NATION

PASSWORD

NS Military Realism Mk. 7: NO

A place to put national factbooks, embassy exchanges, and other information regarding the nations of the world. [In character]

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
The Red Star Union
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 491
Founded: May 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Red Star Union » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:17 pm

Atomic Utopia wrote:
The Red Star Union wrote:So I wanna make a new megacarrier design to sell on GE&T, but what is the point where you have so many planes that it is just ineffective logistically? And what would the said dimensions be?

What is the military use of a megacarrier?

It could probably be heard from miles away dependent on hull design, is a big friggin target that costs a metric shitton or two, and could not be in more than one place at a time. What exactly would be the benifit to a huge carrier over several (2-3) small ones?


to be a Noob magnet for more sales

So, NS doesnt really work like the real world. EVERYONE has armadas of supercarriers. Trying to RP with 15 escorts against 5 supercarriers? Thats about, what 450 planes vs 300planes. Assuming the small carriers have 20 planes each, and the supercarriers each have 90 planes, mental math gives me roughly equal price per plane (super is 4 bill, escort is 1 bill). But in NS, people focus on ONE main theatre most of the time. You would much rather have a large concentration of force. I see your arguement in the real world, but in NS? Huge fleets and megaships give all the more reason for megacarriers over escorts.
Last edited by The Red Star Union on December 17, 322 BC, edited 84838 times


Proud Member of The Socialist Action Party (SAP)
☻/ This is Bob, copy & paste him in
/▌ your sig so Bob can take over the
/ \ world.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
Top
1-Peace
2-Alert
3-Small Mobilization
4-Large Mobilization- Current Level
5-Regional War
6-International War
7-Nuclear War

User avatar
Rich and Corporations
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6560
Founded: Aug 09, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Rich and Corporations » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:20 pm

say one supercarrier is sunk, you just lost a lot of planes.

unlike in RL, NS nations do not have the sheer technical and military superiority that the US has.

User avatar
Atomic Utopia
Minister
 
Posts: 2488
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Atomic Utopia » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:22 pm

Nachmere wrote:
Atomic Utopia wrote:What is the military use of a megacarrier?

It could probably be heard from miles away dependent on hull design, is a big friggin target that costs a metric shitton or two, and could not be in more than one place at a time. What exactly would be the benefit to a huge carrier over several (2-3) small ones?



Easier to maintain a high rate of operations due to larger work areas, more personnel and aircraft? Thinking out loud.

Then why not get several carriers in the same area, that way you can have the same amount of personnel and aircraft without putting all of your eggs in one basket.

One giant megacarrier is like the longs- I mean that-which-must-not-be-named, it is a target just begging to be nuked.
Fabulously bisexual.
Note: I do not use NS stats for my RP, instead I use numbers I made up one evening when writing my factbooks.

sudo rm -rf /, the best file compression around.

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13914
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Akasha Colony » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:27 pm

The Red Star Union wrote:So, NS doesnt really work like the real world. EVERYONE has armadas of supercarriers. Trying to RP with 15 escorts against 5 supercarriers? Thats about, what 450 planes vs 300planes. Assuming the small carriers have 20 planes each, and the supercarriers each have 90 planes, mental math gives me roughly equal price per plane (super is 4 bill, escort is 1 bill). But in NS, people focus on ONE main theatre most of the time. You would much rather have a large concentration of force. I see your arguement in the real world, but in NS? Huge fleets and megaships give all the more reason for megacarriers over escorts.


Concentration of force means concentration of targets. A submarine can sink both a "supercarrier" and a "megacarrier" all the same, but one leaves the target down $5 billion and a fraction of his air power, and the other leaves him down $50 billion and his entire theater's air contingent. The size of *NS* means that aircraft flying from a single point could not cover an entire theater effectively, in which case a carrier force capable of greater dispersal would be more useful.

Atomic Utopia wrote:What is the military use of a megacarrier?

It could probably be heard from miles away dependent on hull design, is a big friggin target that costs a metric shitton or two, and could not be in more than one place at a time. What exactly would be the benifit to a huge carrier over several (2-3) small ones?


