Your Nation's Air Force Mark II:

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Planes, torpedoes, naval mines.

All solid options.

Speaking of, are aircraft-deployed torpedoes still a valid option? Since Harpoons and KH-22s could at least possibly get shot out of the sky by some kind of CIWS, would an aircraft-launched torpedo have any more success? Ship-launched?

Gun CIWS is literally for the comfort of the crew. You'd be extraordinarily lucky to score more than two kills with it.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

So A tactical bomber capable of holding 10 skinnier guided bombs for anti vehicle and anti building purposes in a enclosed bomb bay center mass on the plane. Now my question is should I mount any more munitions on the wings or should I mount fuel pods? Should I even bother with a cannon? Its not necessarily a new jet of any sorts I mean its comparable to a basic design of the F-4 Phantom but for a anti ground quick support sort of role.

Always add a cannon, they may come in handy. The US learned the hard way in Vietnam. Most hardpoints have the plumbing to mount fuel tanks, but can also carry munitions on the same hardpoint.

The four week life expectancy of the entire A-10 fleet in case of Fulda Gap going hot says otherwise. Helmet mounted qeueing systems, R-73, AIM-9X and other supermanoeuvreable off-boresight SRAAM's enabling a pilot to literally do a parthian shot over their shoulders was arguably the final death-knell for the airborne gun being a useful tool vs other aircraft. On the ground the stable, rotating, guided gun platform that is the Pantsir-S1 and short range SAM's like Crotale, Tor and Tunguska basically relegated the Thunderbolt II to above and beyond the reach of its highly unstable, linear and unguided GAU-8, and if its slinging AGM's all day erryday a Typhoon with 18 Brimstones can do the job better, faster and with a lot more chance at getting out alive.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Damn that's a good looking plane.

Thanks. :)

Here's a squadron logo for a WIP Cold War nuclear bombardment wing that uses the Sky Dart.

That's actually awesome... _{and I have none even though I should, zetsubou shita!}

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I find the lack of kamikaze planes in this thread disturbing also with that said...


there is nothing more effective then attaching as many M112 C4 blocks as possible to a wooden-frame MiG-3 carrying bombs containing flammable liquid huehuehueheuehuueueuehueeueueeeeeeeeeee

Say hello to the modern, guided, supermanoeuverable wide-off-boresight locking plane-severing kamikaze.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

yes you could certainly get by without them.

but the question is why would you willingly give up such an effective tool?

Because I have a defense only policy. Sweden seems to get along well enough without any.

That until our Överbefälhavare bluntly states that he cannot hold Stockholm, the capitol against an invader for more than a single week, and then he cannot defend any other location in Sweden at all.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

That until our Överbefälhavare bluntly states that he cannot hold Stockholm, the capitol against an invader for more than a single week, and then he cannot defend any other location in Sweden at all.

Sweden needs to bring back brigade combat teams or whatever.

Like fifty of them god bless.

Needs to bring back Arméfördelning and the 850,000 men army from 1988.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I know it ain't much but still I like to use Soviet Cold War era planes and helicopters.

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=ars ... /id=565833

What do you guys think?

Literally saying nothing beyond "WOOHOO B-52'S, SU-27'S and MI-24'S!!!1112271´377611!!!eleventen!!"

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Anyone have thoughts on Su-33 fighter aircraft?

On the fun note, there's a Chinese attempted replica of Su-33 called Shenyang J-15. Typical PLA copies of Soviet/Russian hardwares.

It's an Su-27 with canards and a tailhook. What's not to love?

It's not NATF. >.>

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I'll put my AF Factbook because I have to many planes :v

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=kare ... /id=581573

Monseigneur, it is
1) In Spanish. This thread understands only Anglo-Saxon.
2) All the wannabe logisticians in this thread are crying silent distilled tears of pure rage all over their keyboards (or loling).

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

1. So you still have fragments, just not very effective fragments.
2. The question is how this is accomplished. The RPG-7 thermobaric grenade has a kill radius of 10 meters. It weighs 4.5 kilos and only flies out to 200 meters. The frag grenade for the same RPG... has similar results, but weighs two kilos and flies to four hundred meters effective range. Equally, a 155mm shell (smaller than 17 cm) will have a kill radius of 50 meters on infantry and 30m on tanks. [!]

