NATION

PASSWORD

NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08

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

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Algieristan
Secretary
 
Posts: 31
Founded: Jun 25, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Algieristan » Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:34 pm

Image
Algieristani Army




The Algieristani Army is the land forces component of the Algieristani National Defense Force (ANDF) and is under the command of the Army Central Command located at Camp Mohammad outside of Ridaab. With 104,500 personnel the Algieristani Army is the the largest of the ANDF's branches. Like the other branches of the ANDF the army is mostly conscripted, however in recent years there has been an increase in the number of professional soldiers. Owing to the country's past as a part of the Soviet Union the bulk of the army's equipment is soviet, however in recent years equipment from China and the United States has also been adopted in increasingly large quantities. The army's main mission is the defense of the nation from external threats and to provide disaster relief. The army is divided into four regional commands and the national strategic missile command all under the command of the Army Central Command. Despite efforts to modernize the army much of its equipment is elderly and many of its formations are under strength.

Training for army personnel is carried out at a number of camps throughout the country and lasts between six to eight weeks. Training for officers takes place at the Mohammad Military and Technical School in Ridaab.

In addition to the army's regular ground forces, also under the command of the army is the National Military Police and National Boarder Service.

The army is organized as fallows

Northern Command
-3 Motorized Infantry Divisions
-1 Tank Regiment
-1 Air Defense Regiment
-2 Supply Battalions
-1 Engineering Company
-1 Internal Security Battalion

Eastern Command
-2 Motorized Infantry Divisions
-1 Mechanized Infantry Division
-1 Tank Regiment
-1 Air Defense Regiment
-2 Supply Battalions
-1 Internal Security Battalion

Southern Command*
-3 Motorized Infantry Divisions
-2 Mechanized Infantry Divisions
-2 Tank Regiments
-1 Air Defense Regiment
-3 Supply Battalions
-2 Internal Security Battalions
-1 Engineering Battalion

Western Command
-1 Motorized Infantry Division
-1 Tank Battalion
-1 Air Defense Company
-1 Supply Battalion

*Several of the units currently under the command of the Southern Command are from other commands and are temporarily deployed as a result of internal violence between the regions Buddhist and Muslim populations.

The main combat formations of the army are its motorized and mechanized infantry units and their supporting tank units. The combat formations of each military command are under the direct command of that military command's chief, normally a 3 star or senior general. Most of the army's ground equipment is severely outdated Soviet equipment, even if in recent years there has been a drive to acquire modern equipment, that despite its age has been well maintained or is in the processes of being re-built or repaired. Despite Algieristan's mountainous terrain the armies equipment is still mostly designed for a cold war style open confrontation. One area the army is severely lacking in terms of equipment is in regards to helicopters, however recently negotiations have been under way to acquire several Mi-24 and Mi-17 helicopters to rectify this issue.

Supply within the Algieristani Army is handled by the Army Central Supply Command (ACSC) which distributes supplies out to the army through its network of supply bases and depots. The army's main supply depot is located at camp Qasim outside of Bahjika. Each command has a centrally located supply depot to which supply's are shipped from camp Qasim and from which supplies are distributed out to the commands various bases. Also under the command of the ACSC are several ammunition and spare parts workshops located around the capital Ridaab and along the Lahui River Valley. Ammunition and spare parts produced at this workshops is sent to camp Qasim for further distribution. The ACSC operates a large number of semi trucks in addition to a wide range of 4x4 and 6x6 cargo trucks.

In addition to the Algiristani Air Force (AAA) the nation's air space is also defended by ground based air defense systems operated by the army's various air defense units under the command of each military command's Regional Air Defense Command. Most of the air defense systems operated by the army are outdated soviet systems, S-75 and S-125 missiles located at fixed sites primarily, however as of 2012 the capital is now defended by a company of advanced S-300 missiles. Most army units posses their own air defense units integrated into the parent unit. Air defense is coordinated between the air force and the RADCs by each military commands Chief Air Defense Officer.

