NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #4

[Canuckland]

So I've actually always wondered one thing about tanks and a type of gun.

Railguns/Coilguns.

So, why don't they work? I hear they require a fuckton of power.

Efficiencies, the amount of electricity needed to launch said projectile,, cooling the rails, managing to switch the coils correctly, efficiencies, power generation, efficiencies.

So, even if we possibly, some how make a Rail/Coilgun work, IRL nations would still prefer Smoothbore/Rifled guns instead?

[Aqizithiuda]

Efficiencies, the amount of electricity needed to launch said projectile,, cooling the rails, managing to switch the coils correctly, efficiencies, power generation, efficiencies.

So, even if we possibly, some how make a Rail/Coilgun work, IRL nations would still prefer Smoothbore/Rifled guns instead?

Until the technology is practical and as cheap/offers sufficient advantages to justify the cost, yes.

[Imperializt Russia]

So I've actually always wondered one thing about tanks and a type of gun.

Railguns/Coilguns.

So, why don't they work? I hear they require a fuckton of power.

Efficiencies, the amount of electricity needed to launch said projectile,, cooling the rails, managing to switch the coils correctly, efficiencies, power generation, efficiencies.

Also concerns about the multipurpose capabilities of tanks.
You've put this on, presumably to make it better at killing tanks.

How does firing a low-mass, low-calibre, high-velocity round at buildings or infantry help its requirements to engage buildings and infantry?

[Aqizithiuda]

Efficiencies, the amount of electricity needed to launch said projectile,, cooling the rails, managing to switch the coils correctly, efficiencies, power generation, efficiencies.

Also concerns about the multipurpose capabilities of tanks.
You've put this on, presumably to make it better at killing tanks.

How does firing a low-mass, low-calibre, high-velocity round at buildings or infantry help its requirements to engage buildings and infantry?

Sabot the round and have a well designed HE shell.

[Lubyak]

Am I right in saying that in the army, of all personnel about a quarter would be in actual combat formations?

Depends on a lot of things, like whether it's meant to be deployed in an expeditionary capacity (which requires more support) or it's a home-guard militia. Plus there are a lot of people in combat formations who are not meant to be combatants.

Aye, I'm just trying to get an idea for how many men I can organise into actual divisions, rather than keeping them in general administrative and support positions. My military is going to be mostly built for homeland defense and over-land invasions, and not exactly optimised for trans-ocean expeditions.

[Registug]

Efficiencies, the amount of electricity needed to launch said projectile,, cooling the rails, managing to switch the coils correctly, efficiencies, power generation, efficiencies.

Also concerns about the multipurpose capabilities of tanks.
You've put this on, presumably to make it better at killing tanks.

How does firing a low-mass, low-calibre, high-velocity round at buildings or infantry help its requirements to engage buildings and infantry?

If it relies on magnets to create velocity, couldn't you adjust the rate at which the magnets alternate?

[Imperializt Russia]

Also concerns about the multipurpose capabilities of tanks.
You've put this on, presumably to make it better at killing tanks.

How does firing a low-mass, low-calibre, high-velocity round at buildings or infantry help its requirements to engage buildings and infantry?

If it relies on magnets to create velocity, couldn't you adjust the rate at which the magnets alternate?

Yes. But remember all of this requires power, and lots of it.

Each 120mm shell contains, in stored chemical energy, 12MJ ready to be dispensed pretty much on demand.
This means that your railgun tank, with its <1MW engine, has to have the capacity to generate 12MJ per shot to match its performance (obviously requiring somewhat more than 12MJ to actually get that in ME). Surely, part of the point of such a weapon is to better the effects of chemical-driven guns.

When sat stationary, you would have a rate of fire of 5rpm, running everything else off the APU.

[Vitaphone Racing]

IIRC my last calculations on this topic, you need an 8MW engine and a kickass capacitor to match current conventional gun performance with a railgun.

[Triplebaconation]

??? Wouldn't it take 0 to not very many MW for a railgun to match current gun performance???

[Imperializt Russia]

IIRC my last calculations on this topic, you need an 8MW engine and a kickass capacitor to match current conventional gun performance with a railgun.

~10,750 horsepower?

[Vitaphone Racing]

IIRC my last calculations on this topic, you need an 8MW engine and a kickass capacitor to match current conventional gun performance with a railgun.

~10,750 horsepower?

Yeah. Or some ridiculous figure like that. I can't find the post I wrote it on but, yeah, it's high. And that's with less than 10 seconds in between shots.

