NS Military Realism Mk. 7: NO

[Aelarus]

Cascade got smacked. Really hard.

---

Oale seems to be going off of this, as well as the context of your post.

Ah, forgot he was asking about attack helicopters specifically.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

NATO-ized Mi-24 is still a decent gunship for modern use, yes?

[Post War America]

NATO-ized Mi-24 is still a decent gunship for modern use, yes?

Why NATOize it? It is of stronk Soviet technology and can into destroyings cities to remove kebab.

But in all seriousness it should still be a decent gunship, I do believe the Russians still use it, as do several other nations, and several *ahem* modernizations exist if the baseline Hind is insufficient.

[Spirit of Hope]

So on the whole PGM aren't accurate debate I found this little nugget:

In the Gulf War, only nine per cent of the tonnage expended on Iraqi forces by American airmen were precision munitions. Not quite half of this per centage - 4.3 per cent - consisted of laser-guided bombs, credited with causing approximately 75 per cent of the serious damage inflicted upon Iraqi strategic and operational targets.

That quote comes from PRECISION GUIDED MUNITIONS AND THE NEW ERA OF WARFARE by Richard P. Hallion.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

Why NATOize it? It is of stronk Soviet technology and can into destroyings cities to remove kebab.

Because 90% of Azurgan munitions come from NAVO. Too, I figure it may be a spot cheaper than old Combloc bits.

But in all seriousness it should still be a decent gunship, I do believe the Russians still use it, as do several other nations, and several *ahem* modernizations exist if the baseline Hind is insufficient.

Right then.

[The Soodean Imperium]

Why NATOize it? It is of stronk Soviet technology and can into destroyings cities to remove kebab.

Because 90% of Azurgan munitions come from NAVO. Too, I figure it may be a spot cheaper than old Combloc bits.

But in all seriousness it should still be a decent gunship, I do believe the Russians still use it, as do several other nations, and several *ahem* modernizations exist if the baseline Hind is insufficient.

Right then.

Do bear in mind, though, that the Mi-24 emerged at a time when dedicated attack helicopters were in their infancy, and includes one unusual quirk: a troop compartment. As helicopter doctrine developed, it was found that having specialized attack helicopters and transport helicopters worked better, and the troop compartment wasn't used much except for storing missiles or other supplies. If you're doing a new-build design of a :not:Hind, you could easily do away with it altogether.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

If you're doing a new-build design of a :not:Hind, you could easily do away with it altogether.

Indeed.

Actually, I've stumbled into a bit of an issue. I only suggested the Hind because it was fairly cheap, and I was under the impression someone (Israel or South Africa) had developed a reasonably cheap kit to bring it to NAVO standard. Unfortunately, it seems I was wrong on the second.

So, any suggestions for a decent, cost effective NAVO compliant gunship? Next in line was the AH-1W.

[Crookfur]

If you're doing a new-build design of a :not:Hind, you could easily do away with it altogether.

Indeed.

Actually, I've stumbled into a bit of an issue. I only suggested the Hind because it was fairly cheap, and I was under the impression someone (Israel or South Africa) had developed a reasonably cheap kit to bring it to NAVO standard. Unfortunately, it seems I was wrong on the second.

So, any suggestions for a decent, cost effective NAVO compliant gunship? Next in line was the AH-1W.

A-129 mangusta or the Romania puma SOCAT for maximum I'm not a Hind honest I just play one in all of the movies.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

A-129 mangusta or the Romania puma SOCAT for maximum I'm not a Hind honest I just play one in all of the movies.

Mangusta is double the price for. . . not much extra speed or capacity. SOCAT is an idea, although I admit I dislike how it looks.

[Crookfur]

A-129 mangusta or the Romania puma SOCAT for maximum I'm not a Hind honest I just play one in all of the movies.

Mangusta is double the price for. . . not much extra speed or capacity. SOCAT is an idea, although I admit I dislike how it looks.

The price difference isn't that much the $10-11 million figure for the whiskey cobra is just the unit replacement cost for the USMC and that is generally a lot less than the true market price. If we take a look at the kinds of prices turkey was being quoted the a129 was 1.35 bil for 51 and the ah-1W 111mil for 3. Admittedly both these prices include a lot of spares and support (particulary the cobra price) and differences in numbers distort things but it clear the price difference isn't anywhere near as big as it appears on first glance.

[The Kievan People]

Relevant to the last page...

http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13 ... P1,00.html

A very good article written by a former F/A-18 pilot about modern CAS and where it might be going.

[Auroya]

With the late-MTish tech that I use, could potentially fighter-sized UAVs be made to operate from carriers reliably? Afaik the main reason it isn't done now is the higher likelihood of accidents on landing, though the X-47B seems to be able to do it fairly well, so how far away does it look like that is from becoming a reality?

I feel like designing a CAS UAV as outlined in that article which I'd like to be carrier-capable.

[The Archangel Conglomerate]

The price difference isn't that much the $10-11 million figure for the whiskey cobra is just the unit replacement cost for the USMC and that is generally a lot less than the true market price. If we take a look at the kinds of prices turkey was being quoted the a129 was 1.35 bil for 51 and the ah-1W 111mil for 3. Admittedly both these prices include a lot of spares and support (particulary the cobra price) and differences in numbers distort things but it clear the price difference isn't anywhere near as big as it appears on first glance.

True. All things being equal, the AH-1 comes out to $37mil to the Mangusta's roughly $27mil.

