NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #4

[Gallia-]

I would rather compare it to DCL, tbh.

[The Kievan People]

"Paket" is really the name for the entire Russian system. The torpedo is Paket-NK, the sonar is Paket-AE, etc.

[Gallia-]

Oh, I see.

[Imperializt Russia]

Anthrax spores can persist in the soil in a dangerous state for decades. It's also a bastard to get rid of them once they're there unless the weather and natural climate cooperates perfectly.

Use denser than air oil-like chemical weapons for enemy supply depots. VX is pretty much optimal for this.

I already use VX heavily for things like that. Rustonian (that's my nation) doctrine calls for unrestrained use of chemical weapons in wartime; VX, mustard gas, phosgene, and sarin being the most commonly used.

I was just thinking of using bioweapons, such as anthrax or perhaps pneumonic plague infected fleas or rats as a way to deny an enemy an area long term.

VX will already do that wonderfully.
Bioweapons are just unpredictable.

As a note, mustard gas and phosgene, whilst perfectly terrifying in their own right from their WWI reputation, aren't especially effective agents - especially alongside VX and sarin.

It'd be much easier to simply issue MANPADS to your company HQ and have them use it.

So issue individual MANPADS to the Company Chief, Assistant, both Medics, the Provisions Commissar, and the Forward Observation Commander?

The Forward Observation Commander probably has observation to do. The Commissar has dissidents to execute, the medics people to treat and the Company Chief has a company to command.

You do want MANPADS, but not that low. Issue a platoon of MANPADS to the Battalion, with additional anti-air assets like dedicated SAM vehicles and SPAAGs at the Regiment (and of course, more MANPADS).

I have an NGO whose job is to assist people with the environmetnal damage caused by wars, but it does not as such complain/protest about things.

Doesn't it financially cheat by earning donations every RL day, and somehow all of it's donations are stored as liquid assets?

one and done. Now would it be cost effective?

You can kill with one bullet.

You can kill with one bullet with Hague-compliant munitions.
You still have to expend a quarter million to hit someone.

[The Kievan People]

Mustard gas is still one of the better chemical weapons. Acts on skin + there is no effective post-exposure treatment, anyone caught without full protective gear will become a casualty. It is also really, really cheap to manufacture.

[Immoren]

So at company level, I've got this so far:

HQ:

1x Company Chief w/radiotelephone
1x Company Assistant w/radiotelephone
1x Provisions Commissar (Equivalent of Quartermaster)
1x Forward Observation Commander w/radiotelephone
2x Medics w/radiotelephone

3x 52-man platoons
1x anti-tank squad
1x HMG squad
1x Sniper team

Does that sound alright?

Needs 2-3 Forward observer teams.

The Forward Observation Commander probably has observation to do.

Actually I forgot to mention in post that The Forward Observer Commander I mentioned wouldn't do much forward observing, beyond what he can see from COy command position, but his job is to plan usage of company's fire support resources and divide rights to wield certain artillery and mortar units, Basically what his superior has allocated to him, between his men (company's forward observer) and perhaps retaining some rights to him.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

My Carrier tactical bomber has been overlooked

Here's my little submission; the Ravorn FB18 "Raider"

Originally designed as a fighter-bomber in 1971, the plane was beset by problems with control and stability in sharp maneuvers, eventually computing caught up and the MKIB was a frontline bomber in the 1983 Southern War which initially saw on the first three days of hostilies, good success againts Tarkanese emplacements but after the downing of 3 FB18s, they became reserved, only used when the airspace was secure. In 1995, the design was updated in the MkII which was 1t too heavy for the catapults and elevators of the Dresburg Class Carriers but saw service in land based naval squadrons and later on the Albatross Class Supercarriers. Mk III was designed alongside the MKII as a reconnaissance aircraft, still in service for monitoring EEZ violations. MkIV and MKV came into being in 1999 as a dedicated tactical bomber and a dual seater trainer craft respectfully. both necessitated a rebuilt forward fuselage for both new models with their two man crews. In 2008 the MkIIa saw a huge upgrade in MkVI which is intended for service for the Albatross subclass, the larger Consort Class, able to carry slightly heaveir munitions (750kg more) as well as a updated engine, giving 25 more knots of maximum airspeed and 39km extra range. Included with updated electronics, it is expected that the MkVI will gradually replace the MkII and MkIIA in frontline service by 2018 and be in service till 2030. In 2013, 52 MkVI Raiders were ordered by the Republic of Hayanba which saw service on the ASW Carrier Ryujin and in various Naval airbases on the coast.

