NS Military Realism Consultation Thread

[The Akasha Colony]

Would there be reason to keep Special operations/Special forces/Whatever as their own command instead of army, navy, etc. maintaining SF units? Size of SF units/organizations compared to rest of military?

If you're building a military from scratch right now, in the modern day, then you don't necessarily need to put your SF under different branches and then throw another command down to coordinate them like the US does. A good deal of the current structure of modern militaries derives from nothing more than simple tradition and political wrangling. Newer militaries in the real-world tend to draw inspiration from other, older militaries, such as the US/UK, which means they copy these inefficiencies, but there is no practical reason to do so.

Doctrinally and strategically, there should be no need for a separate 'Marine Corps' in most militaries; they only exist now due to historical lineage and tradition. Marines were originally created as a dedicated ship-borne fighting force, back when boarding enemy ships was common and required a special skill set, and to put down mutinies by the ships' crew against the officers. Neither of those roles are of any real consequence today, and as Operation Overlord showed, properly-trained Army troops can be used for landings so long as they are provided with the necessary equipment.

[Immoren]

I was asking because IRL my Beloved Armed Forces don't have anything like SOCOM.
Then again it is debatable whether units under banner of "special forces" in Finland (minus special jaeger company or army and special operations department of navy) would be counted as "real" special forces when compared to special forces in other countries.

[The Akasha Colony]

I was asking because IRL my Beloved Armed Forces don't have anything like SOCOM.
Then again it is debatable whether units under banner of "special forces" in Finland (minus special jaeger company or army and special operations department of navy) would be counted as "real" special forces when compared to special forces in other countries.

SOCOM only exists because the service branches are too traditionalist and proud to give up their individual special forces units. While there are indeed some field special forces units that should remain under local tactical command, such as scout-sniper teams, many of the independent-operation teams (SEALs, SFOD-D, etc.) would probably be better off being grouped on their own, to reduce the duplication of capabilities. There are some 'on the fence' units such as the Rangers, who do both SF work as well as normal field battle if needed, but in most cases, fully independent teams have little in relation to their service branch aside from a recruiting pool and rank structure.

[Birthrank]

Would there be reason to keep Special operations/Special forces/Whatever as their own command instead of army, navy, etc. maintaining SF units? Size of SF units/organizations compared to rest of military?

If you're building a military from scratch right now, in the modern day, then you don't necessarily need to put your SF under different branches and then throw another command down to coordinate them like the US does. A good deal of the current structure of modern militaries derives from nothing more than simple tradition and political wrangling. Newer militaries in the real-world tend to draw inspiration from other, older militaries, such as the US/UK, which means they copy these inefficiencies, but there is no practical reason to do so.

Doctrinally and strategically, there should be no need for a separate 'Marine Corps' in most militaries; they only exist now due to historical lineage and tradition. Marines were originally created as a dedicated ship-borne fighting force, back when boarding enemy ships was common and required a special skill set, and to put down mutinies by the ships' crew against the officers. Neither of those roles are of any real consequence today, and as Operation Overlord showed, properly-trained Army troops can be used for landings so long as they are provided with the necessary equipment.

As a US Marine myself, I can tell you that the Army and the Corps do not serve the same purpose.

[Lubyak]

If you're building a military from scratch right now, in the modern day, then you don't necessarily need to put your SF under different branches and then throw another command down to coordinate them like the US does. A good deal of the current structure of modern militaries derives from nothing more than simple tradition and political wrangling. Newer militaries in the real-world tend to draw inspiration from other, older militaries, such as the US/UK, which means they copy these inefficiencies, but there is no practical reason to do so.

Doctrinally and strategically, there should be no need for a separate 'Marine Corps' in most militaries; they only exist now due to historical lineage and tradition. Marines were originally created as a dedicated ship-borne fighting force, back when boarding enemy ships was common and required a special skill set, and to put down mutinies by the ships' crew against the officers. Neither of those roles are of any real consequence today, and as Operation Overlord showed, properly-trained Army troops can be used for landings so long as they are provided with the necessary equipment.

As a US Marine myself, I can tell you that the Army and the Corps do not serve the same purpose.

That's not what's being argued.

