NS Military Realism Mk. 7: NO

[The Kievan People]

I was actually thinking of early war USMC, needing to kick start thousands of guys for Orange and everything.

Late war Germany is probably a bad idea to be copying tbh.

The Ardennes Offensive and Lake Balaton Offensive showed that at the lowest levels the Germany army was still quite capable even in the very last stage of the war.

[The Kievan People]

The German abbreviated training program - Kurzausbildung - was actually longer than I remembered. 12 weeks.

It had some interesting features:
1. Classroom exercises were banned.
2. Drill was banned.
3. Sequential training exercises (i.e. squad exercises, then platoon exercises etc) were banned.
4. Weapons training began on day one or day two, ballistic theory was eliminated from the training process as were blanks.
5. Firing ranges were also eliminated. Weapons training focused on the "battle run" which combined firing, digging in, camouflage and stalking. All of which were to be introduced simultaneously, and the recruits were supposed to learn through practice.
6. "Combined training" was introduced were the recruit would alternate between individual, squad and platoon training on a daily basis. Combined training was also the replacement for drill, recruits were expected to learn discipline from participating in their instruction groups.
7. Every training exercise "without exception" was observed from the enemies vantage point by experienced instructors. If they spot a mistake they were to halt the exercise with a red flag and repeat until it was performed correctly.
8. The focus of training was good shooting. But camouflage, digging in and night fighting were given special emphasis. One quarter of all ammunition allocated for training was to be used in night training. Recruits were not considered combat ready until they could meet camouflage and entrenching standards.
9. The goal of training was to produce units that could be committed to combat at the lowest level possible as soon as possible.

All in all they tried to compress what had once been two years of training into 12 weeks.

[Aelarus]

On F-16:

Fighter mafia wanted a lightweight fighter and they got one. Politics and pointless infighting makes odd design choices. It's not even that great at A2A if you ask me, since it lacks in speed and power extension. It's still better than the Russian equivalent (MiG-29ish, it was supposed to be, but is almost in a different class) at dogfighting (when comparing equivalent year models, though the USSR might of had a better MiG in the 80s especially with the fuselage ECM suite). The Viper has a better sustained turn rate even while loaded (this is with the newer engines, older model F-16s had piss poor engines) as well as much better SA (seriously Russia, you fix your search radar but your cockpit visibility still suuuuuucks).

Also, the A-10 isn't better than either the Viper or Eagle. Frankly, it's only advantage is armor plating which only applies to <30mm. The gun is another example of the America's fetish for externally powered rotary cannons and frankly isn't really used very often anymore on strike missions (flying policies changed, all of the intended advantages of the A-10 like visual scanning basically vanish with new combat procedure).

[Aelarus]

A matter of opinion for you all. SMAW or Pzf 3?

I personally prefer the SMAW due to it being lighter, and the fact it looks nicer IMO.

[Doppio Giudici]

A matter of opinion for you all. SMAW or Pzf 3?

I personally prefer the SMAW due to it being lighter, and the fact it looks nicer IMO.

What about AT-4? It's lighter and makes thinks go boom.

Or even the RPG-18, so cheap and light it's wrong not to fire ten of them a battle!

[Erusuia]

Would it make sense to train soldiers based in and around urban areas for riot control? Nothing intensive, but having the ability for the police to call up a large reserve of soldiers who know how to use riot control devices might be beneficial

[Padnak]

Would it make sense to train soldiers based in and around urban areas for riot control? Nothing intensive, but having the ability for the police to call up a large reserve of soldiers who know how to use riot control devices might be beneficial

I have my military trained in riot control, although in my case its mostly just shooting everything that moves

[Immoren]

Would it make sense to train soldiers based in and around urban areas for riot control? Nothing intensive, but having the ability for the police to call up a large reserve of soldiers who know how to use riot control devices might be beneficial

I presume you've military police uits?

[Auroya]

So, I was arguing against the concept of 'flying warships' on an IRC, and I managed to come up with several points which I wanted to run by this thread to see if it actually works out like that and if I could add anything more to it.

We can take such a ship to have the basic countermeasures and sensors that a naval vessel might, though adapted to its role (e.g. it might have weather radar also, and would not be firing AShMs).

-Firstly, you present an absolutely enormous target in the air. All ground-based radar will be able to see it and there is no real way to make something like this a stealth vessel. S-300s can see targets from almost 300km away, and for a target like this I'm sure you could do better if you tried. It would get spammed with SAMs.

