NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #2

[Spirit of Hope]

Side loading magazines can give you that special gangsta look, without actually shooting sideways.

A simple jetpacks isn't really that hard to build, and it doesn't have to be very heavy. But there just isn't a particular role for them. They don't have the range to replace other transportation, don't have much loiter time, and it's hard to imagine a combat situation where even a perfectly functional and compact Duke Nukem 3D jetpack would really be useful.

Hollywood style storming a compound atop a cliff certainly springs to mind, but jetpacks cause so much noise that you'd be more discreet dropping from an armed helicopter.

With mass cryogenics I can think of ways to make usable jetpacks, but it's still a so-so solution looking for a problem.

Well I was thinking a modern city, lots of skyscrapers and other large buildings. A jet pack would allow you to move infantry from the ground to the top of buildings quickly. Helicopters could do it but they would be much more restricted in a city environment. I wouldn't equipp all infantry with them but certain scout sniper units greeting up high quickly would be useful.

[Vault 1]

Well I was thinking a modern city, lots of skyscrapers and other large buildings. A jet pack would allow you to move infantry from the ground to the top of buildings quickly.

However you have to move on foot a lot, and you can't go far with a jetpack. And it only really gives you one flight, you have to drop it when you get there to regain mobility.

But more importantly, what's the particular value of getting to the top of buildings quickly?

[Spirit of Hope]

Well I was thinking a modern city, lots of skyscrapers and other large buildings. A jet pack would allow you to move infantry from the ground to the top of buildings quickly.

However you have to move on foot a lot, and you can't go far with a jetpack. And it only really gives you one flight, you have to drop it when you get there to regain mobility.

But more importantly, what's the particular value of getting to the top of buildings quickly?

Starting from the end, getting to the top of tall buildings gives you a vantage point for observations and sniping. Skyscrapers are huge getting to the top using anything but a elevator would be a chore, and elevators wouldn't be that trustworthy in a battlefield where power will likely be out.

As to fuel, yeah your probably dropping it after one flight, but that one flight might be all you need.

[The UK in Exile]

Well I was thinking a modern city, lots of skyscrapers and other large buildings. A jet pack would allow you to move infantry from the ground to the top of buildings quickly.

However you have to move on foot a lot, and you can't go far with a jetpack. And it only really gives you one flight, you have to drop it when you get there to regain mobility.

But more importantly, what's the particular value of getting to the top of buildings quickly?

rule one of storming buildings. going down is easier than fighting up.

[Kouralia]

However you have to move on foot a lot, and you can't go far with a jetpack. And it only really gives you one flight, you have to drop it when you get there to regain mobility.

But more importantly, what's the particular value of getting to the top of buildings quickly?

rule one of storming buildings. going down is easier than fighting up.

But if you're at the bottom you can place high-explosives on all load-bearing walls!

[Vault 1]

Starting from the end, getting to the top of tall buildings gives you a vantage point for observations and sniping.

Buildings have ladders inside them for a reason.
Getting up with a jetpack is announcing to the whole world that you're there. Say hello to some mortar fire and a quick end to your sniping.

Skyscrapers are huge getting to the top using anything but a elevator would be a chore, and elevators wouldn't be that trustworthy in a battlefield where power will likely be out.

Getting to the top using a jetpack is an even greater chore, when you consider all the effort spent carrying it to the jump point.

Also, there aren't many skyscrapers in modern cities, and they are a special case altogether. Don't expect to be just flying to the top and that's it. This isn't battlefail 3. In scorched earth warfare, expect WTC style fires. In moderate intensity warfare, expect them to be contested and a welcome team with assault rifles on the roof making swiss cheese out of you as you're still piloting your jetpack there.

Now you want to take them out with airburst rounds of course, but you see, first of all you have your hands busy flying your jetpack, and second, they won't all be standing in the open, they will be on the top floor. Expect some fire out of broken windows as you're flying up as well.

I guess there is some tactical benefit in using jetpacks in combination with low-level assault and helicopter support for overtaking a major building, but it's not something major that you couldn't get otherwise.

rule one of storming buildings. going down is easier than fighting up.

If you expect to be fighting floor by floor, you need a lot more force than a few jetpack guys. You need helicopter drops.

[Spirit of Hope]

rule one of storming buildings. going down is easier than fighting up.

But if you're at the bottom you can place high-explosives on all load-bearing walls!

Dropping the building on your own head? Losing the structure that was rather expensive to build in the first place? While under fire from the defenders? I mean you could do it but blowing up a skyscraper just because it's holding enemy defenders seams a bit wasteful.

Starting from the end, getting to the top of tall buildings gives you a vantage point for observations and sniping.

Buildings have ladders inside them for a reason.
Getting up with a jetpack is announcing to the whole world that you're there. Say hello to some mortar fire and a quick end to your sniping.

Skyscrapers are huge getting to the top using anything but a elevator would be a chore, and elevators wouldn't be that trustworthy in a battlefield where power will likely be out.