Up to a point, a larger hull means more space for aircraft and the ability to operate larger aircraft more effectively. A single large carrier will also generally require fewer crew than a host of smaller ships since fewer positions would be duplicated. Of course, beyond a certain point increases in size bring diminishing returns, as the extra space is no longer as useful. This isn't a fixed point though.
A colony of the New Free Planets Alliance.
The primary MT nation of this account is the Republic of Carthage.
New Free Planets Alliance (FT)
New Terran Republic (FT)
Republic of Carthage (MT)
World Economic Union (MT)
Kaiserreich Europa Zentral (PT/MT)
Five Republics of Hanalua (FanT)
National Links: Factbook Entry | Embassy Program
Storefronts: Carthaginian Naval Export Authority [MT, Navy]

User avatar
New Vihenia
Minister
 
Posts: 3418
Founded: Apr 03, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby New Vihenia » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:29 pm

Those mega carriers and superships are really giving me reason to have 12x 650mm tubes and 60x VLS for my submarine, and producing it exponentially.
We make planes,ships,missiles,helicopters, radars and mecha musume






User avatar
Rich and Corporations
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6560
Founded: Aug 09, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Rich and Corporations » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:32 pm

New Vihenia wrote:Those mega carriers and superships are really giving me reason to have 12x 650mm tubes and 60x VLS for my submarine, and producing it exponentially.


no

just use a tungsten rod mounted on an ICBM.

User avatar
Roski
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15601
Founded: Nov 18, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Roski » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:42 pm

Rich and Corporations wrote:
New Vihenia wrote:Those mega carriers and superships are really giving me reason to have 12x 650mm tubes and 60x VLS for my submarine, and producing it exponentially.


no

just use a tungsten rod mounted on an ICBM.


Just use an ICBM
I'm some 17 year old psuedo-libertarian who leans to the left in social terms, is fiercly right economically, and centrist in foriegn policy. Unapologetically Pro-American, Pro-NATO, even if we do fuck up (a lot). If you can find real sources that disagree with me I will change my opinion. Call me IHOP cause I'm always flipping.

Follow my Vex Robotics team on instagram! @3921a_vex

I am the Federal Republic of Roski. I have a population slightly over 256 million with a GDP of 13.92-14.25 trillion. My gross domestic product increases each year between .4%-.1.4%. I have a military with 4.58 million total people, with 1.58 million of those active. My defense spending is 598.5 billion, or 4.2% of my Gross Domestic Product.

User avatar
Tule
Senator
 
Posts: 3883
Founded: Jan 29, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Tule » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:59 pm

Roski wrote:
Rich and Corporations wrote:
no

just use a tungsten rod mounted on an ICBM.


Just use an ICBM


Hell, considering the re-entry speed you could probably just fill up a traffic cone with concrete and it would still destroy the ship.
Last edited by Tule on Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Formerly known as Bafuria.
NSMRC's friendly neighborhood luddite.

Radical moderate, conservative liberal, anarcho-statist.

...furthermore I consider that ISIL must be destroyed.

User avatar
The United Remnants of America
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17399
Founded: Mar 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The United Remnants of America » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:05 pm

Tule wrote:
Roski wrote:
Just use an ICBM


Hell, considering the re-entry speed you could probably just fill up a traffic cone with concrete and it would still destroy the ship.

Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.
By any means necessary. Call me URA
Winner of 2015 Best of P2TM Awards: Best Roleplayer - War
"I would much rather be with you than against you, you're way too imaginative."
"URA New Confucius 2015."- Organized States
"Congrats. You just won the second place prize for Not Giving a Fuck. First Place, of course, always goes to Furry."
"He's an 8 Ball, DEN. You can't deal with an 8 Ball." - Empire of Donner land
"This Rp is flexible with science and so will you." - Tagali Federation
"I'm confused as to your tactic but I'll trust you." - Die erworbenen Namen
"Unfiltered, concentrated, possibly weaponized stupidity."
Thafoo, Leningrad Union: DEAT'd for your sins.
Discord: Here

User avatar
North Arkana
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8829
Founded: Dec 16, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby North Arkana » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:09 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Tule wrote:
Hell, considering the re-entry speed you could probably just fill up a traffic cone with concrete and it would still destroy the ship.

Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.

Well, kinetic orbital bombardment would work on a ship. Punch a hole right through it, and it would create a massive void beneath the ship from the cavitation effect on the water. And I think a projectile made up of a mass of small pellets or of a relatively soft metal, rather than a single large object, would work better for KOB because it would dissipate the impact better than just digging a REALLY big hole. Kinda like an orbital bean-bag round or hollow point bullet.
Last edited by North Arkana on Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I don't know everything, just the things I know"
oooooooooo

/人 ‿‿ 人\ Just sign on the dotted line please...
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

User avatar
Tule
Senator
 
Posts: 3883
Founded: Jan 29, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Tule » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:09 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Tule wrote:
Hell, considering the re-entry speed you could probably just fill up a traffic cone with concrete and it would still destroy the ship.

Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.


Dear god no. I'm talking about ICBM's in sub-orbital flight.

Their re-entry speed is roughly Mach 20.

North Arkana wrote:Well, kinetic orbital bombardment would work on a ship. Punch a hole right through it, and it would create a massive void beneath the ship from the cavitation effect on the water.


There is no good reason to put anything in space that you plan on using to bombard the ground. None.
Last edited by Tule on Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Formerly known as Bafuria.
NSMRC's friendly neighborhood luddite.

Radical moderate, conservative liberal, anarcho-statist.

...furthermore I consider that ISIL must be destroyed.

User avatar
The Corparation
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33912
Founded: Aug 31, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Corparation » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:11 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Tule wrote:
Hell, considering the re-entry speed you could probably just fill up a traffic cone with concrete and it would still destroy the ship.

Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.

The Lol-aircraft has mostly been just me, I did the same thing with my Orion. occasionally clutter the thread for advice on realisim for a what-if of questionable realism. The Long word which must not be named has always been here, but it has come up a lot recently. Not sure why, at any rate this fad will pass. Nukes are nukes, somebody always wants to use a nuke.
Last edited by The Corparation on Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting)
Orbital Freedom Machine Here
A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc.Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia-
Making the Nightmare End 2020 WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.
Prop 65, CA Health & Safety
This Cell is intentionally blank.

User avatar
The United Remnants of America
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17399
Founded: Mar 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The United Remnants of America » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:12 pm

Tule wrote:
The United Remnants of America wrote:Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.


Dear god no. I'm talking about ICBM's in sub-orbital flight.

Their re-entry speed is roughly Mach 20.

That's the speed for an orbital weapon as well.
By any means necessary. Call me URA
Winner of 2015 Best of P2TM Awards: Best Roleplayer - War
"I would much rather be with you than against you, you're way too imaginative."
"URA New Confucius 2015."- Organized States
"Congrats. You just won the second place prize for Not Giving a Fuck. First Place, of course, always goes to Furry."
"He's an 8 Ball, DEN. You can't deal with an 8 Ball." - Empire of Donner land
"This Rp is flexible with science and so will you." - Tagali Federation
"I'm confused as to your tactic but I'll trust you." - Die erworbenen Namen
"Unfiltered, concentrated, possibly weaponized stupidity."
Thafoo, Leningrad Union: DEAT'd for your sins.
Discord: Here

User avatar
North Arkana
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8829
Founded: Dec 16, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby North Arkana » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:12 pm

The Corparation wrote:The Lol-aircraft has mostly been just me, I did the same thing with my Orion. occasionally clutter the thread for advice on realisim for a what-if of questionable realism. The Re Long word which must not be named has always been here, but it has come up a lot recently. Not sure why, at any rate this fad will pass. Nukes are nukes, somebody always wants to use a nuke.

