NS Military Realism Consultancy Thread Mark IX Spitfire

[The Kievan People]

A major fire in a ship packed with propellant charges and explosives is also completely incomparable to what a single burning propellant charge will do.

[Gallia-]

Jet fuel can't melt steel casings.

But it can crack them. ):

[The Corparation]

So what caused the bombs to go off on the Forrestal fire? WWII ammo long past its use-by date?

Thin-walled bombs + explosives that actually got more powerful the older the were + seriously rusty and degraded bombs that were stored practically in the open. They were delivered by USS Diamond Head in their original, mouldy and rotten packing crates, all because Forrestal had run out of the better, less sensitive and more modern Mk-83's, threatening the entire next day's missions.

Wasn't the condition of the bombs the reason they were stored in the open? I seem to recall reading that the officer in charge of ordnance didn't want that shit anywhere near the rest of the weapons the ship was carrying.

[The Akasha Colony]

Thin-walled bombs + explosives that actually got more powerful the older the were + seriously rusty and degraded bombs that were stored practically in the open. They were delivered by USS Diamond Head in their original, mouldy and rotten packing crates, all because Forrestal had run out of the better, less sensitive and more modern Mk-83's, threatening the entire next day's missions.

Wasn't the condition of the bombs the reason they were stored in the open? I seem to recall reading that the officer in charge of ordnance didn't want that shit anywhere near the rest of the weapons the ship was carrying.

Yes, he refused to store them in the magazine since if they happened to go off there then the entire ship would have been toast.

[Arthurista]

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/ACM-8_Malphas

I based this on the ASALM. Can someone pls do a quick glance at the stats and see if I ought to tone down? Thanks!

[Gauliscia]

Just wondering the merits of transferring ground attack aircraft to the RAAC (Royal Army Air Corps). I've already transferred all units to it that are used for delivery of Airborne/Airmobile units...

Any thoughts?

[Spirit of Hope]

Just wondering the merits of transferring ground attack aircraft to the RAAC (Royal Army Air Corps). I've already transferred all units to it that are used for delivery of Airborne/Airmobile units...

Any thoughts?

Not going to be much of an air force if all aircraft capable of ground support and all airborne delivery aircraft are in the hands of your army.

All multi role aircraft fit the description of providing air support/ground attack, and basically all air-lifters carry paratroops even the largest strategic air lifters.

[New Vihenia]

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/ACM-8_Malphas

I based this on the ASALM. Can someone pls do a quick glance at the stats and see if I ought to tone down? Thanks!

Your cruise altitude is non optimal. Optimum operation for ramjet is at around 24000 meter altitude (80000 ft). with speed of M.4

[Gauliscia]

Just wondering the merits of transferring ground attack aircraft to the RAAC (Royal Army Air Corps). I've already transferred all units to it that are used for delivery of Airborne/Airmobile units...

Any thoughts?

Not going to be much of an air force if all aircraft capable of ground support and all airborne delivery aircraft are in the hands of your army.

All multi role aircraft fit the description of providing air support/ground attack, and basically all air-lifters carry paratroops even the largest strategic air lifters.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. By ground attack, I was referring to gunships (fixed wing and rotar) and craft like Warthogs...

Thing is, between my army and navy, the only things they don't have are strategic bombers, stealth aircraft and a few other miscellaneous craft.. Maybe just expand army air corps to include multi role aircraft and bombers..?

[The United Islands People]

How well would a heavy focus on camouflage, field-craft and infiltration tactics work in the Napoleonic Era? Would it protect soldiers from cannon fire or would it just serve to weaken them?

[The Kievan People]

How well would a heavy focus on camouflage, field-craft and infiltration tactics work in the Napoleonic Era? Would it protect soldiers from cannon fire or would it just serve to weaken them?

It would work until the cavalry show up and run everyone down.

[Gauliscia]

How well would a heavy focus on camouflage, field-craft and infiltration tactics work in the Napoleonic Era? Would it protect soldiers from cannon fire or would it just serve to weaken them?

Mm. What I think you may well be omitting from your thought process, well processed though it may very well be, is the fact that the culture and doctrine concerning warfare in that era was not to camouflage or infiltrate, at least not on a military-wide level. It was more about who was best dressed and drilled and more manoeuvre-able. Certain units dressed in more natural colours, such as Jägers or Chasseurs, but even these had their fair share of plumes and pom-poms.

Essentially, I do believe by thinning out your army to such a role would leave it woefully vulnerable to not only, yes, ordnance, but also cavalry assaults.

[Spirit of Hope]

How well would a heavy focus on camouflage, field-craft and infiltration tactics work in the Napoleonic Era? Would it protect soldiers from cannon fire or would it just serve to weaken them?

Not very well. he tactics of the Napoleonic era still relied upon large organized formations, without them infantry wouldn't be able to provide enough fire power to resist enemy formations or cavalry charges. Field craft and camouflage aren't really going to hide those formations or the soldiers in them from enemy artillery and small arms fire.

There is a reason the uniforms of that era tended towards the colorful, it allowed men to identify comrades easily through the smoke of the battlefield. Additionally it helped moral which is important when you are standing there taking fire and dishing it out.

Finally the training time for soldiers of the time period wasn't enough to properly train on field craft, which isn't a big issue since it wasn't really needed. Scouts and other units that would use camouflage and field craft drew from those who had previous experience with it.

Not going to be much of an air force if all aircraft capable of ground support and all airborne delivery aircraft are in the hands of your army.

