NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08

[The Empire of Pretantia]

The forts at the mouth of the river fells, so there wasn't much they could do.

Yeah, they were extremely poorly prepared against the Union Navy.

I don't think the South thought this rebellion thing through.

Speaking of, does anyone know of any nations that RP around civil War era tech and culture?

[United Earthlings]

good post but does anyone really expect European nations other than Britain and Poland to fight the Russians?

I can't imagine any great deal of reliance being placed on the shoulders of the Hungarians and Dutch.

The Dutch army has no tanks.

Then you Dutch bastards must have mastered invisibility stealth after your parked them somewhere, because I counted 137.

Table 4.02.04 told me so...and Table 4.02.04 would never lie to me...

Does anyone have a good guide to modern warfare? I'm looking for something to help my regionmate understand more modern conflict.

Well, back when I started around 15 years ago this was one of my starting points. From there I graduated to the various Operational Field Manuals and now it generally goes every which way, but recently I've found this to be the most informative & enjoyable.

I do wonder; if a successor to the Eurofighter was to be developed and procured by European powers, probably jointly by European aerospace companies, how well could it potentially compare to other modern craft such as the F-35/F-18/MiG-29/etc?

I imagine the aircraft to be a twin-engined multirole with a similar layout to the Eurofighter. Carrier-capable.

My impression is that it will probably be single engined like the F-16 & F-35 with stealth trumping payload capacity, so something akin to the F-35, but with both manned and unmanned versions, maybe not on the manned versions as have to see if France/Germany breaks down like the rest of Europe and joins the F-35 program, maybe even acquiring some from the second hand market.

[Allancia]

Yeah, they were extremely poorly prepared against the Union Navy.

I don't think the South thought this rebellion thing through.

Speaking of, does anyone know of any nations that RP around civil War era tech and culture?

You might be able to find people who could retcon for that. I do, sometimes.

[Stahn]

The Dutch army has no tanks.

Then you Dutch bastards must have mastered invisibility stealth after your parked them somewhere, because I counted 137.

In 2011 it was decided that the Dutch would sell all of their tanks but the Dutch army has decided to keep the last 15.

[Yukonastan]

Then you Dutch bastards must have mastered invisibility stealth after your parked them somewhere, because I counted 137.

In 2011 it was decided that the Dutch would sell all of their tanks but the Dutch army has decided to keep the last 15.

Canada has most of those now.

[Imperializt Russia]

This is the situation my eurofederation puppet is currently facing. The caliphate, basically, is a federation of every Islamic territorist, extremist and revolutionary group under the sun, and its military capabilities reflect this. Obviously, it has access to the resources of all the ex-nations it occupies as it seized their equipment, although whether it has soldiers and crewmen trained in their use is a different matter... I'm going to guess 'not really' given what they are. It would hardly surprise me if they tried to use the Merkavas they seized like Iraq used its T-72s in 2003 (in static defense).

However, given what this is, this is a huge danger to me and I figured it'd be good to come up with an invasion plan. Obviously, this will be the largest war in terms of troops deployed and in terms of territory since WWII.

The first question, then, I suppose is: is such a plan actually likely to succeed? I can provide more detailed statistics about my puppet's military of course.

You have France so you are a nuclear power. Your opponent has Pakistan, which is also a nuclear power.

The question is whether you can destroy all of their nuclear delivery systems in a first strike. I would guess that you can't. Your offensive options are therefore very limited.

A more realistic response than invasion is just enforcing your border against and perhaps refusing trade with this collection of states. You should try to acquire the Balkan nations, but as they fear Turkey that shouldn't be hard.

His opponent may have Pakistan, but it will not have Pakistan's nuclear arms or equipment or the personnel able to use them. The same is likely true of heavy air defences, and it will be unlikely to maintain a comprehensive air defensive network.

France, using its SLBM arsenal, would be able to destroy these sites in Pakistan with the express aim of denying them to a group that has no business possessing them.

I am not saying we are going to have flying cars next Thursday but there is a little more to this than people falling asleep in high school physics and missing the obvious.

Most of the way the press is reporting this is exactly that, they fail to grasp even the basic principle of relativistic momentum and propellant having always been an optional part of a drive.

The papers I've read give different numbers. There's a lot of murkiness surrounding this, but no physics overturned uproar in the scientific community. The truth will come out soon enough. In the meantime, I'd err on the side of keeping my undertrousers on and unbunched.

What is your education area, if you don't mind me asking?

The Dutch army has no tanks.

Then you Dutch bastards must have mastered invisibility stealth after your parked them somewhere, because I counted 137.

Table 4.02.04 told me so...and Table 4.02.04 would never lie to me...

About a half decade ago, the Dutch decided they had no use for tanks and would sell them off, replacing them with attack helicopters. They quickly realised this was a bad idea, but I don't think there was a specific reason this was so.

