NS Military Realism Consultation Thread

[The UK in Exile]

(Image)

The design of the armored vehicle in this picture caught my eye. Well, after the huge wings they were trying to attach to it. But, aside from the wings, how effective would something like the base vehicle be in a WWI/WWII battlefield?

Your enemy's AA gunners would send a letter of thanks for the target practice.

darkness is your friend.

[San-Silvacian]

Your enemy's AA gunners would send a letter of thanks for the target practice.

Yeah, that's.... that's why I said, "aside from the wings"....

How would pull it off?

[San-Silvacian]

Your enemy's AA gunners would send a letter of thanks for the target practice.

darkness is your friend.

Search Lights are your enemy. As is your own air crews miss droppings during night.

And night fighters.

And your own allied fighters if they think you're hostile.

[The Seven Realms]

So I was thinking a naval VTOL bomber...

Good? y/n

[Sevvania]

Yeah, that's.... that's why I said, "aside from the wings"....

How would pull it off?

Pretend the wings aren't there. I'm only concerned with the armored vehicle part. How well would a configuration like that work?

[San-Silvacian]

So I was thinking a naval VTOL bomber...

Good? y/n

Small payload.

n.

STOL is something you could do.

[Vitaphone Racing]

So I was thinking a naval VTOL bomber...

Good? y/n

N

Look at A-4 Skyhawk, and start from there.

[The Seven Realms]

Got it, thanks.

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Would a catapult, ramp, JATO combination work on a carrier? Or would I just be smashing my fighters into the deck?

[Anglo-Nihon]

Would a catapult, ramp, JATO combination work on a carrier? Or would I just be smashing my fighters into the deck?

A ramp seems to be there for STOL- combining a catapult and a ramp seems a little bit uneccessary and bulky for a carrier. I'd just go with CATOBAR (catapult launch) or STOBAR.

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Would a catapult, ramp, JATO combination work on a carrier? Or would I just be smashing my fighters into the deck?

A ramp seems to be there for STOL- combining a catapult and a ramp seems a little bit uneccessary and bulky for a carrier. I'd just go with CATOBAR (catapult launch) or STOBAR.

Doesn't the Nimitz class carrier have a catapult and mild ramp though?

[The UK in Exile]

Would a catapult, ramp, JATO combination work on a carrier? Or would I just be smashing my fighters into the deck?

if you have cats, why would you need the ramp?

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Would a catapult, ramp, JATO combination work on a carrier? Or would I just be smashing my fighters into the deck?

if you have cats, why would you need the ramp?

Getting very heavy craft in the air on a very short runway.

[San-Silvacian]

Would a catapult, ramp, JATO combination work on a carrier? Or would I just be smashing my fighters into the deck?

if you have cats, why would you need the ramp?

The Russians combined the two IIRC on their own carrier.

[The UK in Exile]

if you have cats, why would you need the ramp?

The Russians combined the two IIRC on their own carrier.

YDNRC.

what I'm saying is, either you use a Cat or a ramp. you can't use both, so catapults make the ramp redundant. unless you built a cat that launches at an incline...

[Jagalonia]

(Image)

The design of the armored vehicle in this picture caught my eye. Well, after the huge wings they were trying to attach to it. But, aside from the wings, how effective would something like the base vehicle be in a WWI/WWII battlefield?

If it's late WW2, RADAR would pick it up easily.

Hell, you might even be able to get it with sonar with all the noise it would make.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

My mortar technicals outguns your MG technicals by 110mm's of high explosives, your point?

seems plausible but i don't see it being easy to aim a mortar on a moving technical. i mean sure on specialized vehicles i would assume it'd work, but on those things that insurgents and unprofessional African militias use...well then I'd pick an MG technical any day. explosives are great but if i expected a militia style run in where the truck moves by with it's armament firing like crazy, then MG it is. If you're going the boring but practical way of moving and stopping at points to fire, i suppose mortars could work...

just half a penny for my thought there...

Yeah, it's a Technical Mortar Carrier, by the Austrians.

[Kouralia]

seems plausible but i don't see it being easy to aim a mortar on a moving technical. i mean sure on specialized vehicles i would assume it'd work, but on those things that insurgents and unprofessional African militias use...well then I'd pick an MG technical any day. explosives are great but if i expected a militia style run in where the truck moves by with it's armament firing like crazy, then MG it is. If you're going the boring but practical way of moving and stopping at points to fire, i suppose mortars could work...

just half a penny for my thought there...