-In the air, detection is significantly easier than at sea because the horizon is nowhere near as much of a problem. And you will stick out massively.

-You may be able to armour your hull, but you can't armour your sensors, which SAM and AAM missile spam will do away with pretty quickly and then you will be a floating crippled hulk, unable to engage anything and with non-functional countermeasures. The enemy doesn't even need to bring you down.

-If you're not running on antigravity, your engines will be the first things to go and you will not last long at all.

-Translating a naval concept into the air doesn't work, because the sea is a 2D environment while the air is 3D. You can be attacked from all directions, and you will be. Saturating you with missiles is significantly easier.

-And there is nothing at all that this can do that can't be done better by seagoing vessels or aircraft.

[The High Tatras]

Non-NS related question for a story I am writing. Are there any semi-automatic/ self-loading rifles that would have been available to an American civilian during the 1930s, would be suitable for hunting, and can mount a scope? The pricetag does not matter, as long as it can legally be purchased after the National Firearms Act of 1934.

[Oaledonia]

because the sea is a 2D environment while the air is 3D. You can be attacked from all directions....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

I'm not advocating for flying ships, but the sea is very much a 3D environment.

[Auroya]

because the sea is a 2D environment while the air is 3D. You can be attacked from all directions....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

I'm not advocating for flying ships, but the sea is very much a 3D environment.

Well, okay, excluding submarines. Except for those, what I was saying is that you can be higher or lower than your target as you choose.

I worded it wrong. It's probably not that relevant a point, thinking about it again.

[Oaledonia]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

I'm not advocating for flying ships, but the sea is very much a 3D environment.

Well, okay, excluding submarines. Except for those, what I was saying is that you can be higher or lower than your target as you choose.

I worded it wrong. It's probably not that relevant a point, thinking about it again.

Want to be higher? Use a CVN.
Want to be lower? Use an SSV (troll face)

[Kouralia]

Would it make sense to train soldiers based in and around urban areas for riot control? Nothing intensive, but having the ability for the police to call up a large reserve of soldiers who know how to use riot control devices might be beneficial

Yes.

The British Army regularly trains in Public Order prior to deploying to Cyprus or other places, such as these gents from The London Regiment.

[Oaledonia]

Would it make sense to train soldiers based in and around urban areas for riot control? Nothing intensive, but having the ability for the police to call up a large reserve of soldiers who know how to use riot control devices might be beneficial

Yes.

The British Army regularly trains in Public Order prior to deploying to Cyprus or other places, such as these gents from The London Regiment.

That solider getting pushed, his boot is untied.

[North Yemen-]

So, I kind of need help with formulating a military doctrine, given that my military know-how is severely limited. I’m not much of a military guy, but I agreed to fight a war-to-the-death with, more or less, the three superpowers of my region. I will have some support, granted, but I do need to know how to prepare at least somewhat competently.

I’m a Communist nation, bordering a very large, angry, imperialistic USA analogue. His population, 9.8 billion, is larger than my own, 7.5 billion, and he has a powerful navy. His army is almost exclusively mechanized and he claims one of the finer air forces in the region. He fields about 130 million in mechanized infantry, armored personnel and support personnel. His entire army is a mobile force, which is EMP proof, and can respond quickly to emergency situations. His navy maintains 75 fleets, each fielding twelve carriers, and who knows how many aircraft he fields.

There is another nation, an Imperial Japanese Esque nation, with a massive island full of aircraft and naval assets right below my shores. He has about 80 million men, roughly the same spending as the former, and has one of the more professional armies on the region. Basically, his army is half the size, but more efficient and professional and crap, fielding some very complex technology (he runs a popular storefront.) He also has a very powerful elite light infantry force.

The third is less of a threat given his location, but maintains 24 million troops, each of which is a well toned fighting machine, and should not be ignored. I know little more about him, but his men are some of the finest winter soldiers in the region. There might be others, but these are the only immediate threats.

Now, I can count on quite a bit of aid, but in the assumption I were to fight alone, or were forced to fight alone, what are some steps I could take in my doctrine? How would I deal with these foes, and how could I attempt to defeat them. I understand that, in the first place, victory is rather unthinkable, but I’m concerned merely with survival. That is what my nation’s doctrine is. Any number of my citizens, and any amount of industrial damage can be endured, so long as the regime survives. Also, for OoC reasons, it’d be best if I didn’t use nuclear weapons, though I suppose other forms of WMD might be acceptable.

