NS Military Realism Mk. 7: NO

[Immoren]

Formations as not!tag.

Regional Forces

• 4 Area Corps
• Separate/Support Units

Operative Force

• 1 Operative Corps
• Separate/Support Units

Area Corps

• 2-6 Military Districts
• 1-2Mechanized Brigade
• Separate/Support Units

Operative Corps

• 2 Armoured Division
• 2 Mechanized Division
• 1 Vertical Envelopement Division
• Separate/Support Units

Military District

• 2-6 Motorized Brigades
• 1-3 Mechanized Battlegroups
• Separate/Support Units

Armoured Division

• 3 Armoured Brigade
• Armoured Battlegroup
• Separate/Support Units

Mechanized Division

• 3 Mechanized Brigade
• Armoured Battlegroup
• Separate/Support Units

Vertical Envelopement Division Division

• 2 Air Assault Brigade
• Airborne Brigade
• Ground Attack Squadron
• Separate/Support Units

[Yukonastan]

Realism discussion over in CYOE, if you want some entertainment. I'm promoting the benefits of the Mk1 eyeball for manned fighters.

[Bratislavskaya]

tag

[Yukonastan]

tag

must be moar than a tag i'm afraid.

describe how a tactical nuclear strike can be survived in a trench or something pls. don't want you getting banish for just tagging.

[Oaledonia]

Yo dawgz. How fast could one make a hydrofoil in say, 20 years if they want it to go 3fast5me?

[The Corparation]

Yo dawgz. How be could one make a hydrofoil in say, 20 years if they want it to go 3fast5me?

Look at the US Navy's Pegasus class. You can do it not 20 years ahead but 40 years back.

[Oaledonia]

Yo dawgz. How be could one make a hydrofoil in say, 20 years if they want it to go 3fast5me?

Look at the US Navy's Pegasus class. You can do it not 20 years ahead but 40 years back.

I was looking at that. Could something the size of Shimakaze (in terms of weight) be a fast hydrofoil in 20 years advancements? Maybe even nuclear powered?

[Gallia-]

No.

You'd want a hovercraft like Bora-class.

edit: Anyway 40 knots is fast enough, why would you want to go faster? Plan on racing drag LCS or something?

[Oaledonia]

No.

You'd want a hovercraft like Bora-class.

edit: Anyway 40 knots is fast enough, why would you want to go faster? Plan on racing drag LCS or something?

I wanna beat sanic.

How big can it get then? At least a small frigate?

[Gallia-]

No.

You'd want a hovercraft like Bora-class.

edit: Anyway 40 knots is fast enough, why would you want to go faster? Plan on racing drag LCS or something?

I wanna beat sanic.

How big can it get then? At least a small frigate?

The US Navy was looking at 3 kt ASW frigates.

Russia just made a glorified FAC.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

Look at the US Navy's Pegasus class. You can do it not 20 years ahead but 40 years back.

I was looking at that. Could something the size of Shimakaze (in terms of weight) be a fast hydrofoil in 20 years advancements? Maybe even nuclear powered?

Nuclear propulsion is fairly heavy, especially for a slim hull. Failing that you could always go for an INCAT style hull, far better handling in more moderate sea states and they don't require extra draught to get to speed. There seems to be no exact limit for the size but there seems to be a RL ceiling of 120-150m, most likely due to shipyard constraints and lack of a market for a larger ship

[Connori Pilgrims]

YAY New thread XD!

Only solution, obviously

---

Continuing the battleship discussion from last thread, I'm planning on having a class of "fat" battleships based around extremely thick armor and a very wide body to carry a huge amount of guns at the expense of speed and agility. They would probably be from the mid-20s and would have extremely wide torpedo belts and would generally be quite antiquated looking-

What sort of problems would you encounter with a design with this? This isn't supposed to be the ideal battleship, just a stepping stone design created while the nation experimented with different battleship designs and doctrines.

inb4 yo mamma jokes...

1a.) how "fat" is fat? Generally the limit for beams (the width of ships) is the drydock of the nation in question and/or the max clearance for Panama and Suez canals if you give a damn about crossing said canals.

1b.)Related question - is your navy just gunning for local superiority (ala Imperial Japan or Imperial Germany) or are you trying into empire like the US/UK? If you're going for local superiority it might make sense to build ships emphasizing only certain traits such as firepower and survivability. Ships for global service may suffer more compromises especially if you have tonnage limits.

2.) how huge is huge number of guns?

[Oaledonia]

I was looking at that. Could something the size of Shimakaze (in terms of weight) be a fast hydrofoil in 20 years advancements? Maybe even nuclear powered?

Nuclear propulsion is fairly heavy, especially for a slim hull. Failing that you could always go for an INCAT style hull, far better handling in more moderate sea states and they don't require extra draught to get to speed. There seems to be no exact limit for the size but there seems to be a RL ceiling of 120-150m, most likely due to shipyard constraints and lack of a market for a larger ship

I'm more interested in designing a ship with the weight restraints.

[Yukonastan]

YAY New thread XD!