This fails to work on a fundamental level.

We sacrificed fragments for blast, choke and incendiary capability at the cost of slightly increased weight.
Fragments can be stopped by walls and objects. Thermobaric explosives propagate the blast wave more efficiently and lethally than fragment HE.

Just drop napalm on things.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

No, it is not. Thermobarics don't really spread over a comparable area to napalm, not are they good at actually igniting things (because of their consumption of oxygen, i.e. things hit with thermobaric often don't actually keep burnin).

I said Thermobaric thermite.

The blast will deprive your flame of oxygen and thus killing it. Adding thermite to any explosive that nicks oxygen is thus entirely pointless excess weight.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

If Kaltland wants to use a weapon system that isn't really effective and would find him wanting in a war against anyone who knows what they're talking about, good for him. Someone has to lose these wars, right?

Not effective? Yea... We will see what happens when your soldiers get 17cm Thermobaric thermite shell pinpoint on top of them blowing them into bits, burning into char some others, collapsing the lungs of others, producing 3rd degree burns on others and everything in between. Then you can come back and tell me how some more how ineffective Kaltland's weaponry is.

Let's see how well your airplanes, missiles, ships, tanks,etc... (basically everything you have) do against my all-purpose ballistic capable rockets that can hit you anywhere your assets may hide in the planet as far down as the bottom of the Mariana trench and as high up as anywhere in space. Kaltland has the satellites and the electromagnetic coverage of the entire planet and well into deep space tracking everything around the globe from below the ocean to the previously mentioned deep space.
I'm making this up but all this is armament and equipment that is feasible with current technology. I'm not talking about Star Trek spaceships with photon weaponry here. I'm still in the realm of what is possible in current reality. I don't believe this thread is against that.

Rockets trump everything. Live with it. They are the fastest kind of armament outside of lasers and railguns which are both currently in the early stages. They kind be mass produced faster than any ship or aircraft or tank.

Your army would never even make it to the island continent of Kaltland. And if they do they will meet experience hell and wish they never landed ashore.

PS: We have aircraft but they are transport aircraft similar to the US Osprey in function for equipment and personnel transportation. They also use rocket engines. They can accommodate one MBT in the middle with troops on each side.
Finally we have tanker and strategic airlift cargo aircraft both with a maximum takeoff weight of 1000 tonnes.
Regardless they carry internally mounted horizontal rocket launch systems that can be used for both defensive and offensive purposes if necessary.

You know one thing about tossing ballistic missiles about like candy? You get to be on the jolly receiving end of people's nuclear arsenals or you end up with nobody rping with you because you are iwin all over. Iwin is not how collaborative roleplaying works.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Not effective? Yea... We will see what happens when your soldiers get 17cm Thermobaric thermite shell pinpoint on top of them blowing them into bits, burning into char some others, collapsing the lungs of others, producing 3rd degree burns on others and everything in between. Then you can come back and tell me how some more how ineffective Kaltland's weaponry is.

Let's see how well your airplanes, missiles, ships, tanks,etc... (basically everything you have) do against my all-purpose ballistic capable rockets that can hit you anywhere your assets may hide in the planet as far down as the bottom of the Mariana trench and as high up as anywhere in space. Kaltland has the satellites and the electromagnetic coverage of the entire planet and well into deep space tracking everything around the globe from below the ocean to the previously mentioned deep space.
I'm making this up but all this is armament and equipment that is feasible with current technology. I'm not talking about Star Trek spaceships with photon weaponry here. I'm still in the realm of what is possible in current reality. I don't believe this thread is against that.

Rockets trump everything. Live with it. They are the fastest kind of armament outside of lasers and railguns which are both currently in the early stages. They kind be mass produced faster than any ship or aircraft or tank.

Your army would never even make it to the island continent of Kaltland. And if they do they will meet experience hell and wish they never landed ashore.