Then let us start a new age of NNEMPs!
"I don't know everything, just the things I know"
oooooooooo

/人 ‿‿ 人\ Just sign on the dotted line please...
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

User avatar
The United Remnants of America
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17399
Founded: Mar 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The United Remnants of America » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:14 pm

North Arkana wrote:
The Corparation wrote:The Lol-aircraft has mostly been just me, I did the same thing with my Orion. occasionally clutter the thread for advice on realisim for a what-if of questionable realism. The Re Long word which must not be named has always been here, but it has come up a lot recently. Not sure why, at any rate this fad will pass. Nukes are nukes, somebody always wants to use a nuke.

Then let us start a new age of NNEMPs!

How about an NNEMP cannon?
By any means necessary. Call me URA
Winner of 2015 Best of P2TM Awards: Best Roleplayer - War
"I would much rather be with you than against you, you're way too imaginative."
"URA New Confucius 2015."- Organized States
"Congrats. You just won the second place prize for Not Giving a Fuck. First Place, of course, always goes to Furry."
"He's an 8 Ball, DEN. You can't deal with an 8 Ball." - Empire of Donner land
"This Rp is flexible with science and so will you." - Tagali Federation
"I'm confused as to your tactic but I'll trust you." - Die erworbenen Namen
"Unfiltered, concentrated, possibly weaponized stupidity."
Thafoo, Leningrad Union: DEAT'd for your sins.
Discord: Here

User avatar
Tule
Senator
 
Posts: 3883
Founded: Jan 29, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Tule » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:15 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Tule wrote:
Dear god no. I'm talking about ICBM's in sub-orbital flight.

Their re-entry speed is roughly Mach 20.

That's the speed for an orbital weapon as well.


The difference being that any orbiting weapon is a sitting duck.

Unlike ICBM's you can't harden it, you can't maneuver it and you can't hide it.
Formerly known as Bafuria.
NSMRC's friendly neighborhood luddite.

Radical moderate, conservative liberal, anarcho-statist.

...furthermore I consider that ISIL must be destroyed.

User avatar
Pharthan
Minister
 
Posts: 2969
Founded: Feb 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Pharthan » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:20 pm

The Corparation wrote:
The United Remnants of America wrote:Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.

The Lol-aircraft has mostly been just me, I did the same thing with my Orion. occasionally clutter the thread for advice on realisim for a what-if of questionable realism. The Long word which must not be named has always been here, but it has come up a lot recently. Not sure why, at any rate this fad will pass. Nukes are nukes, somebody always wants to use a nuke.


I've refrained from introducing my orbital bombardment stuff, but I've got packages and stuff drawn up already.

I've been heavily tempted to get into lolaircraft, but that means I'd have to make my megaships into lolmegaships to be able to land the lolaircraft.

Megacarriers:
    Pros:
  • Can field cargo aircraft, assisting in long range humanitarian and strike operations.
  • Can field more fighters and larger bombers.
  • Better crew services. Might actually be able to have a pool.
  • Larger variety of crew services.
  • More likely to be able to field aircraft 24/7.

    Cons:
  • Can pull in to fewer ports
  • ATC may not be able to manage full complement of aircraft
  • Cost
  • Improportional cost & material -to- aircraft complement
  • Theoretically can go faster
  • Larger target
  • Less on-station durability.*

On station durability only really applies to long-term wars and such. You need 2-3 carriers for every carrier you intend to have deployed at a time, to account for maintenance periods and allowing your crews to actually spend some time with their families and whatnot.
Last edited by Pharthan on Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
HALCYON ARMS STOREFRONT

"Humanity is a way for the cosmos to know itself." - Carl Sagan
"Besides, if God didn't want us making glowing fish and insect-resistant corn, the building blocks of life wouldn't be so easy for science to fiddle with." - Dracoria

Why haven't I had anything new in my storefront for so long? This is why. I've been busy.

User avatar
Romic
Senator
 
Posts: 4271
Founded: May 10, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Romic » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:24 pm

Pharthan wrote:
The Corparation wrote:The Lol-aircraft has mostly been just me, I did the same thing with my Orion. occasionally clutter the thread for advice on realisim for a what-if of questionable realism. The Long word which must not be named has always been here, but it has come up a lot recently. Not sure why, at any rate this fad will pass. Nukes are nukes, somebody always wants to use a nuke.


