NS Military Realism Consultancy Thread Mark IX Spitfire

[Gallan Systems]

So can AH-64E so who_cares

[Mancunian Northumbria]

Could an M1A2 probably be penetrated by an AS.30?

[North Arkana]

Could an M1A2 be penetrated by an AS.30?

It's a 520kg bomb with a 240kg SAPHE warhead. That's called overkill. ALL tanks would die to that.

[Gallan Systems]

Could an M1A2 probably be penetrated by an AS.30?

no the airplane is bombed by an F-15E like a fortnight before getting the chance

[Pharthan]

Could an M1A2 probably be penetrated by an AS.30?

no the airplane is bombed by an F-15E like a fortnight before getting the chance

Nah, dude, the airplane is bombed mid-flight by an F-15E.

But yes, probably.

[Imperializt Russia]

no the airplane is bombed by an F-15E like a fortnight before getting the chance

Nah, dude, the airplane is bombed mid-flight by an F-15E.

But yes, probably.

Haven't we discussed before that iron bombs are one of the most effective anti-helicopter weapons for a jet if they can't bring sidewinders to bear?

[Gallan Systems]

Nah, dude, the airplane is bombed mid-flight by an F-15E.

But yes, probably.

Haven't we discussed before that iron bombs are one of the most effective anti-helicopter weapons for a jet if they can't bring sidewinders to bear?

Fighter Combat was written from the perspective of the 1980s, before AMRAAM (although the gold standard of helicopter killing is "ignore it and let someone else deal with it" even now), and a laser guided bomb is not an iron bomb.

[Takhshiyt]

So, I am working on creating my military structure, and was wondering about a couple of things. Namely, why do you need to divide your armed forces into services? Is it possible that one could divide the armed forces into separate area commands? For instance, you would have a sea command, then the land based commands for certain areas of your country, then the aerial command. Then, you could administratively divide procurement/training/payroll etc. into Corps, like how the Turks have it. Then you could forget about services and focus on Corps as being mini services that only serve to provide equipment, train troops and stuff like that. The area commands could deal with operations and the such.

Bad idea?

[Gallan Systems]

Garrison/working dress of a Solarian junior officer of the Corps Contraterrestre/Contraterrene Corps. It is a front-opening minidress worn, conservatively, with opaque silver tights/pantyhose and short boots. Normally it's worn as an officer's equivalent of the enlisted working dress in barracks, but would also be seen worn by staff officers in higher headquarters such as regiments or above.

It is the least formal of dress, and essentially occupies the same spot as the field uniform/battle dress on the "what not to wear to a dinner party" scale, which is why he is wearing the most utilitarian boots and the opaque tights rather than skin-tone.

Preference dictates whether the tights and gloves worn are silver or dark blue, and depending on where the officer works generally tends to decide this, as it is quite obvious to stain silver tights with grease or whatever. The officer depicted probably works in a communications center or something shoveling folders, and aside from a persnickety or dangerous ink stamp, would be unlikely to stain his uniform.

The uniforms only become more ostentatious, since we're already onto semi-formal tights and metallic trims with a garrison dress, from here.

So, I am working on creating my military structure, and was wondering about a couple of things. Namely, why do you need to divide your armed forces into services? Is it possible that one could divide the armed forces into separate area commands? For instance, you would have a sea command, then the land based commands for certain areas of your country, then the aerial command. Then, you could administratively divide procurement/training/payroll etc. into Corps, like how the Turks have it. Then you could forget about services and focus on Corps as being mini services that only serve to provide equipment, train troops and stuff like that. The area commands could deal with operations and the such.

Bad idea?

This is literally what is already done.

Whether you call it "The Air Force" or "Army Air Corps" or "Naval Aviation" is of very little importance.

[The Kievan People]

So, I am working on creating my military structure, and was wondering about a couple of things. Namely, why do you need to divide your armed forces into services? Is it possible that one could divide the armed forces into separate area commands? For instance, you would have a sea command, then the land based commands for certain areas of your country, then the aerial command. Then, you could administratively divide procurement/training/payroll etc. into Corps, like how the Turks have it. Then you could forget about services and focus on Corps as being mini services that only serve to provide equipment, train troops and stuff like that. The area commands could deal with operations and the such.

Bad idea?

Why?

Services make sense for handling things which are common to that service. Like deciding how to spending money, defining requirements for new weapons, distributing forces and so on.

Trying to create one national command that handles everything in detail would be bloated. Allowing each region to do it themselves would be a joke.

[Takhshiyt]

So, I am working on creating my military structure, and was wondering about a couple of things. Namely, why do you need to divide your armed forces into services? Is it possible that one could divide the armed forces into separate area commands? For instance, you would have a sea command, then the land based commands for certain areas of your country, then the aerial command. Then, you could administratively divide procurement/training/payroll etc. into Corps, like how the Turks have it. Then you could forget about services and focus on Corps as being mini services that only serve to provide equipment, train troops and stuff like that. The area commands could deal with operations and the such.

Bad idea?

Why?

Services make sense for handling things which are common to that service. Like deciding how to spending money, defining requirements for new weapons, distributing forces and so on.

