NationStates

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 12:35 am**

*Irrelevant.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 4:14 am**

Elan Valleys Self Defence Force Helicopters:

Observation/Liaison
OH-6A Cayuse (minigun and CRV7 pod)
Gazelle (CRV7 pod)
Bo-105 (TOW)

Attack
Apache (UK spec)
AH-1S Cobra

Lift
UH-1H
Chinook
Westland Sea King

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 4:16 am**

I approve greatly of the Agusta-Westland AH-1.

I approve so much I'm going to have to kill them all on the ground because they will haunt my dreams.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 5:48 am**

Imperializt Russia wrote:I approve greatly of the Agusta-Westland AH-1.

I approve so much I'm going to have to kill them all on the ground because they will haunt my dreams.

I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I’m fucking retarded but I don’t care, I’m beautiful. I’m having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me “Apache” and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can’t accept me you’re a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:38 am**

I could swear I've seen those exact words somewhere before.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:41 am**

The Archangel Conglomerate wrote:I could swear I've seen those exact words somewhere before.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-sexuall ... helicopter

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:46 am**

Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:49 am**

Being on fire will affect his shot placement.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:57 am**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

Imperializt Russia wrote:Being on fire will affect his shot placement.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:58 am**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

As noted being on fire will probably effect his shooting. If it is on his bare back, or there is only a combat uniform in the way of the napalm he probably isn't doing anything but screaming and rolling.

If he has a plate carrier, with plates in, and the napalm hits that he may still be able to shoot.

If he has a back pack between him and the napalm then he is probably good.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:08 am**

Elan Valleys wrote:http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-sexually-identify-as-an-attack-helicopter

I figured it was one flavor of coppypasta.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:09 am**

Spirit of Hope wrote:
Inyourfaceistan wrote:Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

As noted being on fire will probably effect his shooting. If it is on his bare back, or there is only a combat uniform in the way of the napalm he probably isn't doing anything but screaming and rolling.

If he has a plate carrier, with plates in, and the napalm hits that he may still be able to shoot.

If he has a back pack between him and the napalm then he is probably good.

He has two layers of civilian shirts on...

So fuck me I can't believe I just lost to someone's queen dual-wielding an unbarrel flamethrower and a pistol...

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:09 am**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

Yes, it'll hurt a lot more than getting shot, though. Provided you only got "flame-kissed" and not doused/saturated in partially-burnt napalm... in the later case you're either going to have to stop drop and roll until blankets get lobbed at you, or embrace death and hug the queen.

Gallia- wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:Airplane question:

Suppose I took a basic 2-seat trainer... how much avionics (ECM) do you figure I could cram into the backseat to make it a combat-performer?
Starting with 1966-tech, BTW.

Also, if I were to convert the an Yak-7T/9B with a retrograde-turboprop, would it be possible to fit a 35mm cannon to fire through the propeller-hub, and would it be worthwhile to issue a fuze-setting device with it?

1) You can't really. Saab Safari has trouble enough lofting two people. Look at Gannet at minimum.

2) P-39 did this before it was cool.

1) I was thinking more along the lines of the CAC-Wirraway, T-34C Turbo-Mentor, Turcano, or T-6 Texan II. I'm figuring I could cram a radar-warning receiver and some chaff-dispensers in the backseat.
-Or active-camo

2) P-39 did it without compact turboprops by displacing the engine to the rear-seat and running a modestly-exposed prop-shaft between the pilot's legs.
-I was figuring that instead of taking Yak-7s with 45mm hub-guns and jumping directly to the Yak-15, to utilize the easier to mass-produce turboprops to replace the fairly expensive piston-engines of similar performance, allowing even bigger hub-guns to be realized.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:44 am**

Hurtful Thoughts wrote:
Inyourfaceistan wrote:Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

Yes, it'll hurt a lot more than getting shot, though. Provided you only got "flame-kissed" and not doused/saturated in partially-burnt napalm... in the later case you're either going to have to stop drop and roll until blankets get lobbed at you, or embrace death and hug the queen.

Now what's the difference between "flame kissed" and doused? I'm assuming doused would imply a true-back pack mounted flamethrower or a full on incendiary bomb; but this thing that is being shot at my character is an underbarrel attachment that also doubles like a pistol, apparently...

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:59 am**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:Yes, it'll hurt a lot more than getting shot, though. Provided you only got "flame-kissed" and not doused/saturated in partially-burnt napalm... in the later case you're either going to have to stop drop and roll until blankets get lobbed at you, or embrace death and hug the queen.

Now what's the difference between "flame kissed" and doused? I'm assuming doused would imply a true-back pack mounted flamethrower or a full on incendiary bomb; but this thing that is being shot at my character is an underbarrel attachment that also doubles like a pistol, apparently...

It's Weither you just got touched by the actual flames so you might loose some hair or if some of the actual burning stuff on you. Both are possibilities with a pistol sized flame thrower which should be able to cover a reasonable area.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 12:19 pm**

Hurtful Thoughts wrote:
Inyourfaceistan wrote:Could a reasonably well trained-individual be hit with a small amount of napalm fired from a weak flamethrower in the back and still be able to capably fire a pistol at a stationary target within <15m?