General characteristics FB18 Mk II
Crew: 1
Length: 54 ft 1 in (16.48 m)
Wingspan: 33 ft 7 in (10.25 m)
Width: 24 ft (7.31 m) wings folded
Height: 16 ft 1 in (3.91 m) (not including landing gear)
Empty weight: 19,250 lb (8,950 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 47,300 lb (21,500 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Beaufor GPJE431-A non-afterburning turbofan engine, 16,075 lbf (71.5 kN) thrust
Performance
Maximum speed: 675 kn (781 mph; 1,249 km/h) at Sea level
Range: 1,070 nmi; 1,231 mi (1,981 km) maximum internal fuel
Ferry range: 1,342 nmi; 1,544 mi (2,485 km) with maximum internal and external fuel
Take-off run: 1,950 ft (594.5 m) at 47,300 lb (21,500 kg) Without Catapult assist
Armament
Guns: 4× M213 18 mm (0.72 in) rotary cannon with 300 rounds each
Hardpoints: 6× under-wing and 2× fuselage pylon stations (Light missiles only) with a capacity of 15,000 lb (6,803.9 kg) total capacity,with provisions to carry combinations of:
Missiles:
4× AAM
or
2× ARM
or
2x Air launched torpedoes
or
2x 1500L drop tanks
or
4x laser-guided bombs
or
4xSmart depth charges

Other: 2x 1500L drop tanks

http://imageshack.us/a/img46/5981/xwsa.png

[Imperializt Russia]

Mustard gas is still one of the better chemical weapons. Acts on skin + there is no effective post-exposure treatment, anyone caught without full protective gear will become a casualty. It is also really, really cheap to manufacture.

You can decently survive mustard gas exposure by pissing into a hanky and breathing through it (obviously whilst running away from the noxious cloud coming towards you).

You'll obviously have some skin burns, but your lungs won't be filling with acid and blood.

[Triplebaconation]

You must have a pretty bizarre definition of decent.

[The Kievan People]

Mustard gas is still one of the better chemical weapons. Acts on skin + there is no effective post-exposure treatment, anyone caught without full protective gear will become a casualty. It is also really, really cheap to manufacture.

You can decently survive mustard gas exposure by pissing into a hanky and breathing through it (obviously whilst running away from the noxious cloud coming towards you).

You'll obviously have some skin burns, but your lungs won't be filling with acid and blood.

So?

Who cares if it kills? Mustard gas burns are debilitating and can take a soldier off the front for weeks, months or even permanently. This is as good as dead.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

Somethings better than nothing Would rather feel like I was doing something to survive than to lay down and take it

[Triplebaconation]

Obviously it's better to run away than piss in a hanky then run away.

[The Kievan People]

Somethings better than nothing Would rather feel like I was doing something to survive than to lay down and take it

Mustard gas doesn't normally kill by inhalation. Samoz is actually thinking of Phosgene.

It is a skin contact agent. I hear pouring bleach all over yourself can help though.

[Anacasppia]

Arleigh Burke for NS - somewhat lengthened, 128 VLS cells, low observable hull and superstructure constructed of 'sandwich composite', nuclear propulsion, and 'dual band' AESA radar Y/N?

In any case, by this point I suppose the end product could hardly be called an Arleigh Burke anymore...it would be more of 'a destroyer possessing armament vaguely similar to the Burke' or generic 'NS missile barge'.