PS: We have aircraft but they are transport aircraft similar to the US Osprey in function for equipment and personnel transportation. They also use rocket engines. They can accommodate one MBT in the middle with troops on each side.
Finally we have tanker and strategic airlift cargo aircraft both with a maximum takeoff weight of 1000 tonnes.
Regardless they carry internally mounted horizontal rocket launch systems that can be used for both defensive and offensive purposes if necessary.

You don't know how any of this works.

You don't just get to say, "nuh uh it totally works becuz I say so". Thermobaric thermite does not work the way you think it does, as you've been told countless times by people who to a man(or woman) know much, much more than you on the subject.. And you don't get to say, "Does so!" during a war with someone. No, both ICly and OOCly, your military doesn't present anything close to a threat, in any circumstance, to mine.

You could advice without the... dickwaving? It's not like it is up to you that anybody in here accepts the supposed "might" of any other player.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

You could advice without the... dickwaving? It's not like it is up to you that anybody in here accepts the supposed "might" of any other player.

If you read what he wrote, he started the dickwaving. Just sayin' how it is.

And do we really have to dickwave back just because in an never ending cycle of tu quoque?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Not strictly speaking air force, but it am planes.

The QEII class can carry 40 aircraft. I'm not sure what aircraft a Carrier Air Wing should have, so here's my approximation for a kinda-sorta-Yuropoor nation running a CVBG as below:

1x QEII Class
1x Type 45 Class
5x FREMM (2x ASW, 3x Multi Role)
2x Fleet Submarines

Mounted on Carrier:
No.1 Strike Squadron:

No.1 Flight: 4 Dassault Rafaels
No.2 Flight: 4 Dassault Rafaels
No.3 Flight: 4 Dassault Rafaels

No.2 Strike Squadron:

No.1 Flight: 4 Dassault Rafaels
No.2 Flight: 4 Dassault Rafaels
No.3 Flight: 4 Dassault Rafaels

No.3 Support Squadron:

No.1 Radar Support Flight: 3x Carrier-borne AWACs (is that a thing?)
No.2 Electronic Warfare Flight: 4x Electronic Warfare thingies, like Tornado ECRs? (is SEAD even a thing at sea? Do I need specialist aircraft for that?)

No.4 Rotary Squadron:

No.1 ASW Flight: 3x Lynx Wildcat
No.2 ASW Flight: 3x Lynx Wildcat
No.3 Support Flight: 3x NH90

Onboard Other Vessels:
Not!Type 45 Destroyer:

2x Lynx Wildcat

5x not!FREMM Frigates:

1x NH90 each

I'm going to suggest that, as standard, a fleet would have a single Carrier!AWACS airborne continuously if a threat was likely, otherwise merely two planes in the air for 4hrs at a time before landing and swapping over, so the carrier alternates daily between each Squadron.

x9 R/1280 for your carrier air wing (steep ballistic trajectory)
x43 R/640 for your carrier air craft (direct trajectory)

Both programmed for Time-On-Target.

You are extremely lucky nobody really follows French nuclear policy. Otherwise, one carrier for about a hundred million of your population? Would you make that tradeoff? If Arlelli and Trescia was following Force de Frappe policy you'd have half his nuclear arsenal heading your way the second he confirms your missiles heading his way.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

You are extremely lucky nobody really follows French nuclear policy. Otherwise, one carrier for about a hundred million of your population? Would you make that tradeoff? If Arlelli and Trescia was following Force de Frappe policy you'd have half his nuclear arsenal heading your way the second he confirms your missiles heading his way.

I made my reply and you made yours.
I have answers but I don't want to derail this thread deeper than my response to him has already done. I just responded to let him know how futile ships and aircraft are for a nation that only wishes to defend itself and is not interested in attacking other nations.

Still, remember that cruise missiles can carry nuclear warheads too and I don't think French commanders would go bonkers and nuclear over that.

Let's not bring up the fact that your "reply" was entirely unneeded dickwaving.
Oh they would. They would fire countervalue in response to any credible threat the Soviet Union made on the continued survival of the French state, such as an invasion. Considering your esteemed (and recently highly aggressive) behaviour so far I would fire countervalue against you as well. Would a couple of hundred million of your population be worth launching your worthless ballistic missiles? You have 15 minutes.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Even if they would not go full release - which I think most government wouldn't, this would of course lead the enemy to start nuclear strikes on all your military forces. This would be almost guaranteed to be devastating and lead to strategic nuclear exchange.