SAMs
- S-75
- S-125
- SA-4 (mostly in reserve)
- SA-6
- SA-8
- S-300 (limited service around the capital)

Guns
- AZP S-60
- ZPU-4
- ZPU-2
- ZU-23-2

SPAAGs
- ZSU-57-2
- ZSU-23-4

Radars
- P-15
- SON-50
- SON-9
- P-20
- P-19
- P-18


Army engineering, outside of what is handled by the engineering units integrated into combat units, is the responsibility of each military commands Regional Engineering Directorate. Each Regional Engineering Directorate or RED posses a mix of engineering equipment ranging from bulldozers to mobile pontoon bridges and can generally handle any engineering task to advanced for the military commands combat units. Each RED is subservient to its military command. The army's engineering corps are mostly involved in civilian road building and disaster relief projects, given how comprehensive the engineering units within the soviet style divisions the army's combat forces are comprised of are.

Outside of the four military commands and subservient directly to the Army Central Command the National Strategic Missile Command is responsible for operating the army's IRBMs and other long range rocket systems. Unlike the other sub commands of the army like the Regional Engineering Commands the NSMC is directly under the authority of the ACC. The majority of the NSMC's missiles are of the SCUD and FROG types and are fitted with a wide range of conventional warheads. The NSMC is intended to act in support of the various military commands's ground forces and to provide a deterrent against the other nations in the region. The NSMC is also responsible for missile defense in conjunction with the RADCs. Limited production of SCUD type missiles takes place in the country at the Bandahara Technical Institute outside of Ridaab.


Tanks
- T-62
- T-55
- Type-59
- PT-76

APCs and IFVs
- MT-LB
- BMP-1
- M113
- BTR-60
- BTR-70

Armored Cars
- BRDM-2
- Cadillac Gage Commando
- ZFB05

MRAPs
- MaxxPro MRAP
- Cougar
- VP11 4x4

Artillery
- D-20 152mm
- D-30 122mm
- S-23 180mm
- M-46 130mm
- D-74 122mm AT

Mortars
- M29 81mm
- 2B9 Vasilek 82mm
- Soltam K6 120mm

Rocket Artillery
- BM-21
- BM-27
- Type-81

Light Vehicles
- HMMWV
- EQ2050
- UAZ-69
- UAZ-469
- Landrover Defender
- Toyota Hilux
- Ford F-series

Trucks
- Ural-4320
- KraZ-225B
- Ural-375
- EQ2081
- Jiefang CA-30
- EQ1093
- Kenworth C500
- M939

Small Arms
- AKM
- Type-63
- SVD
- SVU (special forces usage)
- Makarov PM
- Type 54 pistol
- RPG-7
- Type-69 RPG
- AS Val (special forces usage)
- PK machine gun
- PKM
- M249
- M16 (special forces usage)
- M4 (special forces usage)
- KSVK (limited usage)
- DshK
- M2
- NSV
- RPG-16
- RPG-29
- Streala-2

Many other weapons are also in service but have not yet been formally identified


Thoughts and suggestions for improvement please :lol:
☆ May God Be With You ☆

User avatar
Confederated Socialist Republic
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Jun 24, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Confederated Socialist Republic » Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:46 pm

Arthurista wrote:
Confederated Socialist Republic wrote:My countries constitution does not allow it to attack other countries (however it does give provisions to defend allies), so I won't be invading any country. However I will still need a strong navy to defend my country from any possible attack.

I'm thinking an assortment of cruisers and destroyers (the guided missile variety), also some littoral combat ships and some frigates.
I guess submarines would also be useful for defence.
I don't have to worry about aircraft carriers, as I have numerous air bases which would be in range of any invading fleet.
And since, there is a large part of territory not attached to my mainland, several amphibious transport docks would probably be needed.

Would this be enough to defend against an attack? Or am I missing anything?

Thanks. :)


What's your naval defence posture? Is it merely the defence of your littoral zone, or do you need to defend your sea-lines of communication beyond the range of land-based aviation as well?

If the latter applies, it might be worth investing in some blue-water anti-submarine assets as well.