Trying to create one national command that handles everything in detail would be bloated. Allowing each region to do it themselves would be a joke.

OK then.

[Heavonia]

(Image)

Why does the metallic trim not go the whole way around the hem?

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

Hey, stupid question. Has anyone got a copy of Achtung - Panzer! they'd be willing to link? All I can seem to find are Russian coppies, and I'm not keen on shelling out to buy the book proper honestly.

[Imperializt Russia]

Pirate Bay surely has enough resident wehraboos to have an English PDF copy of it if I can download all 18 episodes of Battleplan.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

Just looked. No dice
Maybe because I'm on my mobile

[Versail]

Would 7 weeks for basic training be a decent amount of time for recruits.
(This is during the year 1943)
I honestly have no idea on how to organize the training of troops for my nation.
Thank you for your time.

[Gallan Systems]

(Image)

Why does the metallic trim not go the whole way around the hem?

raisons

i guess ill change that since thinking about it it would be weird

[Husseinarti]

Would 7 weeks for basic training be a decent amount of time for recruits.
(This is during the year 1943)
I honestly have no idea on how to organize the training of troops for my nation.
Thank you for your time.

The US Army training was 10 weeks. At first they were only conscripting 21+, but by like 1943 they needed more personnel and began to tap the 18 to 21 age group. The US also had the advantage of being over 1,000 miles away from any land combat, and never organized over 100 divisions at any point in time in WW2.

The Germans were different, as they had an entire indoctrination system organized from the ages of 14 and up with the Hitler Youth.

The Soviets training? kek. Ivan applies the Mosin to the Fascist, or else he gets the Maxim again.

British training was apparently really good before the war, and was shortened during iirc.

French training varied. Their best divisions were super good and professional with all kinds of cool things like MAS-36s, FM-29s, etc but then they also had some good colonial divisions and then had colonial divisions which looked legit like WW1 guys, just brown.

NIPPON GRORIUS TRAINED ARME BROW AWAY AMERICAN-KUN BAKA GAIJN ARMY AWAY EACH SOLDIER TRAINED ONE TOUSAND TIMES

[Southern Sovereignties]

I have a question for everyone here: How would a polygonal fort be organized, arranged and defended when under attack? Basically trying to figure out everything to do with how a polygonal fort worked during day-to-day operations and how it reacted to an attack, by land or by sea.

[Inyourfaceistan]

If a variant of the Tomahawk missile can be fitted into a ground-based launcher system; is there any reason (besides a decrease in range) that the AGM-158 JASSM/LRASM wouldn't be able to do the same?

[Kouralia]

I'm considering creating a specialist vessel for maximum West African Squadroning in modern tech. While IRL it's not a major problem (it's pretty much a non-problem), the number of nations which are 'lol, imma pirates' or 'lol, imma have slave trade' etc. is high, so I think there's more of a role for something like this in MT.

It would be a ship which would need to combine capabilities for naval gunfire, more comprehensive aviation facilities than a normal warship (though it would likely not need aviation of the size or fixed-wing nature of a full aircraft carrier), it would also likely need some air defence and CIWS capabilities as well as sufficient embarked marines to be able to actually assault and liberate slave forts or to capture and raze pirate havens. I believe nuclear power allows increased speed, which would be beneficial, as well as the lesser need to resupply. Finally, it would need sufficient humanitarian relief capabilities to be able to take on a large number of refugees from a liberated slave camp, and also prison cells for captured slavers. Probably escorted by a pair of multi-role frigates to provide additional security on missions which are against more 'nation state-level' slaver organisations.

How big do you guys think such a vessel might need to be?

[Husseinarti]

I'm considering creating a specialist vessel for maximum West African Squadroning in modern tech. While IRL it's not a major problem (it's pretty much a non-problem), the number of nations which are 'lol, imma pirates' or 'lol, imma have slave trade' etc. is high, so I think there's more of a role for something like this in MT.

It would be a ship which would need to combine capabilities for naval gunfire, more comprehensive aviation facilities than a normal warship (though it would likely not need aviation of the size or fixed-wing nature of a full aircraft carrier), it would also likely need some air defence and CIWS capabilities as well as sufficient embarked marines to be able to actually assault and liberate slave forts or to capture and raze pirate havens. I believe nuclear power allows increased speed, which would be beneficial, as well as the lesser need to resupply. Finally, it would need sufficient humanitarian relief capabilities to be able to take on a large number of refugees from a liberated slave camp, and also prison cells for captured slavers. Probably escorted by a pair of multi-role frigates to provide additional security on missions which are against more 'nation state-level' slaver organisations.

How big do you guys think such a vessel might need to be?

[Kouralia]

I'm considering creating a specialist vessel for maximum West African Squadroning in modern tech. While IRL it's not a major problem (it's pretty much a non-problem), the number of nations which are 'lol, imma pirates' or 'lol, imma have slave trade' etc. is high, so I think there's more of a role for something like this in MT.

