NationStates

The Kievan People wrote:

Radictistan wrote:I don't like the idea of stealth anything operating as far forward as attack helicopters due, and there's little point in radar stealth when you're flying nape-of-the-earth at relatively low speeds.

Is look-down-shoot-down radar not a thing?

Triplebaconation wrote:

Gallia- wrote:
Well, an industrial society is where 99% of humans live so I guess we can just ignore the mass genocide. Nbd, humans are already planning it anyway.

A proper Strossian singularity would decide it needs coconuts more than a few cavemen pretty quickly.

Firmador wrote:So bad or good weather for a strategic-sized air operation?

And random thought:

Say a company of my men runs into another enemy force, estimated to be company level. They control an area we need to pass, and because its also a convoy lane we've been given the order to secure it and not bypass. They enemy holds the high ground on the right side of the road, which is also a wooded patch.

Would it be realistic to set up your company outside the wooded high ground your enemy holds, fire WP smoke shells into the rear of the forest, have them ignite a forest fire that would force the enemy from cover? Or would once the WP evaporates the fire would not continue on its own momentum?

The Akasha Colony wrote:

Firmador wrote:So bad or good weather for a strategic-sized air operation?

And random thought:

Say a company of my men runs into another enemy force, estimated to be company level. They control an area we need to pass, and because its also a convoy lane we've been given the order to secure it and not bypass. They enemy holds the high ground on the right side of the road, which is also a wooded patch.

Would it be realistic to set up your company outside the wooded high ground your enemy holds, fire WP smoke shells into the rear of the forest, have them ignite a forest fire that would force the enemy from cover? Or would once the WP evaporates the fire would not continue on its own momentum?

Starting a forest fire right near a road you need to control is a bad idea. Depending on weather conditions, the fire could take either too long to spread or spread too rapidly and spiral out of control... right next to the road you need to use.

Firmador wrote:

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Starting a forest fire right near a road you need to control is a bad idea. Depending on weather conditions, the fire could take either too long to spread or spread too rapidly and spiral out of control... right next to the road you need to use.

So it would be a tactic reserved for more open battlefields?

The Kievan People wrote:

Radictistan wrote:I don't like the idea of stealth anything operating as far forward as attack helicopters due, and there's little point in radar stealth when you're flying nape-of-the-earth at relatively low speeds.

Is look-down-shoot-down radar not a thing?

Firmador wrote:So it would be a tactic reserved for more open battlefields?

Gallia- wrote:

Oaledonia wrote:Galla, sometimes I think you only think in 2D :<

I think in 4D. black white hot cold

AIs are just 2D.

On or off.

Kouralia wrote:Does anyone know the difference in NATO terminology between Special Forces and Special Operations Forces? It seems APP-6A differentiates between them.

Triplebaconation wrote:

Kouralia wrote:Does anyone know the difference in NATO terminology between Special Forces and Special Operations Forces? It seems APP-6A differentiates between them.

APP-6A differentiates between everything.



The truth is out there.

Kouralia wrote:

Triplebaconation wrote:
APP-6A differentiates between everything.



The truth is out there.

Okay... So that's an Unknown, Air/Space Forces... I got nothing.

Someone made the NATO symbol for an alien space ship?

Gallia- wrote:(Image)

My favourite.

Kouralia wrote:Okay... So that's an Unknown, Air/Space Forces... I got nothing.

Someone made the NATO symbol for an alien space ship?

It's Unknown - Space Station

Kouralia wrote:

Gallia- wrote:(Image)

My favourite.



It's Unknown - Space Station

Oh, cool. Is there a website which has the full collection of symbols on it, as Wiki is lacking in some regards.

Gallia- wrote:That's really :Interbellum:.

Gallia- wrote:No.

Triplebaconation wrote:

Firmador wrote:
Alrighty, thank you. I always thought bad weather would obstruct

Bad weather will degrade radar and IR to some extent, plus at the low altitudes you'd expect for an airfield attack vision and hearing are still important. The chances of encountering defending patrols is smaller.

Historically bad weather has been preferred for low-level attacks - even before the proliferation of very expensive all-weather navigation and targeting aids, which would seem to be wasted if only used on clear nights.

Firmador wrote:So bad or good weather for a strategic-sized air operation?

Gallia- wrote:The NATO version is actually less extensive.

Velkanika wrote:

Triplebaconation wrote:
Bad weather will degrade radar and IR to some extent, plus at the low altitudes you'd expect for an airfield attack vision and hearing are still important. The chances of encountering defending patrols is smaller.

Historically bad weather has been preferred for low-level attacks - even before the proliferation of very expensive all-weather navigation and targeting aids, which would seem to be wasted if only used on clear nights.

You do not want to fly below 2,000 feet above ground level in bad weather, it's extremely dangerous at best and probably suicidal. Between microbursts, ridiculously bad turbulence, and the general lack of visibility you better have one hell of a pilot if you plan on sending an aircraft toting a bomb load through that.

Firmador wrote:So bad or good weather for a strategic-sized air operation?

It could be useful to achieve tactical surprise at serious risk of death if a pilot has to fly through much more then a light rain storm while simultaneously trying not to catch a SAM.