Yes, it'll hurt a lot more than getting shot, though. Provided you only got "flame-kissed" and not doused/saturated in partially-burnt napalm... in the later case you're either going to have to stop drop and roll until blankets get lobbed at you, or embrace death and hug the queen.

Gallia- wrote:
1) You can't really. Saab Safari has trouble enough lofting two people. Look at Gannet at minimum.

2) P-39 did this before it was cool.

1) I was thinking more along the lines of the CAC-Wirraway, T-34C Turbo-Mentor, Turcano, or T-6 Texan II. I'm figuring I could cram a radar-warning receiver and some chaff-dispensers in the backseat.
-Or active-camo

2) P-39 did it without compact turboprops by displacing the engine to the rear-seat and running a modestly-exposed prop-shaft between the pilot's legs.
-I was figuring that instead of taking Yak-7s with 45mm hub-guns and jumping directly to the Yak-15, to utilize the easier to mass-produce turboprops to replace the fairly expensive piston-engines of similar performance, allowing even bigger hub-guns to be realized.

1) Super Tucano's CAS variant has chaff/flare dispensers, RWR, and some other things iirc.

I thought you meant jammers and stuff.

2) I don't know what you mean by "retrograde turboprop". Rear engine? Pusher prop?

Ideally you'd just move the engine to the back with the prop and not even bother with a hub anything. You can now have as big a gun as you want. It'd require rebuilding/rengineering on Yak-15 tier. Alternatively just use Saab 21.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 1:20 pm**

Nationstates is a browser game. There is a roleplaying game on this forum, but they are only tangentially related.

United Earthlings wrote:Furthermore, had you actually read what I posted you would have noticed and comprehended a key point.

Explains a lot.

United Earthlings wrote:1. This is a game.; This is a role-playing forum.
2. This also has stats too and yet seems to indicate I have a richer country than you do both in overall GDP and in GDP Per Capita. Funny isn't it how we can select the stats that best support our own point of view when the truth of the matter is always usually somewhere in the middle.
3. Congratulations, we're all envious of your impressive size, but you would please put it back in your pants now as I would prefer not to have to report you to moderation for public indecency.
4. An Irreverent Fact, but if it's your desire to argue over semantics go right ahead.
5. Why do I need to prove you wrong? Who says there's even a right way or wrong way and even if there is, stating something is more powerful is merely subjective. More powerful in what way? Finally, if you're going to state an objective truth, the burden of proof is on you.

Unofficial calculators are just wanking, abstracted. Anyone can create one and they can produce any output the creator desires. R&C's calculator was better anyways.

I don't use ns stats either. I haven't since about... 2006? I don't even RP with this account. I minmax purely for my own amusement.

Why did I bring it up? Just to remind you that you are a wanker, because your supposed power is based on nothing but you repeatedly prattling on about it. If your claim to power was based on ns stats, at least those are measurable. But it even isn't even that substantial(!) You basically embody the worst aspects of popcap RP: furious wanking based on nothing at all.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 1:42 pm**

Three recommended strategies:

1.)Outflanking the enemy on all side but one, which creates a chokepoint, which you use to your advantage as you pick the huddled escapees off with air support
2.)Outflanking the enemy and then sending in a wedge to cut their tight circle in half
3.)Outflanking them, then sending paratroopers to the center of their circle so that they have to fight on two sides

Quick question(s):
What's the best fighter aircraft for use in large numbers? what about use in small numbers? Takeoff efficiency?

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 5:17 pm**

I'd imagine you send the paratroops in first to tie up their reserves and panic their command, also disrupting their line, before launching your main assault to break this weakened line.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 5:39 pm**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:Yes, it'll hurt a lot more than getting shot, though. Provided you only got "flame-kissed" and not doused/saturated in partially-burnt napalm... in the later case you're either going to have to stop drop and roll until blankets get lobbed at you, or embrace death and hug the queen.

Now what's the difference between "flame kissed" and doused? I'm assuming doused would imply a true-back pack mounted flamethrower or a full on incendiary bomb; but this thing that is being shot at my character is an underbarrel attachment that also doubles like a pistol, apparently...

The difference is whether or not your character is covered in burning fuel, or has simply been singed by a fully-spent flame.

Gallia- wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:Yes, it'll hurt a lot more than getting shot, though. Provided you only got "flame-kissed" and not doused/saturated in partially-burnt napalm... in the later case you're either going to have to stop drop and roll until blankets get lobbed at you, or embrace death and hug the queen.