Bump.
Also, how much of the Arleigh Burke's weight (or barring that, what percentage of a generic, steel destroyer's weight) is made up by the hull and superstructure?

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

That'd be the "light" displacement essentially, it'd give you a rough estimate of 6800t (Full is 8900t), later flights of the Burkes could be around 1000t heavier

[Imperializt Russia]

Somethings better than nothing Would rather feel like I was doing something to survive than to lay down and take it

Mustard gas doesn't normally kill by inhalation. Samoz is actually thinking of Phosgene.

It is a skin contact agent. I hear pouring bleach all over yourself can help though.

Yes, you're right, phosgene or chlorine, certainly.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

Chlorine I'd imagine would be most affected by the urine trick but again, unless you can fill a ditch with urine, its a very small stopgap

[New Vihenia]

Further looking on my APS.

My consideration regarding to "low angle target tracking" other than what i previously said like some remedies one is to keep the beam off the horizon.. which i think somewhat unecessary considering that the beam should be narrow enough for the task without illuminating the ground and target is in very short range of 3 Km.

Hmmm Nonetheless i'm still have no idea especially in what elevation angle the target will arrive. In my view of the matter, target would be located within the same height as the beam. Thus elevation angle would be very low, even nearing zero or perhaps it'll be slightly downward if the target flying lower (Say APFSDS fired by tank in hull down position) Thus clutter will be dominant source of error which would be filtered by doppler processing. As far as i found.. the accuracy in such condition assuming the surface is rough (typical for ground) Including the multipath problem Would be around 0.1 beamwidth of the radar (radar essentials). Which according to my calculation correspond to 54 cm of azimuth error and around 70 cm's in elevation, assuming multipath still happen within the kill zone of my APS which is 200 m.

Furthermore my APS antenna is tilted upward in some degrees perhaps 5-10 degrees To reduce clutter entering the main beam.

Nonetheless i can't really model tracking loop now.. so i can't visualize how "wild" the tracker would be. However according to Skolnik's Introduction Radar System.. Chapter about Tracking radar, in Figure 5.16 Apparently within short range the radar would be able to track properly as it's now able to resolve the real target from the image.

Should the above mentioned accuracy not sufficient however i considered strategy below :

The strategy is to extend the IR sensor within the APS to help the radar resolve azimuth or elevation error. Optical sensor tend to have better azimuth and elevation accuracy. Combining this with the radar's range would help nullifying the error, especially in elevation. In the most extreme case, the radar beam is slaved to the IR sensor thus it's only serve as guidance beam that provide only range information.

The APFSDS shell inbound at Mach 6.5 at low altitude will be very hot perhaps emitting at wavelength of 1-3 Micron, my expectation is that the IR sensor can be low cost, using either QWIP or typical bandgap detector FPA consist of short wave Lead-Selenide with Mid to long wave Mercury-Cadmium Telluride.

Detection range is long.. depending on integration time (1/pixel bandwidth) and SNR. Detection range can be very long, much longer than radar but no way to tell distance.

My Expectation is that above method would brought the level of error into acceptable level (or what i considered acceptable) of

Another consideration is to operate at higher frequency. Namely 94 Ghz for even narrower beamwidth. The benefit includes more covert operations, better resolution though one pay price to reduced range performance against target. Another 1 Kw of power have to be added to bring the detection range back to 3 Km for 0.00002 Sqm target. Atmosphere might be a problem.. but well all antitank weapon also not all weather.

As for the process of capturing the missile. The first thing i looked is to reduce separation between the munitions container and the radar, so that amount of corrections necessary for the missile for getting into the beam is reduced (but i do not know how far.. need to look at the missile time constant..which i haven't do) Furthermore. Aside from having strap down "Navigation reference" unit that tell the missile before launch "how far i should steer to get into the guidance beam" It'll also have small expedient altimeter.