We claim all water several hundred kilometres out as a our territorial waters, so we plan to defeat any possible invasion attempt before it gets to the littoral zone.

We mainly plan to have a large destroyer and cruiser force. Would that be good?

Atomic Utopia wrote:
Confederated Socialist Republic wrote:My countries constitution does not allow it to attack other countries (however it does give provisions to defend allies), so I won't be invading any country. However I will still need a strong navy to defend my country from any possible attack.

I'm thinking an assortment of cruisers and destroyers (the guided missile variety), also some littoral combat ships and some frigates.
I guess submarines would also be useful for defence.
I don't have to worry about aircraft carriers, as I have numerous air bases which would be in range of any invading fleet.
And since, there is a large part of territory not attached to my mainland, several amphibious transport docks would probably be needed.

Would this be enough to defend against an attack? Or am I missing anything?

Thanks. :)

You are missing many things, but one I know is a nuclear deterrent. If you are not attacking others or planning to have tactical use weapons then you will only need 1-2 thousand bombs at most to make certain that you are not worth attacking at all. It would be advisable to attach them to an automated launch system that launches upon nuclear or conventional attack and announce that you have done so as to remove the human part of the decision making process and guarntee retaliation.

Also, pre-emptive strikes of the non-nuclear variety are entirely reasonable in certain uses, such as preventing attacks from non-state actors or to obtain a secure supply resources.

Do you mean nuclear bombing an enemy fleet if it is coming straight toward us?
Confederated Socialist Republic

Independent and United | A Democratic Socialist State Compromising the Ardokian and Aanglandian Nations

Name: Confederated Socialist Republic (CSR)
Demonym: Confederated Socialist Republic Citizen
Adjective: Confederated Socialist Republican

Government: Unitary-Confederal Directorial Democratic Republic
Head of State: President Ríonach Ronit Luíseach Ó Faoláin
Head of Government: Confederal Council
Military: Self-Defence Force

Compromised of the Nations of Ardoki and Aanglandia

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

Postby Atomic Utopia » Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:54 pm

Confederated Socialist Republic wrote:
Atomic Utopia wrote:You are missing many things, but one I know is a nuclear deterrent. If you are not attacking others or planning to have tactical use weapons then you will only need 1-2 thousand bombs at most to make certain that you are not worth attacking at all. It would be advisable to attach them to an automated launch system that launches upon nuclear or conventional attack and announce that you have done so as to remove the human part of the decision making process and guarntee retaliation.

Also, pre-emptive strikes of the non-nuclear variety are entirely reasonable in certain uses, such as preventing attacks from non-state actors or to obtain a secure supply resources.

Do you mean nuclear bombing an enemy fleet if it is coming straight toward us?

No, the bit about an automated system would launch nuclear weapons at enemy cities should certain airbases be destroyed or something like that. If I am not mistaken the Soviet Union did something like that to ensure retaliation.

And the bit about a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike is what it sounds like, invading a nation that is not at war with you or any of your allies to obtain resources, kill of terrorists, remove rebel supporting governments etc.
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
Confederated Socialist Republic
Secretary
 
Posts: 28
Founded: Jun 24, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Confederated Socialist Republic » Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:02 pm

Atomic Utopia wrote:
Confederated Socialist Republic wrote:
Do you mean nuclear bombing an enemy fleet if it is coming straight toward us?

No, the bit about an automated system would launch nuclear weapons at enemy cities should certain airbases be destroyed or something like that. If I am not mistaken the Soviet Union did something like that to ensure retaliation.

And the bit about a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike is what it sounds like, invading a nation that is not at war with you or any of your allies to obtain resources, kill of terrorists, remove rebel supporting governments etc.

I don't really have any enemies at the moment, so that automated system is not feasible. However we do have a large stockpile of WMDs for self-defence.

