NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #3

[Puzikas]

Dont post here alot but...

Russia has a similar system to the longbow, at the time I cant remember the systems name. Crossbow, perhaps. Seriously.

It encountered similar issues to that described in the system. Other issues include that heat differences often screwed with its ability to pinpoint proper distances and altitude because of heat differentials. It also has issues getting an exact fix on mobile targets moving at above...I think 65 kph.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Pretty sure it was called some kind of old Russian crossbow, yeah.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgt7KTTVowg
It's in there somewhere.

[Puzikas]

probably.
Just wanted to share that, thought someone might find it useful in any respect.

[The Kievan People]

Methinks you are referring to Phazotron's Arbalet. Which is currently in the nose of the Ka-52. I had not heard anything about its performance. Much appreciated!

I searched for info on the UKs Longbow radars and while I was able to find articles saying they were quite pleased with its mapping capabilities, I did not see anything about its utility for aiming Hellfires.

[Purpelia]

About to make my Radar range calculator lot simpler and more "user friendly"... perhaps including a PDF manual.

Should the manual contain the whole theory behind the calculator like say "why the range equation contain that 4xphi".. which is known as "factor of proportionality" or just simply explaining "this couloumn" do this and typical value are this to this ?

There could be additional feature that allow the sheet to consider atmospheric absorption effect..using similar method as Blake Chart for Pulse Radar Range Calculation. So basically i will provide a graph or table containing 2-way absorption coefficients for typical radar frequencies which user may use as input.

What I would love to see is some comments on each of the non obvious fields giving us the common range of data values for them. For example "Values are commonly between A and B." or "Should not exceed C.", "Should not be less than D", or anything else that would pose a soft limit for the less knowledgeable among us.

While we are at those less knowledgeable (like my self.) I know this is a boring thing to ask from you. But ideally you should include several filled out sheets for various prominent radars out there. Preferably covering a nice cross section of those currently still in use or those that are somehow famous. Say the Zhuk, APG-79, Blue Vixen,... The idea behind this being that most people will want to start out at (or even finish at) just tweaking existing units rather than building one from scratch. And the best way to figure things out is to tweak stuff and see what it does as well as to compare existing stuff to one another.

Also, any web host but mediafire. For some reason the thing is very polarizing with some of us having a brilliant experience with it and others (like my self) having extreme issues with using it. Took me 45 minutes and two different web proxies to finally manage and download it.

[The Akasha Colony]

Unless your tank has several targeting systems, it won't matter. And ATGMs, which would presumably fire-and-forget if you want them to be last-ditch weapons, are a bad idea in a chaotic battle, and top-attack would be difficult to use in a short-range ambush (most have a minimum range).

This is why I wanted to incorporate the FCS abilities of the Longbow and apply them here, to cover targeting. Why are fire-and-forget weapons a bad choice in a chaotic battle? Minimum range for top-attack could be slightly addressed by having a direct fire mode, I suppose, though it wouldn't do much good for anything to the side or rear. What constrains minimum range?

Minimum range is constrained by the amount of distance a top-attack missile needs to reach its maximum engagement height (they don't 'punt' before impact, they immediately ascend to their engagement altitude, cruise there, then dive to attack in the terminal phase) and then reorient itself to look down and identify its target. In the time it takes to do this, the missile will have traveled several hundred meters. Obviously, you can reduce this distance somewhat by getting a faster-acquiring system, but this is expensive, and there isn't that much room for improvement. You could also slow the missile down, but this also has obvious drawbacks since it increases flight time.

Fire and forget weapons would have limited use in a chaotic battle, particularly of the type being considered, since most ATGMs are not fire and forget. Hellfires are laser-guided with their own terminal guidance, and most others are SACLOS, and the ones that are IR guided like Javelin would not benefit from the tank having a radar system; the tank would still need a visual confirmation with some kind of infrared device to get a shot off.

I am aiming for more of a supplementary usage for them. I agree with you in that I'm still not entirely certain on how well I can compensate for the self-harm risk. How long would it take to lock-on with PMT-era electronics? As for having to turn the turret, with target acquisition handled automatically or manually via some CITV-derivative, why would I have to rotate the turret? Wouldn't a top attack method of engagement make that unecessary?

Lock-on times with PMT equipment are something that can't really be estimated given that technology advances exponentially, and even a few years difference in the future will mean rapid changes (as they already have). Of course, PMT autoloaders will probably have improved reload times for the main gun as well. The usefulness of a CITV is going to depend on the missile design; they have to be specifically designed for off-boresight engagement, a capability that was only recently introduced in air-to-air missiles. I think a clarification of guidance is also needed, since a CITV is not going to do anything for radar-guided missiles that would benefit from Longbow; conversely, Longbow would not do anything for IR missiles that could use a CITV. And neither are going to do much for a laser-guided missile.

[Puzikas]

Methinks you are referring to Phazotron's Arbalet. Which is currently in the nose of the Ka-52. I had not heard anything about its performance. Much appreciated!

I searched for info on the UKs Longbow radars and while I was able to find articles saying they were quite pleased with its mapping capabilities, I did not see anything about its utility for aiming Hellfires.

The Arbalet is different entirely, though I know some on that.
The...whatever...was on the MIL MI-28 and a version was in trials for the MI-24/35

[San-Silvacian]

Pretty sure it was called some kind of old Russian crossbow, yeah.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgt7KTTVowg
It's in there somewhere.

Gotta love Mi-28s.

Also Russian seems to sound epic no mater what they are talking about.

[Primordial Luxa]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

[Lolzieristan]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo

I WANT TO LIVE. I WANT TO LIIIIVVVE!


