NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08

[Imperializt Russia]

Unless you're facing a grossly superior opponent and surrounded by his allies, or a direct coalition of two large (or three) nations, an invasion along three borders will be stretching his forces greatly.
With a sufficient counterattack force you can prepare to act against these invading groups, you might be able to break his assault.

[Laywenrania]

No just one invasion on all 3 at once... I'm surrounded one the northern, western, and southern borders with the eastern being the ocean.

How does the terrain looks like? What are your enemies forces/strength? Have you Air superiority?
etc

[Mitheldalond]

Excessive number of torpedo tubes... if it is within the same age and generation as the Gearing-class then less torpedoes, more AA guns would be a better use of your time. The era of mass torpedo strikes of the kind the IJN envisioned would be more or less gone by the time these things would be finished, assuming you start construction at around the same time as the Gearing.

Personally, I'd delete two torpedo tube banks and replace with another dual 5"/38 mount and more Bofors guns (so basically don't change the Gearing base design) or delete the extra torpedo banks and make the destroyer correspondingly smaller... it'll end up looking like a Yank style Battle/Barfleur-class destroyer.

As the previous poster, I would say too many torpedo tubes for that time. Even the Shimakaze had only 15. And I wouldn't delete the aft turret. It leaves a pretty big gap in fire zones. So I would suggest to leave the aft turret and remove that torpedo tube.
And with the added guns (esp. the Bofors on the bridge) your top weight could get critical.
Oh and you have 20 Bofors according to your description.

It's actually supposed to be more in line with the Fletcher as far as timing goes. For real life, I'd agree about the torpedo tubes (I actually have an AA version of this which replaces the aft 3 torpedo mounts with quad Bofors mounts and hangs out with the carriers), but this is designed for NS, where people regularly form their surface combatants up into a battle line and exchange broadsides with the enemy even in MT. So you know there are going to be formations with dozens of battleships thrown at you in NS WWII. That's what these are mainly designed for; waiting for the enemy BBs to form their battle line to engage my BBs, then charging forward and massacring everything in sight with hundreds of torpedoes (destroyers operate in squadrons of 5, so that's 100 torpedoes per squadron).

How about I take out the two twin Bofors amidships (bear with me), and move the fourth torpedo tube into their place (I'd probably have to move the aft funnel forward a bit to fit them). Then take out the #2 5" mount, and put the #3 mount back where it belongs. Then move the quad Bofors off the top of the bridge and put it in the #2 mount position. Finally, put a fourth quad Bofors mount behind the aft 5" mount, and remove the depth charge rails to make room for the 4 20mm Oerlikons?

That should solve the firing arc and top heavy issues, while maintaining a hefty AA and torpedo armament. And the ship would look a bit more unique, which is a plus.

[Palakistan]

Defend as in repelling multiple large-scale invasions all over the long borders?

No just one invasion on all 3 at once... I'm surrounded one the northern, western, and southern borders with the eastern being the ocean.

Set up ok defenses all along those borders, but leave funnel points to trick his forces into your trap.

[Iltica]

Unless you're facing a grossly superior opponent and surrounded by his allies, or a direct coalition of two large (or three) nations, an invasion along three borders will be stretching his forces greatly.
With a sufficient counterattack force you can prepare to act against these invading groups, you might be able to break his assault.

That's precisely the problem, their army is massive by comparison just by nature of their population size, they could easily send forces larger than my entire army to each border simultaneously. He's the light gray bit we're the tan. Attempting to go on the offensive is hopeless at this point, the best we can hope for is to make it too much of a hassle to invade. The coastline is also very vulnerable since I cannot support a comparable navy
Currently all 3 borders are demilitarized zones, with the only legal way in or out of the country being the Indian Ocean.
Maybe some kind of giant wall or minefield or something? Something that makes any entry point into a nasty choke point if they try and pierce it. That still leaves it vulnerable to naval blockade though...

[Schwere Panzer Abieltung 502]

Defend as in repelling multiple large-scale invasions all over the long borders?

No just one invasion on all 3 at once... I'm surrounded one the northern, western, and southern borders with the eastern being the ocean.

Make a counterthrust in one very concentrated location with a lot of forces, gunning for some important thing behind the enemy's lines. Hopefully he will slow his own advance to isolate your attack, giving you breathing room and at least evening the odds a little.

[Velkanika]

Unless you're facing a grossly superior opponent and surrounded by his allies, or a direct coalition of two large (or three) nations, an invasion along three borders will be stretching his forces greatly.
With a sufficient counterattack force you can prepare to act against these invading groups, you might be able to break his assault.