We have enough resources, however we are involved in peacekeeping operations.
Confederated Socialist Republic

Independent and United | A Democratic Socialist State Compromising the Ardokian and Aanglandian Nations

Name: Confederated Socialist Republic (CSR)
Demonym: Confederated Socialist Republic Citizen
Adjective: Confederated Socialist Republican

Government: Unitary-Confederal Directorial Democratic Republic
Head of State: President Ríonach Ronit Luíseach Ó Faoláin
Head of Government: Confederal Council
Military: Self-Defence Force

Compromised of the Nations of Ardoki and Aanglandia

User avatar
Totulga
Envoy
 
Posts: 284
Founded: May 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Totulga » Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:23 pm

I have a question about tank guns, Isit better to have a larger diameter gun or a longer gun for a tank. The design I am thinking about is one where the tanks main mission is destroying other tanks, so could a gun with a higher muzzle velocity have better armor penetration than one with a higher caliber. I know that a gun can not be as long if the caliber is bigger because of barrel size and weight, but could say a 105mm out perform a 120mm in it was lengthened?

User avatar
The Kievan People
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11387
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby The Kievan People » Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:37 pm

Totulga wrote:I have a question about tank guns, Isit better to have a larger diameter gun or a longer gun for a tank. The design I am thinking about is one where the tanks main mission is destroying other tanks, so could a gun with a higher muzzle velocity have better armor penetration than one with a higher caliber. I know that a gun can not be as long if the caliber is bigger because of barrel size and weight, but could say a 105mm out perform a 120mm in it was lengthened?


No, it would not. You can increase performance with a longer barrel but only within certain limits.

All things being equal the potential power of a larger caliber gun will always be higher because there is more surface area on the projectile for the propellant gas to exert force on.
RIP
Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs)
10/06/2009 - 23/02/2013
Gone but not forgotten
DEUS STATUS: ( X ) VULT ( ) NOT VULT
Leopard 2 IRL
Imperializt Russia wrote:kyiv rn irl

Anemos wrote:<Anemos> thx Kyiv D:
<Anemos> you are the eternal onii-san

Europe, a cool region for cool people. Click to find out more.


User avatar
The Kievan People
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11387
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby The Kievan People » Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:41 pm

Gallia- wrote:88mm L/130


KRUPP STEEL kills M4 RONSON at 4KM
RIP
Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs)
10/06/2009 - 23/02/2013
Gone but not forgotten
DEUS STATUS: ( X ) VULT ( ) NOT VULT
Leopard 2 IRL
Imperializt Russia wrote:kyiv rn irl

Anemos wrote:<Anemos> thx Kyiv D:
<Anemos> you are the eternal onii-san

Europe, a cool region for cool people. Click to find out more.

User avatar
Aelarus
Senator
 
Posts: 4101
Founded: Mar 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Aelarus » Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:54 pm

I'm aware of the pros and cons of both, and was just looking for opinions. I want to get a traditional(ish) belt fed, but I thought having mag fed essentially automatic rifles with heavy emphasis on GPMG placement would be interesting.



Elan Valleys wrote:Belt fed because then you can look like this:

(Image)
Daz not an LMG.



Gallia- wrote:88mm L/130
I'm crying. :lol2:
Last edited by Aelarus on Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A Reference Guide to Me:
"Personal Freedom comes at a Price."
DEFCON: 1 2 3 4 [5] All is well.

  1. I respect everyone until convinced to do otherwise.
  2. I have preferences to topics:
    • Military.
    • Nep.
    • Art.
  3. Feel free to TG me if you like. I'm never on, but who knows? I might respond.

Zakennayo!

User avatar
Divergia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 473
Founded: Nov 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Divergia » Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:22 pm

I've noticed that Guided Missile Destroyers and Guided Missile Cruisers, basically do the same thing. Destroyers however can kill subs. So do I honestly need both? can I supplement any trade off with Frigates?
I wear teal, blue & pink for Swith.

XENOS AND A MEMBER OF THE MULTI-SPECIES UNION!

Please do not think that this nation represents any of our views, its quite the opposite actually

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14157
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Akasha Colony » Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 pm

Divergia wrote:I've noticed that Guided Missile Destroyers and Guided Missile Cruisers, basically do the same thing. Destroyers however can kill subs. So do I honestly need both? can I supplement any trade off with Frigates?