[Yakzistan]

How many main battle tanks are too much to have, not in numbers but different model of tanks

My army have 6 different tanks in service

T-55AGM: used by Defense Force(National Guard)
T-62AGM: used by Defense Force(National Guard)
T-64: reserve tanks received from Russia after fall of the Soviet Union
T-72: main stay tank of the military
T-80: main stay tank of the military
Type 96: recently arrived tank, 10 tank being tested as of now

I currently want phase out the T-55AGM,T-62AGM and possibly the T-64

[Erusuia]

Speaking of Mi-24s, what would be the best way of improving its transport ability while still retaining its attack helicopterness?

Heavily armed assault/transport helicopters are a major part of my military's doctrine so having a bunch of hinds and not:Hinds is rather important. Assault helicopter brigades are supposed to lead/transport deep penetration attacks with special forces and airborne forces, so I'm interested in building a hind styled helicopter with improved transport capabilities while still retaining its heavy armament. Manoeuvrability is secondary to range, armament and capacity

[Crookfur]

Speaking of Mi-24s, what would be the best way of improving its transport ability while still retaining its attack helicopterness?

Heavily armed assault/transport helicopters are a major part of my military's doctrine so having a bunch of hinds and not:Hinds is rather important. Assault helicopter brigades are supposed to lead/transport deep penetration attacks with special forces and airborne forces, so I'm interested in building a hind styled helicopter with improved transport capabilities while still retaining its heavy armament. Manoeuvrability is secondary to range, armament and capacity

Just use hips: all the kaboom and all of the transport of a Hind but with much better visibility and maneuverability

[Gallia-]

With the late-MTish tech that I use, could potentially fighter-sized UAVs be made to operate from carriers reliably? Afaik the main reason it isn't done now is the higher likelihood of accidents on landing, though the X-47B seems to be able to do it fairly well, so how far away does it look like that is from becoming a reality?

I feel like designing a CAS UAV as outlined in that article which I'd like to be carrier-capable.

Aircraft landing under control of a computer guidance system would probably be less prone to accidents, not more.

Since you know this is how things are outside the military.

[Auroya]

With the late-MTish tech that I use, could potentially fighter-sized UAVs be made to operate from carriers reliably? Afaik the main reason it isn't done now is the higher likelihood of accidents on landing, though the X-47B seems to be able to do it fairly well, so how far away does it look like that is from becoming a reality?

I feel like designing a CAS UAV as outlined in that article which I'd like to be carrier-capable.

Aircraft landing under control of a computer guidance system would probably be less prone to accidents, not more.

Since you know this is how things are outside the military.

I remember reading something along those lines. T'was probably wrong, in that case.

[Erusuia]

Just use hips: all the kaboom and all of the transport of a Hind but with much better visibility and maneuverability

Why must the best option always be the least badass option

I'll use Mi-8AMTShs

[Aelarus]

How many main battle tanks are too much to have, not in numbers but different model of tanks

My army have 6 different tanks in service

T-55AGM: used by Defense Force(National Guard)
T-62AGM: used by Defense Force(National Guard)
T-64: reserve tanks received from Russia after fall of the Soviet Union
T-72: main stay tank of the military
T-80: main stay tank of the military
Type 96: recently arrived tank, 10 tank being tested as of now

I currently want phase out the T-55AGM,T-62AGM and possibly the T-64

Why are each of different tank lines? You could be using T-72As as reserve tanks and wouldn't have to deal with entirely different chassis.

---

Speaking of Mi-24s, what would be the best way of improving its transport ability while still retaining its attack helicopterness?

Heavily armed assault/transport helicopters are a major part of my military's doctrine so having a bunch of hinds and not:Hinds is rather important. Assault helicopter brigades are supposed to lead/transport deep penetration attacks with special forces and airborne forces, so I'm interested in building a hind styled helicopter with improved transport capabilities while still retaining its heavy armament. Manoeuvrability is secondary to range, armament and capacity

Hinds aren't the great for transport and aren't used for transport as much nowadays. I'd advise just using something lighter for actually carrying your infantry and having dedicated gunships to protect them.

---

Just use hips: all the kaboom and all of the transport of a Hind but with much better visibility and maneuverability

Mi-8s can't go as fast as Mi-24s.

[Erusuia]

Hinds aren't the great for transport and aren't used for transport as much nowadays. I'd advise just using something lighter for actually carrying your infantry and having dedicated gunships to protect them.

Sounds like the best way of going about things. I'm already operating a large number of Hinds which, with this new found knowledge, I'll move into their own heavy assault aviation units.

Heavy assault aviation units were going to be filled with dedicated attack helicopters, however going from what you said it seems like it would make more sense to attach attack helicopters to Assault helicopter brigades where they can support transport helicopters or act on their own. Heavy assault aviation units would then be used almost exclusively for attacks close to friendly ground forces as appose to penetration attacks, with some use occasionally flying in supplies and commandos

or something kind of like that

[Padnak]

Cascade got smacked. Really hard.

smacked doesn't begin to describe it

speaking of Mi-24s, they seem like very good COIN aircraft in the sense that they seem to not give fuck number one about ground fire and they carry a huge amount of rockets and gunpods

[Korva]

they seem to not give fuck number one about ground fire

How so?

[Spirit of Hope]

Cascade got smacked. Really hard.

smacked doesn't begin to describe it

speaking of Mi-24s, they seem like very good COIN aircraft in the sense that they seem to not give fuck number one about ground fire and they carry a huge amount of rockets and gunpods

And then someone gives your insurgents Stingers.

[Padnak]

they seem to not give fuck number one about ground fire

How so?

looking over the Mi-24s combat performances, it seems much less fragile when exposed to anything less then anti aircraft autocannons and MANPADs then most attack helicopters