1) I was thinking more along the lines of the CAC-Wirraway, T-34C Turbo-Mentor, Turcano, or T-6 Texan II. I'm figuring I could cram a radar-warning receiver and some chaff-dispensers in the backseat.
-Or active-camo

2) P-39 did it without compact turboprops by displacing the engine to the rear-seat and running a modestly-exposed prop-shaft between the pilot's legs.
-I was figuring that instead of taking Yak-7s with 45mm hub-guns and jumping directly to the Yak-15, to utilize the easier to mass-produce turboprops to replace the fairly expensive piston-engines of similar performance, allowing even bigger hub-guns to be realized.

1) Super Tucano's CAS variant has chaff/flare dispensers, RWR, and some other things iirc.

I thought you meant jammers and stuff.

2) I don't know what you mean by "retrograde turboprop". Rear engine? Pusher prop?

Ideally you'd just move the engine to the back with the prop and not even bother with a hub anything. You can now have as big a gun as you want. It'd require rebuilding/rengineering on Yak-15 tier. Alternatively just use Saab 21.

"Retrograde" being more of a simple (minimal-mod) refit of an existing plane-frame, much like the YaK-3 to YaK-15 conversion.

Also was considering a rustaz field-kit of a parasol-wing from a military-glider onto some light-planes to make them into low-performance bomb-busses.
-Not quite FICON project craziness. More like taking a gutted glider on pogo-stilts and strapping it on top via over-wing hardpoints. (so a reverse-mistel)

Seems legit. Although mounting the glider underneath would allow for stronger landing-gear on the load to take advantage of the idea.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 5:54 pm**

Hurtful Thoughts wrote:
Inyourfaceistan wrote:
Now what's the difference between "flame kissed" and doused? I'm assuming doused would imply a true-back pack mounted flamethrower or a full on incendiary bomb; but this thing that is being shot at my character is an underbarrel attachment that also doubles like a pistol, apparently...

The difference is whether or not your character is covered in burning fuel, or has simply been singed by a fully-spent flame.

We'll see that's the issue is I have been searching the Internet, but I can't find anything about napalm flamethrowers (other than assuming the M2 variants used in Vietnam use napalm) so I am having a hard time figuring if this pretty much pistol-flamethrower can actually carry enough fuel to project a significant amount of napalm onto my character...

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:03 pm**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:The difference is whether or not your character is covered in burning fuel, or has simply been singed by a fully-spent flame.

We'll see that's the issue is I have been searching the Internet, but I can't find anything about napalm flamethrowers (other than assuming the M2 variants used in Vietnam use napalm) so I am having a hard time figuring if this pretty much pistol-flamethrower can actually carry enough fuel to project a significant amount of napalm onto my character...

It doesn't need to be much to incapacitate. Really even a small amount of napalm on a person, especially on there back, is probably enough to incapacitate.

Your guy only really stands a chance if none landed on him, but instead near him and the flames burned him.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:04 pm**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:The difference is whether or not your character is covered in burning fuel, or has simply been singed by a fully-spent flame.

We'll see that's the issue is I have been searching the Internet, but I can't find anything about napalm flamethrowers (other than assuming the M2 variants used in Vietnam use napalm) so I am having a hard time figuring if this pretty much pistol-flamethrower can actually carry enough fuel to project a significant amount of napalm onto my character...

If they're 15 meters away, I find it relatively unlikely they could quickly and accurately hit someone with a napalm charge from a pistol-sized projector. And at that range, if you can see them pull the weapon out, you stand a good chance of dodging it outright.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:10 pm**

Inyourfaceistan wrote:
Hurtful Thoughts wrote:The difference is whether or not your character is covered in burning fuel, or has simply been singed by a fully-spent flame.

We'll see that's the issue is I have been searching the Internet, but I can't find anything about napalm flamethrowers (other than assuming the M2 variants used in Vietnam use napalm) so I am having a hard time figuring if this pretty much pistol-flamethrower can actually carry enough fuel to project a significant amount of napalm onto my character...

If it's a shotshell-sized cartridge, it's essentially a dragon's breath. Just gonna flame-kiss unless it shoots a non-burning incendiary that ignites on impact.

There was one useful-sized single-shot napalm-flamer...
-As they were disposable, not a whole lot of info on them.

Most likely it was this. Which also vividly explains why getting covered in unburnt fuel is bad.
-In which case shooting a bullet in your back would've been faster.

Posted: **Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:15 pm**

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Inyourfaceistan wrote:
We'll see that's the issue is I have been searching the Internet, but I can't find anything about napalm flamethrowers (other than assuming the M2 variants used in Vietnam use napalm) so I am having a hard time figuring if this pretty much pistol-flamethrower can actually carry enough fuel to project a significant amount of napalm onto my character...

If they're 15 meters away, I find it relatively unlikely they could quickly and accurately hit someone with a napalm charge from a pistol-sized projector. And at that range, if you can see them pull the weapon out, you stand a good chance of dodging it outright.

Well see first it was <15m, then <10m, and now apparently like six feet away...

Basically what happened was we agreed to roll a dice but instead she decided to cheat the duel and napalm my character in the back with an under-barrel flamethrower that can also double as a pistol.
Why she didn't just shoot a regular pistol blows my mind, but whatever...

NationStates

NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08