Getting to the top using a jetpack is an even greater chore, when you consider all the effort spent carrying it to the jump point.

Also, there aren't many skyscrapers in modern cities, and they are a special case altogether. Don't expect to be just flying to the top and that's it. This isn't battlefail 3. In scorched earth warfare, expect WTC style fires. In moderate intensity warfare, expect them to be contested and a welcome team with assault rifles on the roof making swiss cheese out of you as you're still piloting your jetpack there.

Now you want to take them out with airburst rounds of course, but you see, first of all you have your hands busy flying your jetpack, and second, they won't all be standing in the open, they will be on the top floor. Expect some fire out of broken windows as you're flying up as well.

I guess there is some tactical benefit in using jetpacks in combination with low-level assault and helicopter support for overtaking a major building, but it's not something major that you couldn't get otherwise.

rule one of storming buildings. going down is easier than fighting up.

If you expect to be fighting floor by floor, you need a lot more force than a few jetpack guys. You need helicopter drops.

As I said from the beginning limited use for specialized troops, along with needed improvements to jet pack technology. This is a PMT idea at least (where large buildings would be more prevalent).

[Former Wellboneland]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

[Vault 1]

As I said from the beginning limited use for specialized troops, along with needed improvements to jet pack technology. This is a PMT idea at least (where large buildings would be more prevalent).

Stop overquoting, just please. Is it that hard to edit the quote?

Also, the application is so limited and marginal that it remains questionable even if you had Duke Nukem jetpacks.

[The UK in Exile]

rule one of storming buildings. going down is easier than fighting up.

But if you're at the bottom you can place high-explosives on all load-bearing walls!

if your at the bottom its easier to drop a rock on your head.

and by a rock I mean.... high explosives.

[Spirit of Hope]

As I said from the beginning limited use for specialized troops, along with needed improvements to jet pack technology. This is a PMT idea at least (where large buildings would be more prevalent).

Stop overquoting, just please. Is it that hard to edit the quote?

Also, the application is so limited and marginal that it remains questionable even if you had Duke Nukem jetpacks.

I'm soy, for the last day I have been on my IPhone wich makes it really hard to edit quotes. As to the jet packs, yes limited use, however with a lolhuge army, which is really every army on NS, marginalized systems can be developed and employed in small units.

[The Reliquary]

How much would navalising the Fw190 affect performance?

Would it be like the Seafire and nowhere near as good as the original?

[Ostreig]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

Let's compare.

	Colt Single Action Army	Desert Eagle M. XIX
Weight	1,048 g (w/ 7.5" barrel)	1,999 g
Length	13"	10.75" / 14"
Standard Magazine	It's a 6-shot revolver.	7~9, depending on caliber

Now, not that I've ever fired either gun, so let's leave that to people who're more familiar with that kind of stuff. Most service pistols are around 800 to a little over 1,000 grams, and from what reviews I've read people say the Desert Eagle is an overweight Hollywood monstrosity that wouldn't actually serve well in action because it's heavy and unwieldy.

That being said, the .45 Colt has problems as a single-action revolver. You need to manually cock the hammer for each round, allowing for more accurate shooting (if you're into that kind of thing), but with a lighter trigger than a double-action, I've read nasty stories about misfires because you might unintentionally press with more force while the gun is cocked, and shoot, say, a bathroom window (nasty experience indoors with a big gun) or your foot.

My conclusion? Neither. Get a Colt 1911. :{D

[El Gran Tropico]

How much would navalising the Fw190 affect performance?

Would it be like the Seafire and nowhere near as good as the original?

The Fw190 could be a good platform for a WWII-era multirole carrier aircraft. However, it is a fairly big, sturdy aircraft and apparently had a fairly tight weight margin for takeoff from short airfields. To maintain a low takeoff distance, designers were forced to sacrifice armament on the Fw190 A-4/U8 and Fw190 G-2, both of which were modified to carry ~300L of additional fuel. You should keep this in mind when considering navalising - you can't slap too much extra weight on the air frame without making it impossible to launch from a carrier. That said, the Fw190 tends to be ridiculously up gunned for work as a naval fighter (particularly bomber-killer variants with 4-6 cannon), and perhaps a bit over-armored as well. In these areas, weight saving cuts can be made while still maintaining a competent aircraft. The Fw190 F-8/U2 might serve as a good model, being re-armed as a torpedo bomber. You may want to shy away from the high-altitude variants, as high-altitude performance isn't necessary in a naval fighter. Designing some improved weapons systems (maybe an advanced anti-shipping rocket with some rudimentary guidance package) would also go a long way towards making the Fw190 into a capable naval weapon.

[Bajireyn]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

Let's compare.