[Connori Pilgrims]

About a half decade ago, the Dutch decided they had no use for tanks and would sell them off, replacing them with attack helicopters. They quickly realised this was a bad idea, but I don't think there was a specific reason this was so.

They wanted to keep under 20 tanks supposedly to retain technical knowhow in using them, ostensibly should ole Putin really have all his screws loose. However I find it to be a pathetic political ploy overall typical of the Dutch and other euro-liberal-weaklings, just to show that they're "concerned"; as if a bare bones company really has any real value for defence purposes.

[Versail]

What kind of tactics will a enemy guerrilla force perform in its final last stand?
They have a slight number advantage however I have a quality advantage that negates that.
Also We are using star wars like ground tech, if that helps.
Also I am the attacker here, forgot to mention that.

[Imperializt Russia]

What kind of tactics will a enemy guerrilla force perform in its final last stand?
They have a slight number advantage however I have a quality advantage that negates that.
Also We are using star wars like ground tech, if that helps.
Also I am the attacker here, forgot to mention that.

If you're assaulting a guerilla force in what is presumed to be their last stronghold, why do they have the numerical advantage? This is something you would want to commit large amounts of your forces to.

With any luck, they'll be fighting a conventional battle to defend their stronghold rather than acting as guerillas (you can't fight a set-piece battle, such as a "final last stand" as a guerilla, really), which will give you the favourable position to defeat them.

[Versail]

What kind of tactics will a enemy guerrilla force perform in its final last stand?
They have a slight number advantage however I have a quality advantage that negates that.
Also We are using star wars like ground tech, if that helps.
Also I am the attacker here, forgot to mention that.

If you're assaulting a guerilla force in what is presumed to be their last stronghold, why do they have the numerical advantage? This is something you would want to commit large amounts of your forces to.

With any luck, they'll be fighting a conventional battle to defend their stronghold rather than acting as guerillas (you can't fight a set-piece battle, such as a "final last stand" as a guerilla, really), which will give you the favourable position to defeat them.

Because I'm holding most of my forces in reserve.
The reason being is I might be come under attack by a much more powerful enemy and I'm trying to wipe them out before said enemy gets to me.
They might not come at all though.

[Imperializt Russia]

If this is posing such serious limits on your forces' capabilities, your forces are so small and your insurgent group so large that you are in an all-out civil war over a relatively small state.

[Rich and Corporations]

If this is posing such serious limits on your forces' capabilities, your forces are so small and your insurgent group so large that you are in an all-out civil war over a relatively small state.

i think he is fighting ewoks

devious cretins

[Crookfur]

If you're assaulting a guerilla force in what is presumed to be their last stronghold, why do they have the numerical advantage? This is something you would want to commit large amounts of your forces to.

With any luck, they'll be fighting a conventional battle to defend their stronghold rather than acting as guerillas (you can't fight a set-piece battle, such as a "final last stand" as a guerilla, really), which will give you the favourable position to defeat them.

Because I'm holding most of my forces in reserve.
The reason being is I might be come under attack by a much more powerful enemy and I'm trying to wipe them out before said enemy gets to me.
They might not come at all though.

If speed is of the essence then you want to throw all your forces at the problem.

By only using a small and outnumbered rt of your force you are extending the time it will take the wipe them out, most likely increase the number of casualties you will take and overall leave you in a weakened position. Hit them hardest with the mostest and it will be over quickly and you will end in a stronger position.

As has been mentioned if it is a true last stand then they will pick a position and fortify it as best they can.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

My current options for carrying troops are pretty much the following:

• Humvee
• Truck (FMTV)
• JLTV something
• 10-man MRAP (Caiman - FMTV based)
• Wiesel 2 something
• FNSS ACV-19
• CV90

Now, I have a number of questions:

1. Should I consider including a wheeled APC/IFV?
2. If yes, I kind of want to have a large troop capacity. I was considering the VAB, and then the Patria Pasi or possibly an 8x8. What are the pros and cons of 4x4 vs 6x6 vs 8x8 and which do you recommend given that the primary requirements are relatively low weight and large troop capacity (and if possible low cost and simplicity). Again, the main requirement is being able to carry lots of troops. Armament and armor are of lesser concern.

The Sisu Pasi with its 18-man troop capacity and amphibious capability sounds pretty good, it's also plenty light as I understand. The 6 wheels should offer superior mobility compared to the VAB. One area of concern however is the armor:

The 200 series looks a little different from older variants due to increased armour. It lacks amphibious capabilities but can wade through water that is up to 1.5 m deep. The improved armour protects the passengers against up to 14.5 mm small arms fire. It is also equipped with modern optical aids like periscopes and night vision. The armor upgrade was initiated after the realisation that the previous armor was inadequate, even modern armor-piercing 7.62 mm ammunition could pierce the older XA-180 and XA-185 models in certain areas. The XA-202 was originally developed for Communications and Command. The XA-203 was made as a temporary replacement for XA-185, and is intended to be replaced by Patria AMVs in Finnish service.