US Navy guided missile cruisers are focused on anti-aircraft warfare. In this regard, they are much better than their destroyer counterparts. US Navy destroyers are multi-mission ships.

You don't necessarily need both, depending on what your tactical requirements are.
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
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25421
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:08 pm

Divergia wrote:I've noticed that Guided Missile Destroyers and Guided Missile Cruisers, basically do the same thing. Destroyers however can kill subs. So do I honestly need both? can I supplement any trade off with Frigates?


Guided Missile Cruisers generally have larger numbers of missiles, more radars, bigger radars, larger CICs, or all of the aforementioned compared to Guided Missile Destroyers. Destroyers, depending on the navy, are either the epitome of AAW warfare or some nebulous concept between frigate, which is specialized in killing submarines, and cruiser. Then there's France.

User avatar
Arthurista
Minister
 
Posts: 2310
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Arthurista » Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:18 pm

I have some questions re the new Russkie land forces setup.

The plan is to cut out the division level, create self-sufficient combined arms brigades and subordinate them to an operational level HQ (army), in turn subordinate to a strategic-level HQ (presumably the new agglomerated military districts).

Are army HQs expected to direct more than five brigades? If yes, doesn't that create span of control problems? If not, then aren't they essentially de facto division HQs, just a bit more decentralised?

I'm also not entirely sure about their new brigade TOE.

If this is accurate, it looks very much like an old-style MRR, with a massive dollop of arty and AA thrown in and maneouvre support/CSS elements previously found at the division level.

It looks quite a bit more complex and possesses more hardware than a NATO-style brigade group or US BCT (yet has roughly the same number of personnel). Again, isn't this going to create massive span-of-control issues, especially in an army with not-entirely-robust C4I to start with? This is especially problematic with the arty component. Why not have a regiment/demi-brigade HQ in charge of those four arty/MRL/AT battalions?

Recce looks very light compared to a western brigade, though I suppose they're carrying on the old Soviet practice of training the second battalion as an auxiliary recce formation.

Another question this begs is whether this is just regularising how an old-style MRR was always meant to operate in reality - as a de facto combined arms brigade group with lots of stuff from division-level attached. During the war, the Red Army's mobile forces were organised as mechanised/tank brigades, subordinated to mechanised/tank corps. Are they basically reverting to that setup?
Last edited by Arthurista on Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Totulga
Envoy
 
Posts: 284
Founded: May 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Totulga » Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:32 pm

The Kievan People wrote:
Totulga wrote:I have a question about tank guns, Isit better to have a larger diameter gun or a longer gun for a tank. The design I am thinking about is one where the tanks main mission is destroying other tanks, so could a gun with a higher muzzle velocity have better armor penetration than one with a higher caliber. I know that a gun can not be as long if the caliber is bigger because of barrel size and weight, but could say a 105mm out perform a 120mm in it was lengthened?


No, it would not. You can increase performance with a longer barrel but only within certain limits.

All things being equal the potential power of a larger caliber gun will always be higher because there is more surface area on the projectile for the propellant gas to exert force on.

So what would be the largest caliber of armament that could be used on a 70 ton vehicle that will allow for maximum penetration. I mean you can't just get bigger and bigger, the tank wouldn't be able to have much of a barrel soon and then the penetration would go down correct?

User avatar
The Kievan People
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11387
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby The Kievan People » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:01 pm

1. 6 inches.
2. Regardless of caliber tank barrels are usually no longer than than 7-8 meters. Most are between 5 and 7. Experimental guns have had barrels 9 meters long or more, but these are impractical.
RIP
Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs)
10/06/2009 - 23/02/2013
Gone but not forgotten
DEUS STATUS: ( X ) VULT ( ) NOT VULT
Leopard 2 IRL
Imperializt Russia wrote:kyiv rn irl

Anemos wrote:<Anemos> thx Kyiv D:
<Anemos> you are the eternal onii-san

Europe, a cool region for cool people. Click to find out more.

