]

Beat the Longsword in length, NS is now over. Thanks for playing.

There do exist many NS ships longer than the Longsword. And heavier. And deeper and wider and so on. The Longsword was the only supercapital that fielded an OTH radar, and thus is why it's the only one you tend to see around. Others were gigantic battleships, with extremely limited roles, even conceptually.

The Fuso-class (Seen above) has OTH and PAVE PAWS.

I'll only build one. And it's not for sale

[Imperializt Russia]

It's an extreme example, but in this post, the Longsword doesn't fire at all. But plenty of ground units do.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=240661&p=18790358

Saying we buy a Longsword, can we name it or change it's paint scheme since it'd be ours?

Strictly speaking, "Longsword" is the class of ship.
Many navies, when buying ex-fleet or new-build vessels from other states, may alter the name of the class for a variety of reasons - and almost always change the name or designation of the actual ship. For example, the ARA General Belgrano (formerly ARA 17 de Octobre) was acquired from the US Navy as the USS Pheonix.
Though, judging from a wiki skim read, they may not have renamed the class, which Wiki still lists as "Brooklyn-class Light Cruiser".
This may just be the revisionist nature of wiki, however.

[Oaledonia]

Town-class destroyers.

[Roski]

Well, I bought four of them (like 1/3 of my defence spending went into it), and now I am in the process of sub-proofing and missile proofing it.

[Oaledonia]

Beat the Longsword in length, NS is now over. Thanks for playing.

Now with Mental Model.

[Lyras]

Well, I bought four of them (like 1/3 of my defence spending went into it), and now I am in the process of sub-proofing and missile proofing it.

Nothing is sub-proof or missile-proof. Many things are missile-resistant, and you could argue Longsword is one of them.
Subs pose issues, but that's why you (should) have escorts... Lots of escorts.

[Roski]

Well, I bought four of them (like 1/3 of my defence spending went into it), and now I am in the process of sub-proofing and missile proofing it.

Nothing is sub-proof or missile-proof. Many things are missile-resistant, and you could argue Longsword is one of them.
Subs pose issues, but that's why you (should) have escorts... Lots of escorts.

I meant anti-submarine/torpedo defences, in case for some ungodly reason they decimate my entire navy before attacking it.

It would actually be a reasonable target for enemies to hit, considering I am making it a mobile FOB.

I am going to take a few engines out and add my more powerful ones as well, decommissioning a ship, but its engines are still good.

[Lyras]

Nothing is sub-proof or missile-proof. Many things are missile-resistant, and you could argue Longsword is one of them.
Subs pose issues, but that's why you (should) have escorts... Lots of escorts.

I meant anti-submarine/torpedo defences, in case for some ungodly reason they decimate my entire navy before attacking it.

It would actually be a reasonable target for enemies to hit, considering I am making it a mobile FOB.

I am going to take a few engines out and add my more powerful ones as well, decommissioning a ship, but its engines are still good.

Getting more speed out of it would require an awful lot of additional power. Folks more cognisant of such matters can give you the calculations, but the required increase in reactor power throughput would be phenomenal, for a very minor gain. I'd recommend against, but it's your ship...

[Roski]

I meant anti-submarine/torpedo defences, in case for some ungodly reason they decimate my entire navy before attacking it.

It would actually be a reasonable target for enemies to hit, considering I am making it a mobile FOB.

I am going to take a few engines out and add my more powerful ones as well, decommissioning a ship, but its engines are still good.

Getting more speed out of it would require an awful lot of additional power. Folks more cognisant of such matters can give you the calculations, but the required increase in reactor power throughput would be phenomenal, for a very minor gain. I'd recommend against, but it's your ship...

I bought an MT ship to PMT it.

[Imperializt Russia]

50 knots without something incredibly funky requires a near-infinite amount of power, according to Springsharp, from previous discussions. Anything on reality's validity of that?

Well, I bought four of them (like 1/3 of my defence spending went into it), and now I am in the process of sub-proofing and missile proofing it.

A third of your defence spending?
One of them is already nine times the entire US procurement budget.

So, scaling your spending with the US, you spent two years' procurement budget. Someone's going to have to tell Comrade Pavlov there's no money to buy sand to fill the sandbags to fortify his House.
Or the sandbags.
Or his ammunition.

There used to be a building there, didn't there?

[Horizont]

Would it be technologically possible to construct a superdreadnought in the 40s/50s era? I imagine in this era it could have a distinct advantage over smaller battleships, as its arnament would be a good deal heavier and its size alone would provide it with good protection.

The major problems I can see are vulnerability to aircraft (though it wouldn't be fielded alone, usually with an escort carrier or two also in the fleet), propulsion (without marine nuclear reactors, it would have to be powered by steam- how much of a problem is this?), and the general difficulty in constructing it in that time period- I imagine it to be difficult, but not completely impossible.