My manufacturing is good, and my infrastructure is decent, though better in some areas than others. In particular, in the immediate area bordering the US. esque nation, I was imagining small cities and villages dotted around in a vast region of forests, tundra and taiga, while my industrialized areas would be on the opposite land border/on the southern coasts. I would be willing to mobilize 5% of my entire population in a dire situation, though I’m leaving it at 1 or 2% until the war actually starts heating up. My population mostly dislikes the state, though will fight against invaders (because of xenophobia) all the same.

Anyways, thanks in advance for any assistance/insight on my situation.

[Gallia-]

I was actually thinking of early war USMC, needing to kick start thousands of guys for Orange and everything.

Late war Germany is probably a bad idea to be copying tbh.

The Ardennes Offensive and Lake Balaton Offensive showed that at the lowest levels the Germany army was still quite capable even in the very last stage of the war.

Maybe tactically, but both of those counteroffensives were operational and strategic failures.

[Purpelia]

The Ardennes Offensive and Lake Balaton Offensive showed that at the lowest levels the Germany army was still quite capable even in the very last stage of the war.

Maybe tactically, but both of those counteroffensives were operational and strategic failures.

Indeed. Thus we can derive the conclusion that it is not inherently bad to copy the organization and other low level tactical elements from the late war German army just as long as one avoids the strategic aspects of being Nazi Germany.

[Gallia-]

Maybe tactically, but both of those counteroffensives were operational and strategic failures.

Indeed. Thus we can derive the conclusion that it is not inherently bad to copy the organization and other low level tactical elements from the late war German army just as long as one avoids the strategic aspects of being Nazi Germany.

Well, we can actually derive the conclusion that tactical organisation matters the least as long as the operational and strategic vision of the military is retained without significant blemish. While it isn't bad to focus on tactical level, it shouldn't come at the expense of other areas. Examples being Tiger and Panther, although I', not sure what effect an additional 3-4,000 Panzer IVs would have had on German war effort, but it possibly could have prolonged it a mere couple days or weeks more assuming nothing else changed.

[Bratislavskaya]

Would it make sense to train soldiers based in and around urban areas for riot control? Nothing intensive, but having the ability for the police to call up a large reserve of soldiers who know how to use riot control devices might be beneficial

Yes.

The British Army regularly trains in Public Order prior to deploying to Cyprus or other places, such as these gents from The London Regiment.

Those other places being Leeds, Manchester and Glasgow I presume?

[Gallia-]

Hull.

[Rich and Corporations]

Indeed. Thus we can derive the conclusion that it is not inherently bad to copy the organization and other low level tactical elements from the late war German army just as long as one avoids the strategic aspects of being Nazi Germany.

Well, we can actually derive the conclusion that tactical organisation matters the least as long as the operational and strategic vision of the military is retained without significant blemish. While it isn't bad to focus on tactical level, it shouldn't come at the expense of other areas. Examples being Tiger and Panther, although I', not sure what effect an additional 3-4,000 Panzer IVs would have had on German war effort, but it possibly could have prolonged it a mere couple days or weeks more assuming nothing else changed.

so you're saying my invincible tank army will win every battle but lose the war?

[Gallia-]

Well, we can actually derive the conclusion that tactical organisation matters the least as long as the operational and strategic vision of the military is retained without significant blemish. While it isn't bad to focus on tactical level, it shouldn't come at the expense of other areas. Examples being Tiger and Panther, although I', not sure what effect an additional 3-4,000 Panzer IVs would have had on German war effort, but it possibly could have prolonged it a mere couple days or weeks more assuming nothing else changed.

so you're saying my invincible tank army will win every battle but lose the war?

I'm saying if you're German you're pre-destined to lose every war you set out in where the objective is a vague and nebulous "world domination" scheme.

[Doppio Giudici]

Not-America is best something you should not attack, best bet is to lock down your area with AA and AT as best you can. That means SAM sights, Artillery, hidden missile carriers, and well trained homing rocket squads. The biggest problem is that they will have to face more then one foe and be spread thin.

Your Japanese foe is more compident when it comes to infantry and has a strong navy, but that doesn't mean that their tanks or aircraft are okay or reasonable. Your best bet is to sit back and let Japan whatever go up against American whatever, since the two are complete opposites more or less tactically. Recommend you use air-craft, tanks, and artillery on this one. Infantry are soft, but capable if close enough.

As for the last one, you're best bet is what was mentioned earlier. Anything that would reduce losses would be worth it since his men and women are so expensive, so even missiles at long ranges would be useful.

[Oaledonia]

their tanks ... are okay or reasonable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_10