The altimeter will help the missile that to provide it with more detail reference height, So it'll plunge straight at the same height within the radar's phase center (Where the mainlobe originates..) The missile's task is then simplified that it'll only need to find the radar beam in azimuth sector. Once acquired, the missile can switch to ride the beam taking slightly higher altitude to ensure proper standoff is reached to detonate above the target.

[Triplebaconation]

Arleigh Burke for NS - somewhat lengthened, 128 VLS cells, low observable hull and superstructure constructed of 'sandwich composite', nuclear propulsion, and 'dual band' AESA radar Y/N?

In any case, by this point I suppose the end product could hardly be called an Arleigh Burke anymore...it would be more of 'a destroyer possessing armament vaguely similar to the Burke' or generic 'NS missile barge'.

Bump.
Also, how much of the Arleigh Burke's weight (or barring that, what percentage of a generic, steel destroyer's weight) is made up by the hull and superstructure?

You can't add heavier radar, weapons and reactors to a ship by lightening the hull.

[Anacasppia]

O:
Idk, reportedly the 'composite material' of the Visby is not only lighter for the same strength, but also allows 'a higher payload carrying capability, higher speed or longer range'.

[Yes Im Biop]

Arent there fences that a ship can drag like the Strikers passive Anti RPG fence? That probably wouldn't work with TNF seeing as everyone he faces will likely be a nuke happy as him, but don't Torpedoes kill through HE alone?

[Imperializt Russia]

Arent there fences that a ship can drag like the Strikers passive Anti RPG fence? That probably wouldn't work with TNF seeing as everyone he faces will likely be a nuke happy as him, but don't Torpedoes kill through HE alone?

Torps can kill either by penetrating an blowing a massive below-waterline hole, or they can detonate under the keel and use water pressure of the explosion to suspend the hull above bow and stern, generating large straining(?) forces to destroy the hull.

Below-keel torpedoes are very difficult to provide countermeasure or protection against.
On lighter warships, such torpedoes as the Mk48 can literally snap the ship in two.

[Lubyak]

Arent there fences that a ship can drag like the Strikers passive Anti RPG fence? That probably wouldn't work with TNF seeing as everyone he faces will likely be a nuke happy as him, but don't Torpedoes kill through HE alone?

You mean torpedo nets?

a) Those generate a lot of drag. You won't be going very fast with them.
b) They worked against torpedoes that needed to physically impact the hull. Modern torpedoes go off under the ship, so that the resultant air pocket causes the ships keel to break. A torpedo net isn't going to stop that.

[Yes Im Biop]

Arent there fences that a ship can drag like the Strikers passive Anti RPG fence? That probably wouldn't work with TNF seeing as everyone he faces will likely be a nuke happy as him, but don't Torpedoes kill through HE alone?

You mean torpedo nets?

a) Those generate a lot of drag. You won't be going very fast with them.
b) They worked against torpedoes that needed to physically impact the hull. Modern torpedoes go off under the ship, so that the resultant air pocket causes the ships keel to break. A torpedo net isn't going to stop that.

O! That's how people weaponized bubble jets.

Arent there fences that a ship can drag like the Strikers passive Anti RPG fence? That probably wouldn't work with TNF seeing as everyone he faces will likely be a nuke happy as him, but don't Torpedoes kill through HE alone?

Torps can kill either by penetrating an blowing a massive below-waterline hole, or they can detonate under the keel and use water pressure of the explosion to suspend the hull above bow and stern, generating large straining(?) forces to destroy the hull.

Below-keel torpedoes are very difficult to provide countermeasure or protection against.
On lighter warships, such torpedoes as the Mk48 can literally snap the ship in two.

That's fucking terrifying, There's gotta be an easier way to defend against them. I mean we can shoot down missiles, torpedoes (As a rule I think) Move a lot slower.

[The Nuclear Fist]

The Forward Observation Commander probably has observation to do. The Commissar has dissidents to execute, the medics people to treat and the Company Chief has a company to command.

I would just like to point out that the Provisions Commissar is the equivalent of a quartermaster, in charge of the provisions commissary, and thus a sort of logistics officer not authorized to execute people.