Also, that Russkie fellow gets two thumbs up from me. Beats all the hosts of these stupid shows History Channel's been churning out by a long shot.

[The Akasha Colony]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

I usually consider nanites a form of 'cheating,' not in a metagamey, douchebaggy sort of way, but insofar as if you have them, and as depicted they can usually dismantle any enemy target on command while being difficult if not impossible to stop, why bother having an army at that point? Just throw a few swarms of nanites out there and tell them to dismantle all the enemy's weapons and equipment, and call it a day. Conversely, if the enemy can so easily counter said swarms, why have them at all? The natural recourse for some is to invent some kind of arbitrary limitation as to why you'd still need other types of forces, but then it's just an arbitrary reason that requires some kind of suspension of disbelief as to why this limitation would not simply be solved.

[European Prussia]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

I use it to change my camo colour in my uniform

[Strykla]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

Well, I don't really see how nanites work. "Oh, they take you apart by the molecule." What? How does that explain anything? How does such a tiny machine even possess the power to break molecular bonds? WTF IS THIS SHIT???

[Arkania 5]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

Well, I don't really see how nanites work. "Oh, they take you apart by the molecule." What? How does that explain anything? How does such a tiny machine even possess the power to break molecular bonds? WTF IS THIS SHIT???

1. Get thousands of small UGV's
2. Equip with plastic explosive
3. Send towards everything

There's your nano bot swarm.

[Yes Im Biop]

Ive been doing some research into Nanites and am planning on adding roving swarms of nanobots to my armies forces
any opinions?

I just use them in AMR's and 100+mm Rockets.

[Altito Asmoro]

Aw. I figured FT was grounded in some reality and FanT was Warhammer40K Crazy stuff.

Both would generally be classed as FT since they involve space travel and at least some measure of science and pretend-military themes. This is relative to traditional FanT, of the J.R.R. Tolkien, J.K. Rowling, and George R.R. Martin variety, that often rely on outright magic, lack space travel, and usually have historical themes randomly enhanced through the use of magic.

But the design of KURATAS is amazing.

Which is not relevant to the discussion at hand regarding the practicality of mechs in combat. It's also not an acronym, and should not be capitalized.

No, the name is capitalized in the news.

[The Akasha Colony]

Both would generally be classed as FT since they involve space travel and at least some measure of science and pretend-military themes. This is relative to traditional FanT, of the J.R.R. Tolkien, J.K. Rowling, and George R.R. Martin variety, that often rely on outright magic, lack space travel, and usually have historical themes randomly enhanced through the use of magic.





Which is not relevant to the discussion at hand regarding the practicality of mechs in combat. It's also not an acronym, and should not be capitalized.

No, the name is capitalized in the news.

No it's not. Even Suidobashi doesn't claim it's an acronym, it's just derived from the name of the lead designer, and their own website is inconsistent in its own capitalization.

[The Corparation]

Well, I don't really see how nanites work. "Oh, they take you apart by the molecule." What? How does that explain anything? How does such a tiny machine even possess the power to break molecular bonds? WTF IS THIS SHIT???

1. Get thousands of small UGV's
2. Equip with plastic explosive
3. Send towards everything

There's your nano bot swarm.

Small UGVs? Filled with Explosives? The Third Reich just called they want their Antitank mines back

[European Prussia]

1. Get thousands of small UGV's
2. Equip with plastic explosive
3. Send towards everything

There's your nano bot swarm.

Small UGVs? Filled with Explosives? The Third Reich just called they want their Antitank mines back

Goliath,drive em to minefields or barbed wired fences and boom. Cheap weapon with mass devastating effects

[The Corparation]

Small UGVs? Filled with Explosives? The Third Reich just called they want their Antitank mines back

Goliath,drive em to minefields or barbed wired fences and boom. Cheap weapon with mass devastating effects

IN theory yes. In practice they weren't the most useful thing, they weren't that resistant to enemy fire, with the control cables being especially vulnerable to damage.

[European Prussia]

Goliath,drive em to minefields or barbed wired fences and boom. Cheap weapon with mass devastating effects

IN theory yes. In practice they weren't the most useful thing, they weren't that resistant to enemy fire, with the control cables being especially vulnerable to damage.

Well, if we strap em to today's RC vehicles wouldn't we have a Goliath 2? Oh wait, we already have those expensive's RC. It's called UAV's

[Altito Asmoro]

No, the name is capitalized in the news.

No it's not. Even Suidobashi doesn't claim it's an acronym, it's just derived from the name of the lead designer, and their own website is inconsistent in its own capitalization.

Yes, it is.

[The Akasha Colony]

No it's not. Even Suidobashi doesn't claim it's an acronym, it's just derived from the name of the lead designer, and their own website is inconsistent in its own capitalization.

Yes, it is.

You do realize the very preview image of the video you posted, as well as that entire website in general, does not capitalize the name, right?

[The Corparation]

IN theory yes. In practice they weren't the most useful thing, they weren't that resistant to enemy fire, with the control cables being especially vulnerable to damage.

Well, if we strap em to today's RC vehicles wouldn't we have a Goliath 2? Oh wait, we already have those expensive's RC. It's called UAV's

True, modern day RC technology would make them more practical, and the control circuits would be pretty cheap. At the time though Germany used cables to relay the commands which sucked. Basic idea of them is sound though.

UAVs are an entirely different story though.

[Altito Asmoro]

Yes, it is.

You do realize the very preview image of the video you posted, as well as that entire website in general, does not capitalize the name, right?

The titles, yes. The other is not.