Maybe I should consider an 8x8 like a modern Skot or smth? I basically want a vehicle that is a)wheeled b) (hopefully well) under 20T, c) has a troop capacity of 15+ and d) decent armor (at least capable of stopping 7.62 AP or a little more than that) . Bonus points for being amphibious.

[HMS Vanguard]

You have France so you are a nuclear power. Your opponent has Pakistan, which is also a nuclear power.

The question is whether you can destroy all of their nuclear delivery systems in a first strike. I would guess that you can't. Your offensive options are therefore very limited.

A more realistic response than invasion is just enforcing your border against and perhaps refusing trade with this collection of states. You should try to acquire the Balkan nations, but as they fear Turkey that shouldn't be hard.

His opponent may have Pakistan, but it will not have Pakistan's nuclear arms or equipment or the personnel able to use them. The same is likely true of heavy air defences, and it will be unlikely to maintain a comprehensive air defensive network.

France, using its SLBM arsenal, would be able to destroy these sites in Pakistan with the express aim of denying them to a group that has no business possessing them.

France has a maximum deliverable capability of 160 SLBM warheads and 75 tactical (ALCM) warheads.

Pakistan has 120 warheads which can be delivered by mobile MRBM, aircraft, and cruise missiles, the latter it claims to be able to deploy aboard submarines. It is also believed there are plans in place to transfer bombs to Saudi Arabia, which has its own ballistic missiles.

I do not believe that with 235 warheads, France can reliably destroy 120 warheads, most or all of which will be hidden, mobile, or both. The US can do it, as well as being immune from retaliation due to range, but not France in this scenario.

Whether the weapons are available at all is of course a question for the scenario author, but I suspect that the interest of those concerned in Pakistan is greater in preserving an Islamic bomb than a Pakistani bomb.

[Auroya]

His opponent may have Pakistan, but it will not have Pakistan's nuclear arms or equipment or the personnel able to use them. The same is likely true of heavy air defences, and it will be unlikely to maintain a comprehensive air defensive network.

France, using its SLBM arsenal, would be able to destroy these sites in Pakistan with the express aim of denying them to a group that has no business possessing them.

France has a maximum deliverable capability of 160 SLBM warheads and 75 tactical (ALCM) warheads.

Pakistan has 120 warheads which can be delivered by mobile MRBM, aircraft, and cruise missiles, the latter it claims to be able to deploy aboard submarines. It is also believed there are plans in place to transfer bombs to Saudi Arabia, which has its own ballistic missiles.

I do not believe that with 235 warheads, France can reliably destroy 120 warheads, most or all of which will be hidden, mobile, or both. The US can do it, as well as being immune from retaliation due to range, but not France in this scenario.

Whether the weapons are available at all is of course a question for the scenario author, but I suspect that the interest of those concerned in Pakistan is greater in preserving an Islamic bomb than a Pakistani bomb.

The federation has existed since 1959, expanding since then of course, and thus does have nuclear weapons of course; more than France alone has IRL since it needed a credible deterrent against the Soviets in the Cold War. For this same reason, its military was built up to substantially greater strength than IRL Europe's military. Europe is thus a great power; it's a ways behind the US, obviously, but certainly ahead of Russia and probably the second-strongest nation in the world in military terms.

I would very much like not to go nuclear, but little else is out of bounds to ensure those weapons are destroyed or disabled. It is true that the caliphate does not have the personnel to operate the weapons properly, so I suppose the most they could try is dismounting them from their missiles and smuggling them into Europe to attempt nuclear terrorism or something like that.

I do operate a force of aircraft carriers, whilst the caliphate's navy is in a very poor state (supposedly with only a few thousand personnel), so I could operate an air campaign from carriers in the Arabian Sea to this end. Alternatively, long-range bombers could be used, although these would have to fly long-range from airbases in Europe either over Caliphate airspace or around it. I do have dedicated spyplanes; these may aid in the location of the weapons.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

So I've been reading a thread about logistics and I decided to ask- well, where should I start? I've got an interstellar military which requires ammo, coilgun (or some other electromagnetic motor-based weapon) maintenance, laser components, missiles, food, fuel, medical supplies, spare mechanical parts, and everything else I can't think of.
What influences logistical size, besides the army in question? How much does the economy factor in, and military and political goals? Distance? Population?

[Gallia-]

Just teleport stuff across star systems.

[The Kievan People]

So I've been reading a thread about logistics and I decided to ask- well, where should I start? I've got an interstellar military which requires ammo, coilgun (or some other electromagnetic motor-based weapon) maintenance, laser components, missiles, food, fuel, medical supplies, spare mechanical parts, and everything else I can't think of.
What influences logistical size, besides the army in question? How much does the economy factor in, and military and political goals? Distance? Population?