I've refrained from introducing my orbital bombardment stuff, but I've got packages and stuff drawn up already.

I've been heavily tempted to get into lolaircraft, but that means I'd have to make my megaships into lolmegaships to be able to land the lolaircraft.

I have seen the package and it shines brightly in the face of those who see it.... You sir make all de best ships and aircraft
TG me Anytime, I enjoy them :)
TET's Chosen Mush Mind
Economic Left/Right: -3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 4.77

Male, History Buff, I enjoy reading and watching a good movie. I am the Star Wars geek.

User avatar
The United Remnants of America
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17399
Founded: Mar 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The United Remnants of America » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:25 pm

Pharthan wrote:
The Corparation wrote:The Lol-aircraft has mostly been just me, I did the same thing with my Orion. occasionally clutter the thread for advice on realisim for a what-if of questionable realism. The Long word which must not be named has always been here, but it has come up a lot recently. Not sure why, at any rate this fad will pass. Nukes are nukes, somebody always wants to use a nuke.


I've refrained from introducing my orbital bombardment stuff, but I've got packages and stuff drawn up already.

I've been heavily tempted to get into lolaircraft, but that means I'd have to make my megaships into lolmegaships to be able to land the lolaircraft.

I've just thought about making a flying aircraft carrier, but one of my Regionmates has it, and I've made equipment specifically designed to kill it.

So, if I can kill them, people can kill mine. Right?
By any means necessary. Call me URA
Winner of 2015 Best of P2TM Awards: Best Roleplayer - War
"I would much rather be with you than against you, you're way too imaginative."
"URA New Confucius 2015."- Organized States
"Congrats. You just won the second place prize for Not Giving a Fuck. First Place, of course, always goes to Furry."
"He's an 8 Ball, DEN. You can't deal with an 8 Ball." - Empire of Donner land
"This Rp is flexible with science and so will you." - Tagali Federation
"I'm confused as to your tactic but I'll trust you." - Die erworbenen Namen
"Unfiltered, concentrated, possibly weaponized stupidity."
Thafoo, Leningrad Union: DEAT'd for your sins.
Discord: Here

User avatar
Atomic Utopia
Minister
 
Posts: 2488
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Atomic Utopia » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:27 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Tule wrote:
Hell, considering the re-entry speed you could probably just fill up a traffic cone with concrete and it would still destroy the ship.

Are we back to kinetic orbital bombardment now?

I'm sensing the cycle in this thread that goes between super-duper aircraft, megaships, and nukes.

Though I still haven't figured out if we're cycling or swirling down a toilet.

Well, I guess the next one in the cycle must be nukes, so to break the cycle I have a super-duper aircraft question.

While reading about in air refueling I came up with an idea for increasing the range of drones.

The idea is a large drone resupply aircraft. Drones would be capable of refueling on several booms on the airplane, however what makes it unique is the ability for the plane to re-arm the drones in several specially constructed bays. The drones would fly to the destination and then refuel and re-arm at the plane, thus reducing the distance they would have to fly to re-arm. Note, the drones would not be carried by the plane, instead they would be merely refueled and re-armed, to be repaired or land they would have to land on a naval aircraft carrier or an airfield. It would also contain RADAR to allow it to assist the drones.

And before you ask, yes it will be nuclear powered.
Last edited by Atomic Utopia on Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fabulously bisexual.
Note: I do not use NS stats for my RP, instead I use numbers I made up one evening when writing my factbooks.

sudo rm -rf /, the best file compression around.

User avatar
Romic
Senator
 
Posts: 4271
Founded: May 10, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Romic » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:27 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Pharthan wrote:
I've refrained from introducing my orbital bombardment stuff, but I've got packages and stuff drawn up already.

I've been heavily tempted to get into lolaircraft, but that means I'd have to make my megaships into lolmegaships to be able to land the lolaircraft.