All multi role aircraft fit the description of providing air support/ground attack, and basically all air-lifters carry paratroops even the largest strategic air lifters.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. By ground attack, I was referring to gunships (fixed wing and rotar) and craft like Warthogs...

Thing is, between my army and navy, the only things they don't have are strategic bombers, stealth aircraft and a few other miscellaneous craft.. Maybe just expand army air corps to include multi role aircraft and bombers..?

Air forces are around because aircraft have very different needs and uses from ground forces. While helicopters can and should be integrated into the army integrating aircraft is a little more challenging and doesn't produce the same rewards. Bombers, multi role aircraft, and air transports all have a number of jobs that are of little interest to the army commanders. If you have an army air corps with command of these aircraft it is going to be very different and separate from the regular army.

[Gauliscia]

How well would a heavy focus on camouflage, field-craft and infiltration tactics work in the Napoleonic Era? Would it protect soldiers from cannon fire or would it just serve to weaken them?

Not very well. he tactics of the Napoleonic era still relied upon large organized formations, without them infantry wouldn't be able to provide enough fire power to resist enemy formations or cavalry charges. Field craft and camouflage aren't really going to hide those formations or the soldiers in them from enemy artillery and small arms fire.

There is a reason the uniforms of that era tended towards the colorful, it allowed men to identify comrades easily through the smoke of the battlefield. Additionally it helped moral which is important when you are standing there taking fire and dishing it out.

Finally the training time for soldiers of the time period wasn't enough to properly train on field craft, which isn't a big issue since it wasn't really needed. Scouts and other units that would use camouflage and field craft drew from those who had previous experience with it.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. By ground attack, I was referring to gunships (fixed wing and rotar) and craft like Warthogs...

Thing is, between my army and navy, the only things they don't have are strategic bombers, stealth aircraft and a few other miscellaneous craft.. Maybe just expand army air corps to include multi role aircraft and bombers..?

Air forces are around because aircraft have very different needs and uses from ground forces. While helicopters can and should be integrated into the army integrating aircraft is a little more challenging and doesn't produce the same rewards. Bombers, multi role aircraft, and air transports all have a number of jobs that are of little interest to the army commanders. If you have an army air corps with command of these aircraft it is going to be very different and separate from the regular army.

This is what I thought originally, but speculated otherwise..

[Crookfur]

How well would a heavy focus on camouflage, field-craft and infiltration tactics work in the Napoleonic Era? Would it protect soldiers from cannon fire or would it just serve to weaken them?

It would work fine for small scale skirmishes and limited border raiding etc but it would produce a force wholey incapable of stopping regular forces on the feild, the firepower just isn't there until the rifled musket with minie ball arrives.

Artillery isn't much your Concern as columns or lines of infantry simply sweeping you out of the way and the aforementioned cavalry simply riding you down.

Both sides tried it during the American war of independence and despite all the mythos surrounding volunteer riflemen and the kentucy long rifle etc it was the use of formed feild armies that settled the matter.

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

What is the effectiveness of the very big-scale artillery like the M107 175mm self-propelled gun? I'd think that sort of artillery is NS-level silliness, not something actually to be used.

[Gallan Systems]

It was used by the US Army for like 20 years.

[Great Feng]

My ideals is a limited monarchy where the monarch holds some power, but is kept in check by a democracy.
Anyone willing to help me flesh this out?

[Daeseong]

My ideals is a limited monarchy where the monarch holds some power, but is kept in check by a democracy.
Anyone willing to help me flesh this out?

Why in the world are you asking this in a military realism thread?

[Rich and Corporations]

What is the effectiveness of the very big-scale artillery like the M107 175mm self-propelled gun? I'd think that sort of artillery is NS-level silliness, not something actually to be used.

Rocket artillery is more popular if you want greater ranges. Has also greater rates of fire, and capable of dispatching a greater variety of payloads.

For large penetrating warheads, bombers are typically used.

Perhaps if you don't have aerial supremacy, and you still need bunker busters, such large caliber artillery will be useful.

[Great Feng]

My ideals is a limited monarchy where the monarch holds some power, but is kept in check by a democracy.
Anyone willing to help me flesh this out?

Why in the world are you asking this in a military realism thread?

Because there's no political realism thread.
So...
Yeah.

[Daeseong]

Why in the world are you asking this in a military realism thread?

Because there's no political realism thread.
So...
Yeah.

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=282677

gg top kek

This thread is devoted to discussion of military realism.

[North Arkana]

What is the effectiveness of the very big-scale artillery like the M107 175mm self-propelled gun? I'd think that sort of artillery is NS-level silliness, not something actually to be used.

It was for things like suppression of forward enemy AA defenses, and it performed well enough in Vietnam as long-range support. It had a role, it just didn't get to do it.

[The Akasha Colony]

What is the effectiveness of the very big-scale artillery like the M107 175mm self-propelled gun? I'd think that sort of artillery is NS-level silliness, not something actually to be used.

Artillery calibers at least in the West have broadly concentrated toward the 155 mm caliber, since this offers a pretty good balance between explosive weight per charge, rate of fire, and system weight. 105 mm has managed to stick around for ultralight air-portable howitzers but with things like M777 they may well be on the way out soon as well.

M107 worked fine but started to lose out to longer-ranged 155 and 203 mm guns and then MLRS and ATACMS, and its nature as a high-velocity, low-trajectory field gun meant that its shells were heavy and had a fairly light explosive fraction.

[Rich and Corporations]

Any merit to a modern twenty-five pounder?
/edit