What's being argued is that its not necessary to have a seperate Marine Corps, and you can get the same effect of having a seperate Marine Corps by simply creating specialist Army units.

[Kouralia]

As a US Marine myself, I can tell you that the Army and the Corps do not serve the same purpose.

That's not what's being argued.

What's being argued is that its not necessary to have a seperate Marine Corps, and you can get the same effect of having a seperate Marine Corps by simply creating specialist Army units.

Marines are totally part of the Royal Naval service in Kouralia. Allows for much more jokes about questionable sexuality, which is a main-stay of inter-forces banter. (from people I know)

[The Akasha Colony]

If you're building a military from scratch right now, in the modern day, then you don't necessarily need to put your SF under different branches and then throw another command down to coordinate them like the US does. A good deal of the current structure of modern militaries derives from nothing more than simple tradition and political wrangling. Newer militaries in the real-world tend to draw inspiration from other, older militaries, such as the US/UK, which means they copy these inefficiencies, but there is no practical reason to do so.

Doctrinally and strategically, there should be no need for a separate 'Marine Corps' in most militaries; they only exist now due to historical lineage and tradition. Marines were originally created as a dedicated ship-borne fighting force, back when boarding enemy ships was common and required a special skill set, and to put down mutinies by the ships' crew against the officers. Neither of those roles are of any real consequence today, and as Operation Overlord showed, properly-trained Army troops can be used for landings so long as they are provided with the necessary equipment.

As a US Marine myself, I can tell you that the Army and the Corps do not serve the same purpose.

Because at the moment, there is a separate Army and Marine Corps. But there is no fundamental reason why a military starting from scratch must create a second army attached to the Navy for the purpose of rapid expeditionary warfare. It is quite possible to build such capability into the Army itself. The US doesn't do that, but the US has a lot of money, enough to fund two separate ground combat forces. The UK doesn't have a lot of money but is even more traditionalist than the US. By virtue of its resources, the US chose to repurpose the Marines as a faster-reaction expeditionary force, but there was no physical obstruction to using properly-trained Army troops for the same purpose, just as there is no barrier to the Marines fielding their own medics, rather than relying on Navy corpsmen.

[Anemos Major]

2. Nuclear Tank for Rapid Holocaust

(Image)

Modification package for existing vehicle. Make all ammunition nuclear and strap ICBMs to tank for improved first hit power

2bn research funding for 12.7mm nuclear bullet

even the emergency rifle grenades are nuclear

I should seriously have my entire military be nuclear, justify it by saying that my nation is the Saudi Arabia of uranium and hordes it all to itself. Nuclear artillery shells, nuclear rocket launchers, DU AP bullets, DU KEPs, DU shape charges.

ahahaha you think I mean depleted uranium

10t yield 12.7mm rounds will tear anything apart

[Democratic Consensia]

I should seriously have my entire military be nuclear, justify it by saying that my nation is the Saudi Arabia of uranium and hordes it all to itself. Nuclear artillery shells, nuclear rocket launchers, DU AP bullets, DU KEPs, DU shape charges.

ahahaha you think I mean depleted uranium

10t yield 12.7mm rounds will tear anything apart

Don' wanna rain on the nukie parade, but a 12.7mm round would have to be MIGHTY long to have enough fissile material to boom.

Edit for Q's: Any reason not to build my nuke arsenal out of 15kt-yield weapons?

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

I should seriously have my entire military be nuclear, justify it by saying that my nation is the Saudi Arabia of uranium and hordes it all to itself. Nuclear artillery shells, nuclear rocket launchers, DU AP bullets, DU KEPs, DU shape charges.

ahahaha you think I mean depleted uranium

10t yield 12.7mm rounds will tear anything apart

I said DU bullets. Nuclear artillery shells and torpedoes are perfectly feasible however.

[Bafuria]

ahahaha you think I mean depleted uranium

10t yield 12.7mm rounds will tear anything apart

I said DU bullets. Nuclear artillery shells and torpedoes are perfectly feasible however.

I've been thinking of making Bafuria a phosphorous Saudi Arabia.

