NS Military Realism Consultancy Thread Mk X Purps Safe Space

[The Akasha Colony]

For some reason I made a spreadsheet of various possible gun calibers, in quarter and thirds of inches and 5mm increments. The imperial measurements are also rounded up and down to closest mm.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/617 ... 20Guns.ods

Could be useful if you want to make some original NS gun calibers that are not completely random I guess?

158.75 mm guns gogogo

[Gallia-]

1"/87

[Taihei Tengoku]

378mm, or 14.88"

[Gallia-]

14"/88

mega paris gun

88mm/14 the ultimate airborne infantry gun?

[New Vihenia]

For some reason I made a spreadsheet of various possible gun calibers, in quarter and thirds of inches and 5mm increments. The imperial measurements are also rounded up and down to closest mm.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/617 ... 20Guns.ods

Could be useful if you want to make some original NS gun calibers that are not completely random I guess?

looks interesting.

[Dostanuot Loj]

Sometimes I need to get away from tracks for a bit lest I turn into Kyiv.

:B

You never understood me dad!

You youth today just think war is all about digital this and network that. You don't understand real war is fought with heart and piston and courage!

Now when are you going to clean your room?

[Gallia-]

he has his mother's powerpack [and fire control] ;~;

[The Kievan People]

It did interest me in a spergy way that some weird historical calibers from metricated nations like Germany and France like 77mm, 88mm, 135mm, 165mm, 194mm and 210mm all ended up on the tables.

[Imperializt Russia]

It did interest me in a spergy way that some weird historical calibers from metricated nations like Germany and France like 77mm, 88mm, 135mm, 165mm, 194mm and 210mm all ended up on the tables.

Is 77mm an actual calibre? I thought that only existed to differentiate certain 76.2/76mm systems from others, as was the case with the British 77mm HV.

[Gallia-]

It did interest me in a spergy way that some weird historical calibers from metricated nations like Germany and France like 77mm, 88mm, 135mm, 165mm, 194mm and 210mm all ended up on the tables.

Is 77mm an actual calibre? I thought that only existed to differentiate certain 76.2/76mm systems from others, as was the case with the British 77mm HV.

A lot of WW1 German guns were 77mm.

[The Kievan People]

It was the standard field gun caliber in the German Empire. For whatever reason they did not carry it over into WW2, but started using 75mm bores instead.

[Imperializt Russia]

An attempted move to full metrication that didn't extend to 88mm or other calibres because WW2 happened? It might have come out of the German rearmament what with the PzIII/IV both featuring early 75mm guns.

[The Kievan People]

An attempted move to full metrication that didn't extend to 88mm or other calibres because WW2 happened? It might have come out of the German rearmament what with the PzIII/IV both featuring early 75mm guns.

I do know they made a decision to switch to a 75mm standard in the 30s. I just don't know why.

[Rich and Corporations]

It was the standard field gun caliber in the German Empire. For whatever reason they did not carry it over into WW2, but started using 75mm bores instead.

they kinda scrapped their military for a decade

[Neu-Zipang]

Just a short question by the wayside about the UK armed forces (since the thread seems kind ofstuck at the moment):

There exists the ROYAL Airforce, ROYAL Navy, ROYAL Artillery, ROYAL Marines, etc.
but it is called the BRITISH Army.

If I remember correctly there is a history reason for that. Does anyone (Questers or anyone else) know why that is so?

[Husseinarti]

muh

queen

[Imperializt Russia]

Just a short question by the wayside about the UK armed forces (since the thread seems kind ofstuck at the moment):

There exists the ROYAL Airforce, ROYAL Navy, ROYAL Artillery, ROYAL Marines, etc.
but it is called the BRITISH Army.

If I remember correctly there is a history reason for that. Does anyone (Questers or anyone else) know why that is so?

The oft-repeated story is that if the Monarchy gets bolshy, then it's the British army in the charge of parliament.
I don't think that's actually true anymore, the name has simply stuck. After all, a British army under parliament probably wouldn't do well when pitted against a Royal Navy, Royal Air Force or Royal Artillery.

The Royal Navy, in what we could call its "current form" still predates the British Army by about a century.

According to Wikipedia, the English Army was founded in 1660, the same year as the Royal Navy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... my#Origins
The change to "British Army" was presumably a result of the Act of Union in 1707 between the then Kingdom of England (and Wales), and the Kingdom of Scotland.

[Neu-Zipang]

muh

queen

Care to elaborate?

[Neu-Zipang]

Just a short question by the wayside about the UK armed forces (since the thread seems kind ofstuck at the moment):

There exists the ROYAL Airforce, ROYAL Navy, ROYAL Artillery, ROYAL Marines, etc.
but it is called the BRITISH Army.

If I remember correctly there is a history reason for that. Does anyone (Questers or anyone else) know why that is so?

The oft-repeated story is that if the Monarchy gets bolshy, then it's the British army in the charge of parliament.
I don't think that's actually true anymore, the name has simply stuck. After all, a British army under parliament probably wouldn't do well when pitted against a Royal Navy, Royal Air Force or Royal Artillery.

So according to this story the Army is supposed to be under the control of the parliament? and the rest of the stuff under the control/command of the monarch, am I reading that right?