[Roski]

50 knots without something incredibly funky requires a near-infinite amount of power, according to Springsharp, from previous discussions. Anything on reality's validity of that?

Well, I bought four of them (like 1/3 of my defence spending went into it), and now I am in the process of sub-proofing and missile proofing it.

A third of your defence spending?
One of them is already nine times the entire US procurement budget.

So, scaling your spending with the US, you spent two years' procurement budget. Someone's going to have to tell Comrade Pavlov there's no money to buy sand to fill the sandbags to fortify his House.
Or the sandbags.
Or his ammunition.

There used to be a building there, didn't there?

Well, NStracker disappeared for some odd reason...

[Roski]

Would it be technologically possible to construct a superdreadnought in the 40s/50s era? I imagine in this era it could have a distinct advantage over smaller battleships, as its arnament would be a good deal heavier and its size alone would provide it with good protection.

The major problems I can see are vulnerability to aircraft (though it wouldn't be fielded alone, usually with an escort carrier or two also in the fleet), propulsion (without marine nuclear reactors, it would have to be powered by steam- how much of a problem is this?), and the general difficulty in constructing it in that time period- I imagine it to be difficult, but not completely impossible.

You want to build a failed version of a ship... in the 1940's? Sure... have fun..

[Imperializt Russia]

Would it be technologically possible to construct a superdreadnought in the 40s/50s era? I imagine in this era it could have a distinct advantage over smaller battleships, as its arnament would be a good deal heavier and its size alone would provide it with good protection.

The major problems I can see are vulnerability to aircraft (though it wouldn't be fielded alone, usually with an escort carrier or two also in the fleet), propulsion (without marine nuclear reactors, it would have to be powered by steam- how much of a problem is this?), and the general difficulty in constructing it in that time period- I imagine it to be difficult, but not completely impossible.

The Sovetsky-Soyuz class of dreadnought, had WWII not happened, may have been constructed and fully-fielded (16 planned ships) by the late 40s or early 50s.

[Organized States]

B-1Rs as Super Danger Close, Vietnam style, CAS! Thoughts?

[Imperializt Russia]

B-1Rs as Super Danger Close, Vietnam style, CAS! Thoughts?

If as nothing more than a plot element or set piece.

[Oaledonia]

B-1Rs as Super Danger Close, Vietnam style, CAS! Thoughts?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-10/b-1-stealth-bomber-friendly-fire-strike-kills-5-us-soldiers-afghanistan

[Roski]

B-1Rs as Super Danger Close, Vietnam style, CAS! Thoughts?

Stick with the A-10. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Imperializt Russia]

B-1Rs as Super Danger Close, Vietnam style, CAS! Thoughts?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-10/b-1-stealth-bomber-friendly-fire-strike-kills-5-us-soldiers-afghanistan

"It's painted black, it must be stealth! Grey's almost black!"

[The Akasha Colony]

Would it be technologically possible to construct a superdreadnought in the 40s/50s era? I imagine in this era it could have a distinct advantage over smaller battleships, as its arnament would be a good deal heavier and its size alone would provide it with good protection.

The major problems I can see are vulnerability to aircraft (though it wouldn't be fielded alone, usually with an escort carrier or two also in the fleet), propulsion (without marine nuclear reactors, it would have to be powered by steam- how much of a problem is this?), and the general difficulty in constructing it in that time period- I imagine it to be difficult, but not completely impossible.

Not of the NS size. Nor would it have any use, since as you mention, the penetration of aerial bombs during the period would defeat any feasible level of armor if scaled up large enough.

Also, nuclear reactors use steam as well. The difference is for a nuclear plant, the reactor generates heat which creates steam, whereas in conventional ships, coal or oil is burnt in a boiler to accomplish the same.

[Organized States]

B-1Rs as Super Danger Close, Vietnam style, CAS! Thoughts?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-10/b-1-stealth-bomber-friendly-fire-strike-kills-5-us-soldiers-afghanistan

Heard about that, I don't know if this is true, but those guys were too close. Not the B-1's fault apparently.

[Oaledonia]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-10/b-1-stealth-bomber-friendly-fire-strike-kills-5-us-soldiers-afghanistan

"It's painted black, it must be stealth! Grey's almost black!"

No, silly! It's 2fast4radars to see.

[Roski]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-10/b-1-stealth-bomber-friendly-fire-strike-kills-5-us-soldiers-afghanistan

Heard about that, I don't know if this is true, but those guys were too close. Not the B-1's fault apparently.

"Super Danger Close"

Stick with the A-10

[Questers]

I'm starting a new mechanised_war_novelette, the spiritual follower to The Brink. It will be called Road to Limoges and focuses on the 33rd Cavalry Brigade-group.

Here's a tanku.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/870 ... brgade.png