I've just thought about making a flying aircraft carrier, but one of my Regionmates has it, and I've made equipment specifically designed to kill it.

So, if I can kill them, people can kill mine. Right?

Only if you don't have counter measures
TG me Anytime, I enjoy them :)
TET's Chosen Mush Mind
Economic Left/Right: -3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 4.77

Male, History Buff, I enjoy reading and watching a good movie. I am the Star Wars geek.

User avatar
The Corparation
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33912
Founded: Aug 31, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The Corparation » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:28 pm

Why bother with nukes? Just take the 747 AAC concept and ditch the pilots of the micro fighters.In flight refueling is also a lot cheaper and easier than dealing with a nuclear plant. Then again you are Atomic Utopia.
Nuclear Death Machines Here (Both Flying and Orbiting)
Orbital Freedom Machine Here
A Subsidiary company of Nightkill Enterprises Inc.Weekly words of wisdom: Nothing is more important than waifus.- Gallia-
Making the Nightmare End 2020 WARNING: This post contains chemicals known to the State of CA to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.
Prop 65, CA Health & Safety
This Cell is intentionally blank.

User avatar
The United Remnants of America
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17399
Founded: Mar 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The United Remnants of America » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:32 pm

Romic wrote:
The United Remnants of America wrote:I've just thought about making a flying aircraft carrier, but one of my Regionmates has it, and I've made equipment specifically designed to kill it.

So, if I can kill them, people can kill mine. Right?

Only if you don't have counter measures

But one flying carrier shouldn't be able to defend against an air force, should it?

Like, the reason they always die in the movies/games is because of the storytelling their inability to defend well, right?
By any means necessary. Call me URA
Winner of 2015 Best of P2TM Awards: Best Roleplayer - War
"I would much rather be with you than against you, you're way too imaginative."
"URA New Confucius 2015."- Organized States
"Congrats. You just won the second place prize for Not Giving a Fuck. First Place, of course, always goes to Furry."
"He's an 8 Ball, DEN. You can't deal with an 8 Ball." - Empire of Donner land
"This Rp is flexible with science and so will you." - Tagali Federation
"I'm confused as to your tactic but I'll trust you." - Die erworbenen Namen
"Unfiltered, concentrated, possibly weaponized stupidity."
Thafoo, Leningrad Union: DEAT'd for your sins.
Discord: Here

User avatar
Romic
Senator
 
Posts: 4271
Founded: May 10, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Romic » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:39 pm

The United Remnants of America wrote:
Romic wrote:Only if you don't have counter measures

But one flying carrier shouldn't be able to defend against an air force, should it?

Like, the reason they always die in the movies/games is because of the storytelling their inability to defend well, right?

Not only that but ground based SAMs and everything an aircraft must worry about. It's literally just a giant moving sky target.
TG me Anytime, I enjoy them :)
TET's Chosen Mush Mind
Economic Left/Right: -3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 4.77

Male, History Buff, I enjoy reading and watching a good movie. I am the Star Wars geek.

User avatar
Atomic Utopia
Minister
 
Posts: 2488
Founded: Jan 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Atomic Utopia » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:52 pm

The Corparation wrote:Why bother with nukes? Just take the 747 AAC concept and ditch the pilots of the micro fighters.In flight refueling is also a lot cheaper and easier than dealing with a nuclear plant. Then again you are Atomic Utopia.

The idea was to make a in air refuling vessel capable of also re-arming my drones, not a flying air craft carrier. I think I will drop the reactor due to the fact that it costs a lot more (dependent upon design) and will increase the size of the plane quite a bit.

However on the subject of AACs, how much would one of those cost compared to a conventional carrier, and what would the advantage be. Currently I think the reaction time of it would be a decent advantage, however the need for constant refueling would be a problem.
Last edited by Atomic Utopia on Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:11 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Fabulously bisexual.
Note: I do not use NS stats for my RP, instead I use numbers I made up one evening when writing my factbooks.

sudo rm -rf /, the best file compression around.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Factbooks and National Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]

Advertisement

Remove ads