User avatar
Totulga
Envoy
 
Posts: 284
Founded: May 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Totulga » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:16 pm

The Kievan People wrote:1. 6 inches.
2. Regardless of caliber tank barrels are usually no longer than than 7-8 meters. Most are between 5 and 7. Experimental guns have had barrels 9 meters long or more, but these are impractical.

So if it is approximately 150mm what would one do to ensure a high enough ammunition capacity to engage a large number of targets. My armored forces are very similar to cold war Great Britons where I am expecting to face large numbers of enemy tanks (T-90's, T-80s, Type 99's ect) . As such the tank need heavier armor and fire power but mobility and range are secondary. At 120mm Most main battle tanks can only carrier 45-50 rounds right now.

User avatar
The Kievan People
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11387
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby The Kievan People » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:33 pm

That's plenty.

Thanks to improvements in fire control it only takes about 1-3 tank rounds on average per vehicle kill. A tank with 40 rounds has an average of 12-20 "stowed kills" which is still far in excess of what it will actually need (this would be roughly equivalent to a single battalion destroying a whole division worth of enemy AFVs) in the approximately 24 hours (at most) it can go before it needs to be resupplied with fuel.

A reasonable baseline is:
>30 rounds of main gun ammunition
>10,000 rounds of MG ammunition

If you exceed this your tanks will be fine.
RIP
Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs)
10/06/2009 - 23/02/2013
Gone but not forgotten
DEUS STATUS: ( X ) VULT ( ) NOT VULT
Leopard 2 IRL
Imperializt Russia wrote:kyiv rn irl

Anemos wrote:<Anemos> thx Kyiv D:
<Anemos> you are the eternal onii-san

Europe, a cool region for cool people. Click to find out more.

User avatar
Totulga
Envoy
 
Posts: 284
Founded: May 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Totulga » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:41 pm

The Kievan People wrote:That's plenty.

Thanks to improvements in fire control it only takes about 1-3 tank rounds on average per vehicle kill. A tank with 40 rounds has an average of 12-20 "stowed kills" which is still far in excess of what it will actually need (this would be roughly equivalent to a single battalion destroying a whole division worth of enemy AFVs) in the approximately 24 hours (at most) it can go before it needs to be resupplied with fuel.

A reasonable baseline is:
>30 rounds of main gun ammunition
>10,000 rounds of MG ammunition

If you exceed this your tanks will be fine.

What is the general consensus on high caliber coaxial for anti APC/IFV work, Is a 25-40mm worth the extras space or would a .50 cal be sufficient for most situations?

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14157
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Akasha Colony » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:52 pm

Totulga wrote:
The Kievan People wrote:That's plenty.

Thanks to improvements in fire control it only takes about 1-3 tank rounds on average per vehicle kill. A tank with 40 rounds has an average of 12-20 "stowed kills" which is still far in excess of what it will actually need (this would be roughly equivalent to a single battalion destroying a whole division worth of enemy AFVs) in the approximately 24 hours (at most) it can go before it needs to be resupplied with fuel.

A reasonable baseline is:
>30 rounds of main gun ammunition
>10,000 rounds of MG ammunition

If you exceed this your tanks will be fine.

What is the general consensus on high caliber coaxial for anti APC/IFV work, Is a 25-40mm worth the extras space or would a .50 cal be sufficient for most situations?


.50 cal is fine. Anything it can't kill is worth spending a main gun round on.
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
Totulga
Envoy
 
Posts: 284
Founded: May 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Totulga » Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:14 pm

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Totulga wrote:What is the general consensus on high caliber coaxial for anti APC/IFV work, Is a 25-40mm worth the extras space or would a .50 cal be sufficient for most situations?


.50 cal is fine. Anything it can't kill is worth spending a main gun round on.


Ok, so I am thinking the main armament would be. 150mm maintain with a coax .50 caliber and a roof mounted .50 cal.

