NationStates

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:15 am**

Rupudska wrote:
Bumfrakistan wrote:In Bumfrakistan, women who are unclean must sleep in a different hut.

It is for this reason men have multiple wives, to rotate.

It is considered a sign of disfavor when their menses synchronize.

While that is certainly relevant to the argument at hand, this is a military consultation thread.

In order to achieve a 1 man to 2 women ratio, we fight endless wars.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:16 am**

Bumfrakistan wrote:
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Do lets. I really want to hear another explanation about dirty vaginas keeping women out of combat, despite the vagina being a self-cleaning organ.

#justNSthings.

In Bumfrakistan, women who are unclean must sleep in a different hut.

It is for this reason men have multiple wives, to rotate.

It is considered a sign of disfavor when their menses synchronize.

My reaction best summarized.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:18 am**

Bumfrakistan wrote:
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Do lets. I really want to hear another explanation about dirty vaginas keeping women out of combat, despite the vagina being a self-cleaning organ.

#justNSthings.

In Bumfrakistan, women who are unclean must sleep in a different hut.

It is for this reason men have multiple wives, to rotate.

It is considered a sign of disfavor when their menses synchronize.

If you separate them with barbed wire rather than a wall the mense won't synchronise. The barbed wire fence will confuse the electromagnetic microwaves.

The more you know.

It might make your kitchen difficult to navigate though LOL

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:21 am**

Bumfrakistan wrote:
Rupudska wrote:
While that is certainly relevant to the argument at hand, this is a military consultation thread.

In order to achieve a 1 man to 2 women ratio, we fight endless wars.

So do you fight with AKMs or something even more primitive? Since I doubt any economy could reasonably sustain itself that way.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:23 am**

Rupudska wrote:
Bumfrakistan wrote:In order to achieve a 1 man to 2 women ratio, we fight endless wars.

So do you fight with AK-47s or something even more primitive? Since I doubt any economy could reasonably sustain itself that way.

Presumably they use advanced technology like STRIKE WITCHES

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:23 am**

Will IRST make a good early warning sensor for an Active Protection System ? range measurement however is provided by a radar.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:26 am**

Questers wrote:
Rupudska wrote:
So do you fight with AK-47s or something even more primitive? Since I doubt any economy could reasonably sustain itself that way.
Presumably they use advanced technology like STRIKE WITCHES

I should sig this, but I don't know if I have enough room for it.

New Vihenia wrote:Will IRST make a good early warning sensor for an Active Protection System ? range measurement however is provided by a radar.

Probably not, since infrared detection in general isn't meant to be long range.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 6:34 am**

Rupudska wrote:
New Vihenia wrote:Will IRST make a good early warning sensor for an Active Protection System ? range measurement however is provided by a radar.

Probably not, since infrared detection in general isn't meant to be long range.

Really, it depends on the capability of your IR scanner and the contrast against your target. A cooled scanner, as any good IRST or FLIR probably ought to be, will immediately offer very high contrast against almost all targets. Rocket engines and muzzle blasts will be highly visible.

It will be less effective, than say, a fighter aircraft's IRST system which can observe engine thrust of enemy aircraft at tens of kilometres. But it would be feasible. Personally, I'm not so sure about its utility.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 8:27 am**

Bumfrakistan wrote:
Vitaphone Racing wrote:Do lets. I really want to hear another explanation about dirty vaginas keeping women out of combat, despite the vagina being a self-cleaning organ.

#justNSthings.

In Bumfrakistan, women who are unclean must sleep in a different hut.

It is for this reason men have multiple wives, to rotate.

It is considered a sign of disfavor when their menses synchronize.

Absolutely haram.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 9:23 am**

Bumfrakistan wrote:In Bumfrakistan, women who are unclean must sleep in a different hut.

It is for this reason men have multiple wives, to rotate.

It is considered a sign of disfavor when their menses synchronize.

The people of Bumfrakistan must be in disfavor often, then.

<pause>

Oh, wait... You didn't KNOW that when women live together, their menses tend to synchronize?