Both for agriculture and for covering the enemy in toxic fire. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

[Bafuria]

ahahaha you think I mean depleted uranium

10t yield 12.7mm rounds will tear anything apart

Don' wanna rain on the nukie parade, but a 12.7mm round would have to be MIGHTY long to have enough fissile material to boom.

Edit for Q's: Any reason not to build my nuke arsenal out of 15kt-yield weapons?

It's good enough as long as you don't have to bomb airfields, silos and rail yards. Those are "hard-targets" and need a medium-yield ground burst of about 200 kilotons.

[The UK in Exile]

I was asking because IRL my Beloved Armed Forces don't have anything like SOCOM.
Then again it is debatable whether units under banner of "special forces" in Finland (minus special jaeger company or army and special operations department of navy) would be counted as "real" special forces when compared to special forces in other countries.

it depends largely on wether you see an independent mission for special forces.

do they operate in support of regular units or do regular units support them?

counter-terrorism for example is an independent role. recce isn't.

[Sen]

[Galla-]

ahahaha you think I mean depleted uranium

10t yield 12.7mm rounds will tear anything apart

Don' wanna rain on the nukie parade, but a 12.7mm round would have to be MIGHTY long to have enough fissile material to boom.

Antimatter broette.

[The UK in Exile]

(Image)

synthetic leather. don't want to be accused of cruelty to animals.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

(Image)

synthetic leather. don't want to be accused of cruelty to animals.

Fuck animals! Wait what?

[Free Missouri]

He might be asking more about US Marines vs. the US Army. Definition gets kind of muddled. The traditional definition of a "marine" is just a soldier deployed from a ship. Modern-day US Marines are more of a rapid-response expeditionary force, who aren't exclusively limited to amphibious operations. They deploy from aircraft, operate armored vehicles, and as I understand it, basically act as conventional US ground forces independent from the Army. The main difference is that Marines can be deployed quickly nearly anywhere on the planet, where the Army is larger but slower to get moving.

I think that is true of any Marine force in western countries at least. I still support the idea however that there is nothing the Marines can do that a specialized Army unit couldn't do. It really depends on your military structure and your nations history. You have to ask yourself, does having Marines make sense?

I believe that the marines are more of a Combine-Arms force than the army, the army having to rely on the air force for most of it's planes, the Marine Crops has it's own Air Corps, it's own armored corps, it's own helicopter corps, and it's own landing vehicles

[Jagalonia]

synthetic leather. don't want to be accused of cruelty to animals.

Fuck animals! Wait what?

Careful, wouldn't want to attract 1k cats.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Don' wanna rain on the nukie parade, but a 12.7mm round would have to be MIGHTY long to have enough fissile material to boom.

Antimatter broette.

Consensia is a broette?

[Bajireyn]

(Image)

I would like to order 9001 of these glorious tanks.

[Graditora]

Wondering what the outcome of this fight would be.

Era 1800-1850's

Uniforms Resemble Units for the Civil War(American)

200 Riflemen vs 101 Heavy Cavalry

Riflemen
Riflemen are armed with:
Dreyse Needle Guns or Pauly Needle Guns
Navy Colt Revolvers
12 inch Knife Bayonet

Riflemen Training:
Advanced Bayonet Training
Stealth Training
Marksmanship proficiency with there weapon
Can fire 3 shots every 10 seconds

Heavy Cavalry
Calvary is armed with:
Calvary Sabre's
Revolvers(No designated kind)
Steel Helmets and Breast Plates

Cavalry Training:
Unknown but are elitist units

Scenario
200 Riflemen are positioned in a formation of 3 lines in a wooded forest 4 officers and 1 flag bearer in the rear. The cavalry units are advancing from behind. At 300 meters the cavalry are spotted and the regiment of riflemen turn to face the cavalry and open fire. The cavalry charge at 13 meters a second(30 MPH). They are lined in 3's again first line prone, second knelled and third standing.

[The Akasha Colony]

Wondering what the outcome of this fight would be.