That's precisely the problem, their army is massive by comparison just by nature of their population size, they could easily send forces larger than my entire army to each border simultaneously. He's the light gray bit we're the tan. Attempting to go on the offensive is hopeless at this point, the best we can hope for is to make it too much of a hassle to invade. The coastline is also very vulnerable since I cannot support a comparable navy
Currently all 3 borders are demilitarized zones, with the only legal way in or out of the country being the Indian Ocean.
Maybe some kind of giant wall or minefield or something? Something that makes any entry point into a nasty choke point if they try and pierce it. That still leaves it vulnerable to naval blockade though...

The good news is your borders are all rugged excluding the Indian Ocean coastal plain due to the East African Rift running right down the middle of your territory. Your western borders are also heavily forested with few roads. You should be able to use that to your advantage.

[Iltica]

That helps a little bit, thanks. Do you think it would be worth fortifying in some way during the current peace or does that not really work in the modern world?

[Husseinarti]

That helps a little bit, thanks. Do you think it would be worth fortifying in some way during the current peace or does that not really work in the modern world?

Fortifications, if anything, will have your enemy waste munitions on making them ineffective, or having to move around them completely.

[Tekeristan]

That helps a little bit, thanks. Do you think it would be worth fortifying in some way during the current peace or does that not really work in the modern world?

You need allies.

[Padnak]

mines

massive amounts of mines

[Palakistan]

That helps a little bit, thanks. Do you think it would be worth fortifying in some way during the current peace or does that not really work in the modern world?

You need allies.

Yeah, make a alliance with that Middle East country.

[The Kievan People]

That helps a little bit, thanks. Do you think it would be worth fortifying in some way during the current peace or does that not really work in the modern world?

They do. But more because of their potential to provide cover and concealment than because of the inherent protective qualities of the structure.

Generally the best peacetime policy is to construct extensive, simple (earth, wood, concrete) defensive works that can be rapidly occupied by your forces in the event of an emergency and will provide some level of protection from observation. Since it is relatively simple to observe their construction these works should exceed the amount you actually need by a large margin to create uncertainty about your true disposition and provide flexibility to alternate sites as needed.

The importance of overhead cover cannot be stressed enough. Even tarps are of great benefit.

If it is politically acceptable towns are excellent places to site important rear services like supply dumps and repair depots. Because they consist of structures by definition a military warehouse or garage can "hide in plain sight" there with minimal imagination. Civilian buildings can also be purposed rapidly if necessary, politics notwithstanding.

Critical sites like high level HQs or oil refineries can be protected from destruction (disabling less so) by deep bunkers, preferably bored into mountains or hills. Depending on the amount of money and time available (it is both slow and expensive) deep tunnels can also be used to protect critical equipment like aircraft. Consumables like oil and munitions are not really worth protecting in this manner.

Underground storage tanks are quite a nice place to keep POL. They are cheap, can be emplaced rapidly almost anywhere and are easily concealed once buried. They do not provide significant protection from attack, but they do limit the damage from single strikes and it is very unlikely they will all be detected and destroyed. Munitions can be placed almost anywhere, but civilian buildings are a promising place to conceal them.

[Padnak]

Depending on the terrain which the boarder regions occupy, constructing roadways and improving bridges to allow for the rapid movement of large amounts of men and equipment might also be something to look into if the existing road network is limited or does not fully cover the boarder region. Setting up decoy SAM sites and other deception measures are also probably worth looking into

[Iltica]

You need allies.

Yeah, make a alliance with that Middle East country.

This would be the best option but they are allies themselves already. At best they may refuse to support them in an invasion.
The gigantic minefield option is tempting since you don't have to staff it, but can you really make a dense enough minefield 4700 km long? I think it'd be more practical to use lower density fields with some kind of extensive fortification network behind it to fire at the explosions off in the distance.

As cool as it sounds, the giant wall option is really goofy, being a strong contender for the largest manmade structure ever. The Great Wall of China and Wall of Benin are much longer but not nearly as heavily built. For shits & giggles It would probably look a bit like this:

The less fanciful clusters of fortifications like the Atlantic Wall and Maginot line are certainly more practical to make than continuous reinforced concrete wall but have a worrying history of not working...

As for concealment, that's an interesting idea, what if there were some kind of massive scale method of hiding things from the thermal imaging equipment on spy satellites? You could play this kind of 'shell game' with the few defenders you have.

[Velkanika]

Yeah, make a alliance with that Middle East country.

This would be the best option but they are allies themselves already. At best they may refuse to support them in an invasion.
The gigantic minefield option is tempting since you don't have to staff it, but can you really make a dense enough minefield 4700 km long? I think it'd be more practical to use lower density fields with some kind of extensive fortification network behind it to fire at the explosions off in the distance.

As cool as it sounds, the giant wall option is really goofy, being a strong contender for the largest manmade structure ever. The Great Wall of China and Wall of Benin are much longer but not nearly as heavily built. For shits & giggles It would probably look a bit like this:

The less fanciful clusters of fortifications like the Atlantic Wall and Maginot line are certainly more practical to make than continuous reinforced concrete wall but have a worrying history of not working...