[Triplebaconation]

can someone please explain why a railgun needs megawatts to match conventional gun performance

[Imperializt Russia]

can someone please explain why a railgun needs megawatts to match conventional gun performance

The Railgun needs megajoules. In order to match conventional guns in performance (which also includes rate of fire), they need to be able to generate 10+ MJ repeatedly, several times a minute.

This requires a whacking great engine capable of providing megawatts of power to repeatedly deliver 10+MJ, plus provide engine power.

[Triplebaconation]

On a science fiction railgun maybe. On a multi-megajoule railgun constrained by current or projected materials science the projectile will be injected at high velocities by either conventional propellant or a light gas gun to minimize rail erosion and prevent welding.

So a railgun matching conventional gun performance is kind of dumb.

Note that this nearly universally ignored fact makes railguns even worse for tanks, not to mention small arms.

[Imperializt Russia]

I thought light gas guns were in some way impractical or problematic for armoured vehicles?

[Triplebaconation]

Note that this nearly universally ignored fact makes railguns even worse for tanks, not to mention small arms.

Railguns are used in laboratories, not armored vehicles.

I believe the actual weapon "prototypes" use conventional propellants.

[Allanea]

Okay people.

As some of you know, my ground forces rely mostly on the division-regiment structure (basically I rip off Soviet ORBATs and strategy, and add to them the use of modern technology and UGVs/UAVs/cruise missiles, where for example where the Soviets had 4 SSM launchers I have cruise missile launchers instead, things like this).

Now I come to you with a question:

In a military force whose chief goal is combat against a parity opponent (i.e. an opponent equipped with fully-armed, reasonable, MT/PMT armed forces), in a broadly European/temperate zone environment and/or a northern European environment), what is better:

1. Issuing a mechanized infantry division 150 BMP-3s and 300 wheeled APCs

or

2. Having 3 BMP regiments?

If I understand correctly, the reason that the Soviets had 2 BTR regiments was primarily the additional expense and complexity involved in fielding more BMPs.

I would prefer, in theory, to field more BMPs, and relegate wheeled vehicles to auxiliary roles (there are things a BMP chassis just can't do well, like being a chassis for a RADAR or a 2nd-echelon vehicle, where a BTR would be better). It seems rational that BMPs would be better at tactical and operational maneuver roles and actual combat against a parity opponent where they'd need every bit of firepower they can bring out.

[Imperializt Russia]

Because I simply have no idea (being in the exact same force structure and situation as yourself), I chose to simply change the ratio to two BMP regiments versus one BTR regiment acting in reserve.
This way, I can swing it as either adding in low-weight wheeled vehicles more suitable for COIN, or as an IC misunderstanding of why the Soviets had such a force composition.

[Ea90]

I would say 3 BMP regiments.

[Allanea]

I simply RP my country sucking at COIN.

[Transnapastain]

I would say 3 BMP regiments.

I would agree, if only because it seems to me you're going to get a hell of a lot more use in a lot more situations out of the BMP-3's than you will with BTR's. The BMP-3 is better equipped to deal with the kinds of threats its going to face on the battlefield (aside from aircraft, I suppose)

I'd think that, if you can afford it, that would be the best option.

[Ea90]

tbf the BMP chassis is p. damn versatile

[Vitaphone Racing]

can someone please explain why a railgun needs megawatts to match conventional gun performance

You'll see why when you work out the time the projectile spends undergoing acceleration, and the subsequent voltage and current it requires.

Having a railgun which only serves to slightly boost the performance of a conventional gun is kinda dumb and pointless.

[Tarnslavia]

Hey guys I'm looking through Russian attack helicopters and I'm torn between the Mil-Mi 28 and the Kamov Ka-50. I'm just not sure which one is superior. Also I'm using the T-80 although I was reading and was upset to hear that it did preform well back in Grozny although I'm unsure if his is due to the fact that the Russians used it in a role it wasn't suited for or that it is just a not a good tank.

[East Vlaricstan]

Hey guys I'm looking through Russian attack helicopters and I'm torn between the Mil-Mi 28 and the Kamov Ka-50. I'm just not sure which one is superior. Also I'm using the T-80 although I was reading and was upset to hear that it did preform well back in Grozny although I'm unsure if his is due to the fact that the Russians used it in a role it wasn't suited for or that it is just a not a good tank.

Russia botched Grozny by driving tanks into places where they could be attacked from and they could not fight back, aka urban areas. T-80 is a fine tank, and it can do well against late 80s to early 00s tanks, IIRC.