Only solution, obviously

---

Continuing the battleship discussion from last thread, I'm planning on having a class of "fat" battleships based around extremely thick armor and a very wide body to carry a huge amount of guns at the expense of speed and agility. They would probably be from the mid-20s and would have extremely wide torpedo belts and would generally be quite antiquated looking-

What sort of problems would you encounter with a design with this? This isn't supposed to be the ideal battleship, just a stepping stone design created while the nation experimented with different battleship designs and doctrines.

inb4 yo mamma jokes...

1a.) how "fat" is fat? Generally the limit for beams (the width of ships) is the drydock of the nation in question and/or the max clearance for Panama and Suez canals if you give a damn about crossing said canals.

1b.)Related question - is your navy just gunning for local superiority (ala Imperial Japan or Imperial Germany) or are you trying into empire like the US/UK? If you're going for local superiority it might make sense to build ships emphasizing only certain traits such as firepower and survivability. Ships for global service may suffer more compromises especially if you have tonnage limits.

2.) how huge is huge number of guns?

Sixteen guns was being thrown around, as far as I read that whole discussion.

As far as tonnage, larger :not:Yamato, IIRC.

[Oaledonia]

YAY New thread XD!



inb4 yo mamma jokes...

1a.) how "fat" is fat? Generally the limit for beams (the width of ships) is the drydock of the nation in question and/or the max clearance for Panama and Suez canals if you give a damn about crossing said canals.

1b.)Related question - is your navy just gunning for local superiority (ala Imperial Japan or Imperial Germany) or are you trying into empire like the US/UK? If you're going for local superiority it might make sense to build ships emphasizing only certain traits such as firepower and survivability. Ships for global service may suffer more compromises especially if you have tonnage limits.

2.) how huge is huge number of guns?

Sixteen guns was being thrown around, as far as I read that whole discussion.

As far as tonnage, larger :not:Yamato, IIRC.

Super Yamato is overrated. I have a soft spot for Musashi Kai :3

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Nuclear propulsion is fairly heavy, especially for a slim hull. Failing that you could always go for an INCAT style hull, far better handling in more moderate sea states and they don't require extra draught to get to speed. There seems to be no exact limit for the size but there seems to be a RL ceiling of 120-150m, most likely due to shipyard constraints and lack of a market for a larger ship

I'm more interested in designing a ship with the weight restraints.

Is it weird that I know exactly what you want? <.< >.>
Anyway, skip the nuclear and just install two Rolls-Royce MT30's along with a very streamlined hull. Two of those Marine Trent turbines provides you with about the same horsepower as all twelve of Nagara's steam boilers could put out. You'd also like two diesel engines to avoid the situation where you run out of fuel for the gas turbines in two hours.

[Oaledonia]

I'm more interested in designing a ship with the weight restraints.

Is it weird that I know exactly what you want? <.< >.>
Anyway, skip the nuclear and just install two Rolls-Royce MT30's along with a very streamlined hull. Two of those Marine Trent turbines provides you with about the same horsepower as all twelve of Nagara's steam boilers could put out.

Great minds think alike.

[Roski]

What population is a good cap for an effective military of 2,079,000 Active and 4,000,000 Reservists?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Is it weird that I know exactly what you want? <.< >.>
Anyway, skip the nuclear and just install two Rolls-Royce MT30's along with a very streamlined hull. Two of those Marine Trent turbines provides you with about the same horsepower as all twelve of Nagara's steam boilers could put out.

Great minds think alike.

I'm already ahead of you. :p MEKO 200 hull, 35 kts flank on two MT30's and two diesels, sonar, deck gun, some basic air defence capabilities, and a Lynx. Bye bye North Korean Romeos.

[Questers]

What population is a good cap for an effective military of 2,079,000 Active and 4,000,000 Reservists?

>capping your population based on your military size

incredible

[Ainin]

I have a Nimitz with an Arleigh Burke (that I classify as a CG because why not), four Type 45s, two Type 23s and two Virginia-class submarines, along with supply ship. Is that too big/small for a CVBG and what major flaws are there with this arrangement?

[Roski]

What population is a good cap for an effective military of 2,079,000 Active and 4,000,000 Reservists?

>capping your population based on your military size

incredible

I have my military exactly where I want it, and I don't want to do a whole bunch of work again.
So that's why.

[Gallia-]

>capping your population based on your military size

incredible

I have my military exactly where I want it, and I don't want to do a whole bunch of work again.
So that's why.

It's not "work".

If you don't enjoy it, don't bother.

[Roski]

I have my military exactly where I want it, and I don't want to do a whole bunch of work again.
So that's why.

It's not "work".

If you don't enjoy it, don't bother.

It is work, and its easier to cap a population then re-work your entire military structure.

"If you don't enjoy it, don't bother"

No. I asked a question, and didn't ask for criticism. I'm sorry I asked for something specific and not broad.
I would like if someone actually answered my question.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

I have a Nimitz with an Arleigh Burke (that I classify as a CG because why not), four Type 45s, two Type 23s and two Virginia-class submarines, along with supply ship. Is that too big/small for a CVBG and what major flaws are there with this arrangement?

Well I can imagine you'd have to standardise the guns between the RN and USN ships as they are 0.5" different as well as the Aster/Standard missile families. The RN and USN are rather different fish, the RN is a blend of UK, USA and EU tech and armaments