Yeah, it's a Technical Mortar Carrier, by the Austrians.

It seems that a Lince version would fit in well with my Light Role Infantry.

[Sevvania]

(Image)

The design of the armored vehicle in this picture caught my eye. Well, after the huge wings they were trying to attach to it. But, aside from the wings, how effective would something like the base vehicle be in a WWI/WWII battlefield?

If it's late WW2, RADAR would pick it up easily.

Hell, you might even be able to get it with sonar with all the noise it would make.

...

Are you talking about the wings? Because I specifically pointed out that I have no interest in the wings. Twice. Why does everyone keep missing that? >_<

[Inutoland]

(Image)

The design of the armored vehicle in this picture caught my eye. Well, after the huge wings they were trying to attach to it. But, aside from the wings, how effective would something like the base vehicle be in a WWI/WWII battlefield?

The main problem with the armoured vehicle, discounting the wings as everyone else seems incapable of, is its lack of a proper turret. The basic shape seems reasonable enough for WW2, though possibly a little low to the ground, but that front-mounted ball sponson is a silly place for the main armament. Get a turret or go away. Interwar tanks had all sorts of crazy smeg going on (yeah, I'm looking at you, Vickers Independent), right up to the early war. However, Spanish Civil War and early German blitzkrieg put paid to most of these. Especially the Spanish Civil War - first tank-on-tank major battles.

I don't see a problem with the wheels. Gives it a rather Boarhound sort of a look.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

StG 03, proposed new service weapon.

Weight: 3.75 kg
Length: 800 mm
Cartridge: 6.8×43mm Remington
Action: Short-stroke piston, rotating bolt
Rate of fire: 750 rounds/min cyclic
Muzzle velocity 850 m/s
Effective range 300-400 metres
Feed system: 30-round detachable box magazine or 120-round drum magazine
Sights: Reflex sights or iron sights.

Anything needs changing?

[Ularn]

(Image)

StG 03, proposed new service weapon.

Weight: 3.7 kg
Length: 800 mm
Cartridge: 6.8×43mm Remington
Action: Short-stroke piston, rotating bolt
Rate of fire: 750 rounds/min cyclic
Muzzle velocity 850 m/s
Effective range 300-400 metres
Feed system: 30-round detachable box magazine or 120-round drum magazine
Sights: Reflex sights or iron sights.

Anything needs changing?

Why does it have a folding stock with no hinge?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

(Image)

StG 03, proposed new service weapon.

Weight: 3.7 kg
Length: 800 mm
Cartridge: 6.8×43mm Remington
Action: Short-stroke piston, rotating bolt
Rate of fire: 750 rounds/min cyclic
Muzzle velocity 850 m/s
Effective range 300-400 metres
Feed system: 30-round detachable box magazine or 120-round drum magazine
Sights: Reflex sights or iron sights.

Anything needs changing?

Why does it have a folding stock with no hinge?

It's fixed lightweight stock.

Modified.

[Sevvania]

(Image)

The design of the armored vehicle in this picture caught my eye. Well, after the huge wings they were trying to attach to it. But, aside from the wings, how effective would something like the base vehicle be in a WWI/WWII battlefield?

The main problem with the armoured vehicle, discounting the wings as everyone else seems incapable of, is its lack of a proper turret. The basic shape seems reasonable enough for WW2, though possibly a little low to the ground, but that front-mounted ball sponson is a silly place for the main armament. Get a turret or go away. Interwar tanks had all sorts of crazy smeg going on (yeah, I'm looking at you, Vickers Independent), right up to the early war. However, Spanish Civil War and early German blitzkrieg put paid to most of these. Especially the Spanish Civil War - first tank-on-tank major battles.

I don't see a problem with the wheels. Gives it a rather Boarhound sort of a look.

Aha, thank you. So this would be better as a sort of armored truck with both road wheels and tracks? (the treads seem to be removable, because one side shows them wrapped around the road wheels, while the other side has them rolled out)

If I do use it as inspiration, I'll probably mount the 75mm gun in a more conventional position.

[Vorond]

So...in a nation of vast steppes that are covered in snow for almost 60% of the year...these any good?



I might even fit a recoilless rifle or two on one... this spells tank-death.



Aerosled Infantry - because where horses freeze the engine carries on.