	Colt Single Action Army	Desert Eagle M. XIX
Weight	1,048 g (w/ 7.5" barrel)	1,999 g
Length	13"	10.75" / 14"
Standard Magazine	It's a 6-shot revolver.	7~9, depending on caliber

Now, not that I've ever fired either gun, so let's leave that to people who're more familiar with that kind of stuff. Most service pistols are around 800 to a little over 1,000 grams, and from what reviews I've read people say the Desert Eagle is an overweight Hollywood monstrosity that wouldn't actually serve well in action because it's heavy and unwieldy.

That being said, the .45 Colt has problems as a single-action revolver. You need to manually cock the hammer for each round, allowing for more accurate shooting (if you're into that kind of thing), but with a lighter trigger than a double-action, I've read nasty stories about misfires because you might unintentionally press with more force while the gun is cocked, and shoot, say, a bathroom window (nasty experience indoors with a big gun) or your foot.

My conclusion? Neither. Get a Colt 1911. :{D

I think he was talking about the M1911 not the Colt Single Action Army.

[Former Wellboneland]

Let's compare.

	Colt Single Action Army	Desert Eagle M. XIX
Weight	1,048 g (w/ 7.5" barrel)	1,999 g
Length	13"	10.75" / 14"
Standard Magazine	It's a 6-shot revolver.	7~9, depending on caliber

Now, not that I've ever fired either gun, so let's leave that to people who're more familiar with that kind of stuff. Most service pistols are around 800 to a little over 1,000 grams, and from what reviews I've read people say the Desert Eagle is an overweight Hollywood monstrosity that wouldn't actually serve well in action because it's heavy and unwieldy.

That being said, the .45 Colt has problems as a single-action revolver. You need to manually cock the hammer for each round, allowing for more accurate shooting (if you're into that kind of thing), but with a lighter trigger than a double-action, I've read nasty stories about misfires because you might unintentionally press with more force while the gun is cocked, and shoot, say, a bathroom window (nasty experience indoors with a big gun) or your foot.

My conclusion? Neither. Get a Colt 1911. :{D

I think he was talking about the M1911 not the Colt Single Action Army.

This.

[The UK in Exile]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

yes.

or at least. its more realistic.

obviously something in 9mm is pretty much the universal standard for sidearms in the military.

[Yes Im Biop]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

Depends? Are you trying to break your wrist, Impress yoru friends, and make a drunk girl hit herself in the head? If so the DE is the best.

If you want weight, Power, Cheaper rounds, Controlability and auccacry? The Colt .45

[Former Wellboneland]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

Depends? Are you trying to break your wrist, Impress yoru friends, and make a drunk girl hit herself in the head? If so the DE is the best.

If you want weight, Power, Cheaper rounds, Controlability and auccacry? The Colt .45

Can the .45 be gold plated?

[Spirit of Hope]

Depends? Are you trying to break your wrist, Impress yoru friends, and make a drunk girl hit herself in the head? If so the DE is the best.

If you want weight, Power, Cheaper rounds, Controlability and auccacry? The Colt .45

Can the .45 be gold plated?

Anything can be gold plated, it's just stupid to do it.

[Yes Im Biop]

Depends? Are you trying to break your wrist, Impress yoru friends, and make a drunk girl hit herself in the head? If so the DE is the best.

If you want weight, Power, Cheaper rounds, Controlability and auccacry? The Colt .45

Can the .45 be gold plated?

Throw enough money at it sure. But that makes the shooter a nice shiny target for the eye of a bored enemy sniper in the sun.


Ok Back to mine.

The Advantages of having side loaded are Cool factor

The Dis is: Offset balance. Unless i missed something (More than likely)

Would a Gun made to balance like that have any advantages? Faster cycle rate?

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

Desert Eagle .50AE is just stupid. It's heavy, it's complex and it smashes you in the face if you're of a slim build. The .44 Magnum loading is OK, the .357 Magnum is probably the most reasonable loading for it.

[Galla-]

Is a .45 colt better than a Desert Eagle?

Desert Eagle .50AE is just stupid. It's heavy, it's complex and it smashes you in the face if you're of a slim build. The .44 Magnum loading is OK, the .357 Magnum is probably the most reasonable loading for it.

This never happened to me, and I'm probably the smallest man on the entire forum.

Then again the ones I fired were .44 Magnum, but I fired them both one handed like a boss.

[Former Wellboneland]

Can the .45 be gold plated?

Anything can be gold plated, it's just stupid to do it.

But why? It looks nice.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Desert Eagle .50AE is just stupid. It's heavy, it's complex and it smashes you in the face if you're of a slim build. The .44 Magnum loading is OK, the .357 Magnum is probably the most reasonable loading for it.

This never happened to me, and I'm probably the smallest man on the entire forum.

Then again the ones I fired were .44 Magnum, but I fired them both one handed like a boss.

You have quite a lot of firearms experience though. I was referring specially to the .50 variant though, with all its pointless range queen touches.

Anything can be gold plated, it's just stupid to do it.

But why? It looks nice.

It's expensive, and you'll spend forever worrying about the finish instead of using the damn thing like a handgun. So it'll just get looted off your corpse in a gunfight.