Era 1800-1850's

Uniforms Resemble Units for the Civil War(American)

200 Riflemen vs 101 Heavy Cavalry

Riflemen
Riflemen are armed with:
Dreyse Needle Guns or Pauly Needle Guns
Navy Colt Revolvers
12 inch Knife Bayonet

Riflemen Training:
Advanced Bayonet Training
Stealth Training
Marksmanship proficiency with there weapon
Can fire 3 shots every 10 seconds

Heavy Cavalry
Calvary is armed with:
Calvary Sabre's
Revolvers(No designated kind)
Steel Helmets and Breast Plates

Cavalry Training:
Unknown but are elitist units

Scenario
200 Riflemen are positioned in a formation of 3 lines in a wooded forest 4 officers and 1 flag bearer in the rear. The cavalry units are advancing from behind. At 300 meters the cavalry are spotted and the regiment of riflemen turn to face the cavalry and open fire. The cavalry charge at 13 meters a second(30 MPH). They are lined in 3's again first line prone, second knelled and third standing.

My money is on the infantry winning, although not without losses. A charge of 13 meters per second, assuming the entire turn to face the attackers takes no more than ten seconds, allows three-four full volleys to be fired by the infantry, or 600 shots against only 101 targets. Woods also slow down cavalry due to the uneven terrain and obstructions, although it could give them something of a shield if played right. If the cavalry have their pistols drawn, any who make it even relatively close will be able to shoot and probably hit something.

At most, a handful of cavalry would make it to the infantry, but those would be easily put down if the infantry have their bayonets fixed, since the infantry would have the advantage of range. In very close combat, they could also resort to their revolvers to simply shoot the riders off their horses. I would estimate infantry casualties to be well under 25%, and cavalry casualties near-total if the prosecute the charge to the end. This assumes that as mentioned, the infantry have marksmanship training to make their shots count.

A question though: Are the breastplates supposed to deflect bullets? If they can, then this increases the chances of the cavalry making it to the infantry line, if not, then they're toast. Even if they could block bullets, their horses are quite vulnerable.

[The UK in Exile]

Wondering what the outcome of this fight would be.

Era 1800-1850's

Uniforms Resemble Units for the Civil War(American)

200 Riflemen vs 101 Heavy Cavalry

Riflemen
Riflemen are armed with:
Dreyse Needle Guns or Pauly Needle Guns
Navy Colt Revolvers
12 inch Knife Bayonet

Riflemen Training:
Advanced Bayonet Training
Stealth Training
Marksmanship proficiency with there weapon
Can fire 3 shots every 10 seconds

Heavy Cavalry
Calvary is armed with:
Calvary Sabre's
Revolvers(No designated kind)
Steel Helmets and Breast Plates

Cavalry Training:
Unknown but are elitist units

Scenario
200 Riflemen are positioned in a formation of 3 lines in a wooded forest 4 officers and 1 flag bearer in the rear. The cavalry units are advancing from behind. At 300 meters the cavalry are spotted and the regiment of riflemen turn to face the cavalry and open fire. The cavalry charge at 13 meters a second(30 MPH). They are lined in 3's again first line prone, second knelled and third standing.

cavalry take 23 seconds to cover the ground. 7 shots per man. 1400 shots. or 14 per man and horse.

dead cav.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Wondering what the outcome of this fight would be.

Era 1800-1850's

Uniforms Resemble Units for the Civil War(American)

200 Riflemen vs 101 Heavy Cavalry

Riflemen
Riflemen are armed with:
Dreyse Needle Guns or Pauly Needle Guns
Navy Colt Revolvers
12 inch Knife Bayonet

Riflemen Training:
Advanced Bayonet Training
Stealth Training
Marksmanship proficiency with there weapon
Can fire 3 shots every 10 seconds

Heavy Cavalry
Calvary is armed with:
Calvary Sabre's
Revolvers(No designated kind)
Steel Helmets and Breast Plates

Cavalry Training:
Unknown but are elitist units

Scenario
200 Riflemen are positioned in a formation of 3 lines in a wooded forest 4 officers and 1 flag bearer in the rear. The cavalry units are advancing from behind. At 300 meters the cavalry are spotted and the regiment of riflemen turn to face the cavalry and open fire. The cavalry charge at 13 meters a second(30 MPH). They are lined in 3's again first line prone, second knelled and third standing.

How the hell do the riflemen fire 18 rounds per minute?