As for concealment, that's an interesting idea, what if there were some kind of massive scale method of hiding things from the thermal imaging equipment on spy satellites? You could play this kind of 'shell game' with the few defenders you have.

Minefields are useless unless they're in a prepared fire zone. If the enemy isn't taking fire they can easily clear a safe path through the field in a few minutes.

Good decoy tanks have thermal signatures for a reason you know.

[Vadia]

I just recently found out about ARAT II ERA and saw pictures claiming it was spotted back in 2008 in Iraq.

Is this some ERA for the US that never worked out as intended or is it a joke?

[The Kievan People]

As for concealment, that's an interesting idea, what if there were some kind of massive scale method of hiding things from the thermal imaging equipment on spy satellites?

Tarps, ceilings, trees, clouds, rains, fog...

[Iltica]

Minefields are useless unless they're in a prepared fire zone. If the enemy isn't taking fire they can easily clear a safe path through the field in a few minutes.

Good decoy tanks have thermal signatures for a reason you know.

That brings the manpower issue to the forefront again, there simply aren't enough troops to adequately guard all 4700 km. Most of the 'mineland' will have no one to watch it.
The shell game strategy does seem the most practical solution but that's an unprecedented number of decoys for everything from tanks, mobile launchers, trucks, and personnel.

[Imperializt Russia]

Unless you're facing a grossly superior opponent and surrounded by his allies, or a direct coalition of two large (or three) nations, an invasion along three borders will be stretching his forces greatly.
With a sufficient counterattack force you can prepare to act against these invading groups, you might be able to break his assault.

That's precisely the problem, their army is massive by comparison just by nature of their population size, they could easily send forces larger than my entire army to each border simultaneously. He's the light gray bit we're the tan. Attempting to go on the offensive is hopeless at this point, the best we can hope for is to make it too much of a hassle to invade. The coastline is also very vulnerable since I cannot support a comparable navy
Currently all 3 borders are demilitarized zones, with the only legal way in or out of the country being the Indian Ocean.
Maybe some kind of giant wall or minefield or something? Something that makes any entry point into a nasty choke point if they try and pierce it. That still leaves it vulnerable to naval blockade though...

This brings me back to my original point. Unless he's colossal, he can't launch multiple routes of invasion without a lot of support from your immediate neighbours or he's highly overstretched. The coalition ground forces deployed to fight Saddam in 1991 and 2003 did not have substantial numerical superiority - in fact in 2003, they were ostensibly outnumbered by Iraqi ground forces. Where they gained their superiority was air superiority and in technological superiority.

In both wars, they launched a single invasion along a very wide front through the south of the country. In 2003, they intended to launch an additional infantry invasion through Turkey, but Turkey withdrew permission to use the border to cross at the last minute. Instead, American special operations groups were used to link up with Peshmerga and tie up northern Iraqi units.

In reality, "because I can" is a silly reason to gain total numerical superiority over your opponent unless you're fighting for your existence - which is a much better reason on its own.

[Questers]

There is no such thing as a hopeless offensive. If you can no longer attack, the war is over -- surrender before too many of your young lads are killed to make reconstruction a possibility.

You benefit from some major strategic advantages:
1 ) interior lines.
2 ) dispersion of forces. you can choose where to attack along his whole coast. make attacks with commando units on important infrastructure/facilities everywhere. If the terrain is like IRL, Nigeria for instance has lots of off shore oil. He controls it: attack it. Use economy of force. This will force him to spread out to garrison these areas more strongly, realistically speaking.
3 ) One large offensive can cut off the whole of Eritrea or Kenya/Uganda etc. You benefit from interior lines. Launch both at the same time -- let him guess which one your concentration of forces is in. If he makes the right move, simply withdraw.

[Inyourfaceistan]

How many leightweight torpedoe hits does it take to sink a submarine?
A single impact should do the job it, right?

[Imperializt Russia]

If you hit it, and blow a hole in its hull, it's probably pretty dead. Depends how good their bulkheads are I guess, but it'd probably be beyond fighting.
Near-miss strikes will cause damage.

[The Kievan People]

That brings the manpower issue to the forefront again, there simply aren't enough troops to adequately guard all 4700 km. Most of the 'mineland' will have no one to watch it.
The shell game strategy does seem the most practical solution but that's an unprecedented number of decoys for everything from tanks, mobile launchers, trucks, and personnel.

Decoys are not especially important to realizing the benefits of cover and concealment.

[Inyourfaceistan]

If you hit it, and blow a hole in its hull, it's probably pretty dead. Depends how good their bulkheads are I guess, but it'd probably be beyond fighting.
Near-miss strikes will cause damage.

And a direct hit from a heavyweight will definitely seal the deal, right?
Or does it not matter the size of the torpedo?