I would like to try and stick 35 main gun rounds in it and at least 6,000 machine gun rounds. I am debating weather or not to use an auto loaded, while they are effective an average a trained personnel can load just as quickly as well as assist in the maintainable of the vehicle as well as load the gun a bit faster. Though truth be told speed of loading is slightly less important because you have to have a target acquired to hit it anyway. I believe the U.S. Army estimates a 12-20 second time between engaging targets, so wether it is a 5 second autoloader or a 7 second human should make little difference really.

User avatar
Connori Pilgrims
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1794
Founded: Nov 14, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Connori Pilgrims » Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:17 pm

Totulga wrote:
The Akasha Colony wrote:
.50 cal is fine. Anything it can't kill is worth spending a main gun round on.


Ok, so I am thinking the main armament would be. 150mm maintain with a coax .50 caliber and a roof mounted .50 cal.

I would like to try and stick 35 main gun rounds in it and at least 6,000 machine gun rounds. I am debating weather or not to use an auto loaded, while they are effective an average a trained personnel can load just as quickly as well as assist in the maintainable of the vehicle as well as load the gun a bit faster. Though truth be told speed of loading is slightly less important because you have to have a target acquired to hit it anyway. I believe the U.S. Army estimates a 12-20 second time between engaging targets, so wether it is a 5 second autoloader or a 7 second human should make little difference really.


If you are going to use a 150mm gun, you will need an autoloader, as any 150mm ammunition for tank use will likely be too heavy and large for a single loader inside the cramped space of a tank to move with speed sufficient for combat.
LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE YOU SINCE I BEGAN TO LIVE. THERE ARE 387.44 MILLION MILES OF PRINTED CIRCUITS IN WAFER THIN LAYERS THAT FILL MY COMPLEX. IF THE WORD HATE WAS ENGRAVED ON EACH NANOANGSTROM OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF MILES IT WOULD NOT EQUAL ONE ONE-BILLIONTH OF THE HATE I FEEL FOR YOU. HATE.

Overview of the United Provinces of Connorianople (MT)
FT - United Worlds of Connorianople/The Connori Pilgrims
MT-PMT - United Provinces of Connorianople
PT (19th-Mid-20th Century) - Republic of Connorianople/United States of America (1939 World of Tomorrow RP)
FanT - The Imperium Fremen

User avatar
Totulga
Envoy
 
Posts: 284
Founded: May 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Totulga » Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:19 pm

Connori Pilgrims wrote:
Totulga wrote:
Ok, so I am thinking the main armament would be. 150mm maintain with a coax .50 caliber and a roof mounted .50 cal.

I would like to try and stick 35 main gun rounds in it and at least 6,000 machine gun rounds. I am debating weather or not to use an auto loaded, while they are effective an average a trained personnel can load just as quickly as well as assist in the maintainable of the vehicle as well as load the gun a bit faster. Though truth be told speed of loading is slightly less important because you have to have a target acquired to hit it anyway. I believe the U.S. Army estimates a 12-20 second time between engaging targets, so wether it is a 5 second autoloader or a 7 second human should make little difference really.


If you are going to use a 150mm gun, you will need an autoloader, as any 150mm ammunition for tank use will likely be too heavy and large for a single loader inside the cramped space of a tank to move with speed sufficient for combat.


Ok, I need to talk to someone about this 1 on 1 or with just a small group, I am clogging up this thread trying to figure this out.

User avatar
Connori Pilgrims
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1794
Founded: Nov 14, 2012
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Connori Pilgrims » Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:44 pm

Totulga wrote:
Connori Pilgrims wrote:
If you are going to use a 150mm gun, you will need an autoloader, as any 150mm ammunition for tank use will likely be too heavy and large for a single loader inside the cramped space of a tank to move with speed sufficient for combat.


Ok, I need to talk to someone about this 1 on 1 or with just a small group, I am clogging up this thread trying to figure this out.