It's the future.

Use your FTL drive to send things back in time. Then you will never run out and you will always know what you need.

[Rich and Corporations]

hmmm...
it turns out diesel is much more common for aircraft engines than I thought
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thielert_Centurion

and serial hybrids with low power turbines are becoming popular
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 76398.html

so the great question becomes...
for vehicles with less than 250 HP, use diesel, and for vehicles greater than that, use multi-fuel turbines?

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Just teleport stuff across star systems.

We don't have teleporters, not quite. Just FTL engines which can only travel at about 3.34269991×10¹⁴ meters per second, or 1,115,004.671 times the speed of light. Though even that simplifies it quite a lot.

So I've been reading a thread about logistics and I decided to ask- well, where should I start? I've got an interstellar military which requires ammo, coilgun (or some other electromagnetic motor-based weapon) maintenance, laser components, missiles, food, fuel, medical supplies, spare mechanical parts, and everything else I can't think of.
What influences logistical size, besides the army in question? How much does the economy factor in, and military and political goals? Distance? Population?

It's the future.

Use your FTL drive to send things back in time. Then you will never run out and you will always know what you need.

I never thought about that. I like it! I'll get that idea in place as soon as I can.
Also, it makes it likely that I'll have to defend against time-travelers using the same drive I've got to either kill my forces and country before they can defend themselves.

[HMS Vanguard]

France has a maximum deliverable capability of 160 SLBM warheads and 75 tactical (ALCM) warheads.

Pakistan has 120 warheads which can be delivered by mobile MRBM, aircraft, and cruise missiles, the latter it claims to be able to deploy aboard submarines. It is also believed there are plans in place to transfer bombs to Saudi Arabia, which has its own ballistic missiles.

I do not believe that with 235 warheads, France can reliably destroy 120 warheads, most or all of which will be hidden, mobile, or both. The US can do it, as well as being immune from retaliation due to range, but not France in this scenario.

Whether the weapons are available at all is of course a question for the scenario author, but I suspect that the interest of those concerned in Pakistan is greater in preserving an Islamic bomb than a Pakistani bomb.

The federation has existed since 1959, expanding since then of course, and thus does have nuclear weapons of course; more than France alone has IRL since it needed a credible deterrent against the Soviets in the Cold War. For this same reason, its military was built up to substantially greater strength than IRL Europe's military. Europe is thus a great power; it's a ways behind the US, obviously, but certainly ahead of Russia and probably the second-strongest nation in the world in military terms.

I would very much like not to go nuclear, but little else is out of bounds to ensure those weapons are destroyed or disabled. It is true that the caliphate does not have the personnel to operate the weapons properly, so I suppose the most they could try is dismounting them from their missiles and smuggling them into Europe to attempt nuclear terrorism or something like that.

I do operate a force of aircraft carriers, whilst the caliphate's navy is in a very poor state (supposedly with only a few thousand personnel), so I could operate an air campaign from carriers in the Arabian Sea to this end. Alternatively, long-range bombers could be used, although these would have to fly long-range from airbases in Europe either over Caliphate airspace or around it. I do have dedicated spyplanes; these may aid in the location of the weapons.

I am understanding this scenario less the more information you give.

If it has been around for many decades then its existence is hardly a new or shocking development, that warrants an extraordinary response despite taking no particular hostile action, and if it has no navy I do not see how it can threaten a European Federation that is separated on every side by water.

What is your purpose in invading it? You say you want to avoid a nuclear exchange, so the goals must be quite limited, yet forcing any landing will be enormously expensive.

A more obvious response to this situation would be to maintain naval strength, and do what the Cold War powers did if you want more leverage: try to develop the capability to destroy their nuclear arsenal with a first strike.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

How realistic is it to armor civilian electronics against EMP? That is, how much more inconvenient would it be to do that? Can that be done with electromagnetic shielding at much less inconvenience?
This being because I'm trying to EMP-proof not only my military, but my entire nation.

[Rich and Corporations]

How realistic is it to armor civilian electronics against EMP? That is, how much more inconvenient would it be to do that? Can that be done with electromagnetic shielding at much less inconvenience?
This being because I'm trying to EMP-proof not only my military, but my entire nation.

You can make things EMP-resistant, but not EMP-proof. Every backup generator needs to have an exhaust pipe, every machine needs an outlet. A hole of a few millimeters of protection will allow EMP inside.

[Gallia-]

Just teleport stuff across star systems.

We don't have teleporters, not quite.

If you have FTL travel you can arbitrarily make anything appear wherever its needed. The entire point of logistics (and economics) collapses,, you've broken the universe, things get more confusing than they probably should, and conventional physics and science are no longer applicable.

This is not the right place to be asking this kind of question rly.