88 nuclear weapons per enemy division, a dozen for every nuclear silo, eight for every aircraft carrier, at least one nuclear depth charge for every submarine, and infiltrators armed with subkiloton nuclear charges... these are the things that Cold War planners viewed as inherent in a limited - not even a "strategic" nuclear conflict.

This would almost inevitably lead to a full nuclear exchange.

This is if cruise missiles are carrying nuclear warheads.

Yeah, but you included ballistic missiles, guess what everybody's reaction to getting long-range ballistic missiles fired at them will be, at the minimum? "Yup, thank you very much. I'll go open the can of worms and authorize the deployment of my VX and tactical nuclear stores." and at worst you get a full countervalue strike launched at you.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Yeah, but you included ballistic missiles, guess what everybody's reaction to getting long-range ballistic missiles fired at them will be, at the minimum? "Yup, thank you very much. I'll go open the can of worms and authorize the deployment of my VX and tactical nuclear stores." and at worst you get a full countervalue strike launched at you.

I doubt that's actually true. At any rate if the missiles are conventional it's all okay I guess.\

(Though I'd note they're very likely to miss.)

Yeah but, is anybody willing to bet on whether or not they're conventional or not in the limited timespan they've got? At the very least if I would find missiles of that kind heading for Pola, ostensibly for my carrier bases I'd start considering counterforce options.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Yeah but, is anybody willing to bet on whether or not they're conventional or not?

Literally any weapon could actually be secretly nuclear.

Enemy 155mm artillery could be carrying nuclear charges. ALCMs could be carrying 150-kiloton nukes. Enemy bombers over your country could be carrying megaton-grade nukes.

On this logic as soon as you see weapons systems from a nuclear country being fired you should immediately go FULL RELEASE.

This is of course not actually a thing.

Allanea do you even context. Intercontinental ballistic missiles, conventional or not heading for carrier bases and anybody with a shred of braincells would start readying counterforce assets, artillery strikes with tactical warheads are not even in the same league as a threat of that level.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Well it basically comes down to if you want APG-65 or Blue Vixen.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

To be fair, every once in a great while the stars align and an older airframe comes out on top over a much newer one.

(Image)
(Image)

f-4 > frog plane

McDonnell Douglas 1958 > Dassault Aviation 1986

Oh lol, Frisian Flag 2008. I knew I knew that Geschwader Richthoven insignia from somewhere.

No, because Pierre Sprey is dumb.

Heard you talking shit like I wouldn't find out.

The best airforce is a swarm of F-16s armed only with guns and boundless optimism.

"General Sir... why are we always on the defensive versus those Flankers and Fulcrums? They always spam us with their bloody Adder's and then we have to fucking evade."

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

We most commonly use MiG 29 fighter-jets, but for recon missions we use American-made stealth planes.
Our logo:
(Image)

When we use Helicopters (and we use them rarely) we use standard Nato-Issue transport helicopters. *insert name here, its a common brand*. For fighting we only use Jets.

For Cargo transport the Mil-Mi 26 helicopter

And then... ABH Lynx Wildcat with Starstreak derps you in the face erryday of the year. :V

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

And then... ABH Lynx Wildcat with Starstreak derps you in the face erryday of the year. :V

lol m9, we have 59 million soldiers and counting. Also we have a territory that is LITERALLY ALL of two continets.
As Christ the Redeemer would say.

Oh hello Eritrea.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Oh hello Eritrea.

Wot?

Or alternatively, the last time numberwanking was tried irl. I'm going to need more ammunition.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Or alternatively, the last time numberwanking was tried irl. I'm going to need more ammunition.

Oh yeah, high tech advancement plus territory of both ALL STATES of Europe and Africa... compulsory military service,
A large A.F. population... yet you cry "NUMBERWAAAANK", omfg.

>59 million troops
>high tech
>respectable even
Try again m8.