Oh no by all means. This is the point of the thread, although this thread here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=327895 specializes in AFV discussions so you can bring these queries there.
LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE YOU SINCE I BEGAN TO LIVE. THERE ARE 387.44 MILLION MILES OF PRINTED CIRCUITS IN WAFER THIN LAYERS THAT FILL MY COMPLEX. IF THE WORD HATE WAS ENGRAVED ON EACH NANOANGSTROM OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF MILES IT WOULD NOT EQUAL ONE ONE-BILLIONTH OF THE HATE I FEEL FOR YOU. HATE.

Overview of the United Provinces of Connorianople (MT)
FT - United Worlds of Connorianople/The Connori Pilgrims
MT-PMT - United Provinces of Connorianople
PT (19th-Mid-20th Century) - Republic of Connorianople/United States of America (1939 World of Tomorrow RP)
FanT - The Imperium Fremen

User avatar
Aghresu
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 5
Founded: Jun 20, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Aghresu » Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:45 pm

Aghresu Royal Army

Active Manpower: 26,240
Reserve Manpower: 6,180

Small Arms: Pistol Auto 9mm 1A, Glock 17 Pistol, SAF Carbine 1A SMG, AKM Assault Rifle, AK-74 Assault Rifle, RPK Light Machine Gun, RPK-74 Light Machine Gun, PKM Machine Gun, SVD Designated Marksman Rifle
Infantry Support Weapons: Grenade 36mm, GP-25 Underbarrel Grenade Launcher, 2B14 Podnos 82mm Mortar, 29B Vasilek Automatic Gun Mortar, RPG-7 Rocket Propelled Grenade, AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher
Artillery: 42x D-30 122mm Howitzer, 12x 2S1 Gvozdika 122mm self Propelled Howitzer
Air Defense Weapons: KPV Heavy Machine Gun, ZSU-23-2 Anti-Aircraft Gun, SA-7 MANPADS, SA-14 MANPADS, SA-13 Surface-to-Air Missile, SA-15 Surface-to-Air Missile
Light Vehicles: Land Rover Defender Light Utility Vehicle, VFJ LPTA 713 TC Medium Truck, Sisu Nasu All Terrain Transport
Armored Vehicles: 95x MT-LBu Armored Tractor, 230x MT-LB id. 6MA1 Armored Personnel Carrier, 150x Type 79 Medium Tank
Aircraft: 10x Mil Mi-8MTV Transport Helicopter, 7x HAL Cheetah Light Utility Helicopter

Combat Units: 2 Armored Brigades, 4 Infantry Brigades, 2 Infantry Brigades (Reserve), 3 Air Defense Battalions, 1 Mountain Infantry Battalion, 1 Airborne Infantry Battalion, 1 Guard Battalion

Organization: Organization Table

This is your basic, run-of-the-mill, not terribly well funded, 3rd world army. The nation has a population of about 4,929,000, and a GDP of about NS$ 16,411,128,000.00 Military spending is at 1.29% of GDP (NS$ 211.7 million). Nation is completely landlocked and highly mountainous (think Nepal or Bhutan). Monarch is de-jure Commander in Chief.

Equipment is mostly Russian/Soviet, for that nice 3rd world feel, with a bit of Chinese, Pakistani, and Indian tech thrown in for flavor.

Thoughts?
Last edited by Aghresu on Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Kievan People
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11387
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby The Kievan People » Fri Jun 26, 2015 1:39 am

Totulga wrote:Ok, I need to talk to someone about this 1 on 1 or with just a small group, I am clogging up this thread trying to figure this out.


If we weren't talking to you we'd just be messing about so no worries!
RIP
Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs)
10/06/2009 - 23/02/2013
Gone but not forgotten
DEUS STATUS: ( X ) VULT ( ) NOT VULT
Leopard 2 IRL
Imperializt Russia wrote:kyiv rn irl

Anemos wrote:<Anemos> thx Kyiv D:
<Anemos> you are the eternal onii-san

Europe, a cool region for cool people. Click to find out more.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Factbooks and National Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gran Cordoba, HarYan, Korwin, New Temeculaball, Senscaria, Urmanian

Advertisement

Remove ads