As an aside (and we can take this to Non-Military Realism if people want), how many of you who embrace patriarchy and polygamy consider the social consequences of this (eg., the fact that it implies that most men will never marry, and will likely not even get a chance to engage in sex all that often [unless you either have a thriving culture of prostitution or religiously practice male infanticide])?

Bumfrakistan wrote:In order to achieve a 1 man to 2 women ratio, we fight endless wars.

Well, that's one way of doing it... but then, your economy must be in shambles from the endless damage and destruction these wars cause. So Bumfrackistan is a Third World country, then (or worse)?

And have you taken this into account when it comes to army size (by, say, reducing the size of your armed forces by ⅓)?

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 9:46 am**

Rupudska wrote:
Probably not, since infrared detection in general isn't meant to be long range.

Well APFSDS flying at M.6. According to my calculation, is detectable at 19.5 km. For tank to tank or ground battle which usually take place at 3-5 km. Slower ATGM at M 0.5 However is detected at shorter range (2.8 km) due to lower IR emission

The IR Sensor that i use as baseline is FPA imaging infra red one 640x480 . Which work in 1-10 micron wavelength. and Specific Detectivity (D-star) of 8x10^11 cm-Hz^1/2/W

The interception range of the APS is 100 m.

The reason why i look at IR Detector is that Radar sensor appears to have kinda inconveniently large cooling load.

My calculations showed that in order to detect inbound APFSDS head on (2 Km range) and basically search the volume. Required emitted peak power of 2.3 Kilowatt , put FMICW processing to make the hardware light.. will put average emitted power of the radar in excess of 600 watt (900 to be more exact) Which make liquid cooling mandatory.

The infra red detector however, as i see have advantage that it could have smaller power requirement and probably heat load. Longer or comparable range to radar at smaller aperture (My model IRST only has 2 cm wide Aperture) Better angular resolution and potentially wide instanteneous field of view due to the "staring" Imaging Infra Red mode employed.

The downside is of course weather.. But i believe nobody will fire ATGM or APFSDS/ HEAT etc. during rain or in foggy condition or at least with good accuracy.

My APS Scheme will use the IRST as early warning sensor to cue the radar. Such scheme in my view, allow reduction in radar resources needed to search target, thus aperture size can be reduced and power requirement can be optimized. Target detection range can hopefully be reduced to something like 1 Km or even less. It will hopefully reduce cost of the system.

The "radar only" APS, cost around U$ 1.6 million for 4 radars. The munition cost U$ 9734 (FY-2005).

and yes that is way more expensive than ARENA. but because the target is APFSDS sooooo.

-----------------
Another design alternative is pretty much like Throphy. The radar of the system is unique that it operates at C-band. This band is a compromise between precision and search. Previously however i rejected this operational band because it cannot provide small enough beamwidth for tracking and search. Another reason is that my concern of "Multipath propagation" If the beamwidth hit the ground and mess the target tracking and guidance command transmission. The intercept munition will fail to achieve required performance (Deflect the APFSDS to the ground), even if it managed to tumble the inbound APFSDS

But then.. hey because it's the IRST that will do the whole angular tracking job.. while radar do ranging and sending command.. why not.

and of course.. putting seeker into the intercept munition ala quick kill but this will drive up the munition cost. Nonetheless this might add additional C-RAM capability.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:08 am**

Is det cord actually viable to blow down saplings when or where required?
Wiki suggests that "high grade" could fell trees, but I'm not really sure what sort of size tree it's talking about.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:16 am**

Imperializt Russia wrote:Is det cord actually viable to blow down saplings when or where required?
Wiki suggests that "high grade" could fell trees, but I'm not really sure what sort of size tree it's talking about.

It specifies small trees. Presumably, a trunk less than a foot in diameter, or maybe not even that.

I'd rather use a chainsaw like it suggests though.

Fun fact: the Finnish Army calls detcord mother-in-law's clothesline.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:20 am**

So my nation has a population of 9 million, 1% peace time force of about 90,000 including logistics personnel and all those other people behind the scene. after doing some math stuff in my head that i dont think made sense in any way i came up with a figure of 28,000 actual soldiers capable of combat with a 10,000 reserve solely for combat outside the 90,000 standing army.