EDIT: Because: It was created in 1645 by the English Long Parliament

[Imperializt Russia]

The oft-repeated story is that if the Monarchy gets bolshy, then it's the British army in the charge of parliament.
I don't think that's actually true anymore, the name has simply stuck. After all, a British army under parliament probably wouldn't do well when pitted against a Royal Navy, Royal Air Force or Royal Artillery.

So according to this story the Army is supposed to be under the control of the parliament? and the rest of the stuff under the control/command of the monarch, am I reading that right?

No, take note of the edit.

That's simply the story that gets repeated a lot. It's obviously not actually the case.

[Laritaia]

Just a short question by the wayside about the UK armed forces (since the thread seems kind ofstuck at the moment):

There exists the ROYAL Airforce, ROYAL Navy, ROYAL Artillery, ROYAL Marines, etc.
but it is called the BRITISH Army.

If I remember correctly there is a history reason for that. Does anyone (Questers or anyone else) know why that is so?

The oft-repeated story is that if the Monarchy gets bolshy, then it's the British army in the charge of parliament.
I don't think that's actually true anymore, the name has simply stuck. After all, a British army under parliament probably wouldn't do well when pitted against a Royal Navy, Royal Air Force or Royal Artillery.

The Royal Navy, in what we could call its "current form" still predates the British Army by about a century.

According to Wikipedia, the English Army was founded in 1660, the same year as the Royal Navy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... my#Origins
The change to "British Army" was presumably a result of the Act of Union in 1707 between the then Kingdom of England (and Wales), and the Kingdom of Scotland.

It's the British Army because the New Model Army was created by the Parliamentarians during the Civil War.

who cut the king's head off.

The Royal Navy on the other hand has ties to significantly older institutions all the way back to Alfred the Great.

[Crookfur]

Just a short question by the wayside about the UK armed forces (since the thread seems kind ofstuck at the moment):

There exists the ROYAL Airforce, ROYAL Navy, ROYAL Artillery, ROYAL Marines, etc.
but it is called the BRITISH Army.

If I remember correctly there is a history reason for that. Does anyone (Questers or anyone else) know why that is so?

The oft-repeated story is that if the Monarchy gets bolshy, then it's the British army in the charge of parliament.
I don't think that's actually true anymore, the name has simply stuck. After all, a British army under parliament probably wouldn't do well when pitted against a Royal Navy, Royal Air Force or Royal Artillery.

The Royal Navy, in what we could call its "current form" still predates the British Army by about a century.

According to Wikipedia, the English Army was founded in 1660, the same year as the Royal Navy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... my#Origins
The change to "British Army" was presumably a result of the Act of Union in 1707 between the then Kingdom of England (and Wales), and the Kingdom of Scotland.

The restoration pretty h did away with the army being a tool of parliament. Most of the reason is to do with how armies were raised in the 17th/18th centuries in that each regiment's colonel was essentially a semi independent contractor and once given permission to raise a regiment could do more or less what he liked.
The Royal Corps of the time were directly Controlled raised and equipped by the state as was the navy.

Yes the Infantry and cavalry became centralised over time but the roots are still there in that the British Army is still described as a collection of regiments who just happen to fight on the same side.
A mark of the progress is that more and more of the amalgamated regiments are getting a royal bit stuck into thier title ie royal regiment of Scotland.

[Neu-Zipang]

So according to this story the Army is supposed to be under the control of the parliament? and the rest of the stuff under the control/command of the monarch, am I reading that right?

No, take note of the edit.

That's simply the story that gets repeated a lot. It's obviously not actually the case.

Yes, I understand that. I just asked if I got the STORY right, because your wording somewhat confused me.

I've seen the Edit, will read later thank you for both infos.

Most of the reason is to do with how armies were raised in the 17th/18th centuries in that each regiment's colonel was essentially a semi independent contractor and once given permission to raise a regiment could do more or less what he liked.
The Royal Corps of the time were directly Controlled raised and equipped by the state as was the navy.

the British Army is still described as a collection of regiments who just happen to fight on the same side.

Ah, so somewhat similar to the way the german empire did it. The empire did not have an actual army, but commanded the armies of the (technically) independent member kingdoms (prussia, bavaria, ..), with only the navy being directly subordinate to the emperor (in german: reichsunmittelbar i.e. "without an intermediary" subordinate to the empire).

[Imperializt Russia]

Basically, yes. After the English Civil War, deposing Charles I, abolishing the monarchy and installing Oliver Cromwell - this meant that Parliament was the supreme authority in England, controlling what was then known as the New Model Army, a professional fighting force. After the Restoration, in which Cromwell was deposed and the monarch "restored" under Charles II, Britain got its modern government. The monarch, and parliament, together.

[Crookfur]

Basically, yes. After the English Civil War, deposing Charles I, abolishing the monarchy and installing Oliver Cromwell - this meant that Parliament was the supreme authority in England, controlling what was then known as the New Model Army, a professional fighting force. After the Restoration, in which Cromwell was deposed and the monarch "restored" under Charles II, Britain got its modern government. The monarch, and parliament, together.

Cromwell wasn't deposed. He died in office and his son couldn't keep the various factions of parliament and the army in check which lead to a whole bunch of infighting and coups which lasted until Monck came south, banged some heads together and brought back the only unifying element he could think off: Charles II