It would be a ship which would need to combine capabilities for naval gunfire, more comprehensive aviation facilities than a normal warship (though it would likely not need aviation of the size or fixed-wing nature of a full aircraft carrier), it would also likely need some air defence and CIWS capabilities as well as sufficient embarked marines to be able to actually assault and liberate slave forts or to capture and raze pirate havens. I believe nuclear power allows increased speed, which would be beneficial, as well as the lesser need to resupply. Finally, it would need sufficient humanitarian relief capabilities to be able to take on a large number of refugees from a liberated slave camp, and also prison cells for captured slavers. Probably escorted by a pair of multi-role frigates to provide additional security on missions which are against more 'nation state-level' slaver organisations.

How big do you guys think such a vessel might need to be?

Aside from the enticing picture, that looks pretty fucking awesome having skimmed a few pages online about it.

I imagine I would change a few things about it - the naval gunnery might be restricted to (perhaps multiple) 155mm guns as I imagine the more modern systems are more accurate and conducive to fire support in this case than bigger guns. Would it be simple to fit a nuclear reactor in that sized hull?

[The Akasha Colony]

I'm considering creating a specialist vessel for maximum West African Squadroning in modern tech. While IRL it's not a major problem (it's pretty much a non-problem), the number of nations which are 'lol, imma pirates' or 'lol, imma have slave trade' etc. is high, so I think there's more of a role for something like this in MT.

It would be a ship which would need to combine capabilities for naval gunfire, more comprehensive aviation facilities than a normal warship (though it would likely not need aviation of the size or fixed-wing nature of a full aircraft carrier), it would also likely need some air defence and CIWS capabilities as well as sufficient embarked marines to be able to actually assault and liberate slave forts or to capture and raze pirate havens. I believe nuclear power allows increased speed, which would be beneficial, as well as the lesser need to resupply. Finally, it would need sufficient humanitarian relief capabilities to be able to take on a large number of refugees from a liberated slave camp, and also prison cells for captured slavers. Probably escorted by a pair of multi-role frigates to provide additional security on missions which are against more 'nation state-level' slaver organisations.

How big do you guys think such a vessel might need to be?

I don't see the reason you need dedicated, purpose-built ships for this. The British didn't have any for the West African squadron, they used the usual assortment of warships and converted merchantmen they had on hand for the task.

If you need those capabilities, then you would honestly just do best with a light aircraft carrier like Cavour for air support and to carry a force of troops and then just give it some escorting frigates or destroyers armed with something like 8" Mark 71 or 155 mm AGS for naval gunfire. If for some reason you need it. There's no reason you need to cram all of those features into a single massive, very expensive, and very specialized ship. The US Navy doesn't have any assault ship/battleship/carrier hybrids, it just operated carriers, assault ships, and battleships separately allowing them to retire or replace one class without having to retire or replace the others if they were still useful.

IMO, some of those capabilities would be of dubious utility anyway. There's no reason modern slavers would need such large, fixed, and obvious targets as coastal forts in an age of trucks, highways, railroads, airplanes, and the internet. No need for public auctions at fixed times and places that can be easily targeted by law enforcement.

[Kouralia]

I'm considering creating a specialist vessel for maximum West African Squadroning in modern tech. While IRL it's not a major problem (it's pretty much a non-problem), the number of nations which are 'lol, imma pirates' or 'lol, imma have slave trade' etc. is high, so I think there's more of a role for something like this in MT.

It would be a ship which would need to combine capabilities for naval gunfire, more comprehensive aviation facilities than a normal warship (though it would likely not need aviation of the size or fixed-wing nature of a full aircraft carrier), it would also likely need some air defence and CIWS capabilities as well as sufficient embarked marines to be able to actually assault and liberate slave forts or to capture and raze pirate havens. I believe nuclear power allows increased speed, which would be beneficial, as well as the lesser need to resupply. Finally, it would need sufficient humanitarian relief capabilities to be able to take on a large number of refugees from a liberated slave camp, and also prison cells for captured slavers. Probably escorted by a pair of multi-role frigates to provide additional security on missions which are against more 'nation state-level' slaver organisations.

How big do you guys think such a vessel might need to be?

I don't see the reason you need dedicated, purpose-built ships for this. The British didn't have any for the West African squadron, they used the usual assortment of warships and converted merchantmen they had on hand for the task.

Mostly because I want one.

If you need those capabilities, then you would honestly just do best with a light aircraft carrier like Cavour for air support and to carry a force of troops and then just give it some escorting frigates or destroyers armed with something like 8" Mark 71 or 155 mm AGS for naval gunfire. If for some reason you need it. There's no reason you need to cram all of those features into a single massive, very expensive, and very specialized ship. The US Navy doesn't have any assault ship/battleship/carrier hybrids, it just operated carriers, assault ships, and battleships separately allowing them to retire or replace one class without having to retire or replace the others if they were still useful.

But it only really needs a small number of helicopters to facilitate mobility.

IMO, some of those capabilities would be of dubious utility anyway. There's no reason modern slavers would need such large, fixed, and obvious targets as coastal forts in an age of trucks, highways, railroads, airplanes, and the internet. No need for public auctions at fixed times and places that can be easily targeted by law enforcement.

Because on NS there are literally slaver nations and pirate nations.