My Air Force alone is 10,000 with 1,000 fighter pilots the rest is behind the scenes people (officers, mechanics, medics etc..)

Coast Guard 10,000 with 3,000 sailors on ships

Navy with 10,000 with 6,000 sailors on ships the remaining 4,000 serve as logistics and support with the rest of coast guard support.

and my army has 60,000 with 15,000 actually capable of fighting.

Does this sound real at all? i kind of took the numbers from Belgium since they have almost the same population as me and fiddled around with the number. Also would a 1:1 plane to pilot ratio be okay for the air force or is that overkill. like should it be 2 pilots for every one plane and so forth or not?

Help is greatly appreciated, and comments and feedback as well.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:25 am**

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:Is det cord actually viable to blow down saplings when or where required?
Wiki suggests that "high grade" could fell trees, but I'm not really sure what sort of size tree it's talking about.

It specifies small trees. Presumably, a trunk less than a foot in diameter, or maybe not even that.

I'd rather use a chainsaw like it suggests though.

Fun fact: the Finnish Army calls detcord mother-in-law's clothesline.

I imagine det cord is more readily available than chainsaws are in the average battalion's inventory.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:30 am**

How effective are modern HESH shells? I'm still debating the use of a smoothbore or rifled gun, and the only benefit to a rifled gun seems to be the purpose of HESH.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:31 am**

Tulacia wrote:How effective are modern HESH shells? I'm still debating the use of a smoothbore or rifled gun, and the only benefit to a rifled gun seems to be the purpose of HESH.

What are you shooting at?
HESH is pretty good at lots of things, better on some then the alternatives.
But there are at least alternatives if you don't go that route.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:32 am**

Tulacia wrote:How effective are modern HESH shells? I'm still debating the use of a smoothbore or rifled gun, and the only benefit to a rifled gun seems to be the purpose of HESH.

120mm HESH from L30 gun is apparently deemed sufficient for use against MT-LB target, which would imply it's about as effective as M830 or M830A1 HEAT shell for NATO L/44 120mm gun.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:36 am**

Imperializt Russia wrote:
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:It specifies small trees. Presumably, a trunk less than a foot in diameter, or maybe not even that.

I'd rather use a chainsaw like it suggests though.

Fun fact: the Finnish Army calls detcord mother-in-law's clothesline.

I imagine det cord is more readily available than chainsaws are in the average battalion's inventory.

I know I should've been a gear instead of an American football player.

Some vids.
2m of det cord around a tree.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aleeJ9Rg4Hw

US marines breaching a door.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuNvBjfoqas

Removing a tree from a power line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nq_AFFGbPU

Perfection.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuuPI2hyt6M

Tactical beer keg opening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OmFmsjIt2E

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:37 am**

Tulacia wrote:How effective are modern HESH shells? I'm still debating the use of a smoothbore or rifled gun, and the only benefit to a rifled gun seems to be the purpose of HESH.

HESH is still effective but has largely been replaced by HEAT and APFSDS. HESH doesn't work so well against modern armor because of the multiple layers and spacing used in modern tank armor. Less modern armor, and vehicles (or buildings) with less sophisticated vehicles will also be more susceptible.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:39 am**

Isn't the primary purpose of HESH to be an anti-fortification munition?

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:49 am**

Auroya wrote:Isn't the primary purpose of HESH to be an anti-fortification munition?

Not originally.
It's a major role for the munition today, yes.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 10:53 am**

Imperializt Russia wrote:Is det cord actually viable to blow down saplings when or where required?
Wiki suggests that "high grade" could fell trees, but I'm not really sure what sort of size tree it's talking about.

IIRC the royal engineers used to train to bring telegraph poles with details cord and I believe if they had to deal with anything thicker they just applied the usual engineers solution of more explosives.

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 11:05 am**

The Finnish soldiers who operated Lahti AT rifles were true men.

Can a modern anti-materiel rifle destroy a transport helicopter in flight?

Posted: **Mon May 18, 2015 11:08 am**

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:The Finnish soldiers who operated Lahti AT rifles were true men.

Can a modern anti-materiel rifle destroy a transport helicopter in flight?

Probs.

NationStates

NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08

Re: NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08