NS Military Realism Consultancy Thread Mk X Purps Safe Space

[Gallia-]

How quickly can Chaparrel, Rapier, and related vehicles be reloaded? With only a few shots each I'd figure they would run out of ammo relatively quickly in heavy combat.

It's not a quick process, the missiles have to be pulled out of storage containers and loaded onto the rails by hand.

This is why the later versions of Rapier have 8 missiles on the launcher.

if you want rapid reload you are gonna have to going with a system like Roland which has automated reloading, but even then it only nets you 2 extra missiles over rapier( if abit far more capable)

Fins must also be installed.

AIM-95 is probably a huge advantage over that alone because it's contained within a launch tube on the rail.

[Laritaia]

It's not a quick process, the missiles have to be pulled out of storage containers and loaded onto the rails by hand.

This is why the later versions of Rapier have 8 missiles on the launcher.

if you want rapid reload you are gonna have to going with a system like Roland which has automated reloading, but even then it only nets you 2 extra missiles over rapier( if abit far more capable)

Fins must also be installed.

in the case of Chaparrel maybe, Rapier rounds come with fins installed in their containers

[Gallia-]

Chaparral is truly a man's man's weapon system.

[Purpelia]

M247 best AA.

[New Hyannis]

Bit of a silly question perhaps, but is the kilt at all practical as modern field wear? I'm fairly sure the answer is no, even with the reduced prevalence of chemical and biological munitions and the like, but I just felt I'd ask and get some opinions.

I'm talking about something akin to this, for the record, so you all know before replying.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Bit of a silly question perhaps, but is the kilt at all practical as modern field wear? I'm fairly sure the answer is no, even with the reduced prevalence of chemical and biological munitions and the like, but I just felt I'd ask and get some opinions.

I'm talking about something akin to this, for the record, so you all know before replying.

All the problems of a kilt with none of the elan

[New Hyannis]

All the problems of a kilt with none of the elan

Those problems being? If you're going to criticize something, at least bring out your points.

[Taihei Tengoku]

All the problems of a kilt with none of the elan

Those problems being? If you're going to criticize something, at least bring out your points.

Doesn't protect your inner leg and crotch from debris, hikes up when you try to run, drafty as hell, doesn't even look cool

[New Hyannis]

Doesn't protect your inner leg and crotch from debris, hikes up when you try to run, drafty as hell, doesn't even look cool

That first one is an issue, granted, but I would expect two is a matter of good tailoring, three is solved by this wonderful invention called undershorts, and the fourth is a matter of opinion. Different color patterns than khaki are a definite must, to be sure. A nice plaid, perhaps?

[Gallia-]

Kilts aren't exactly a particularly covering garment. In North Africa, you will get sand in your panties; while in Europe you will get thorns in your crotch, and chafed skin in both places. Kilts have a lower range of motion than trousers and are more difficult to fully clean, especially when spending a large amount of your time in relatively gross places like "outside".

Also if you're going to kilt, it's plaid or bad.

If you're wearing undershorts with your kilt, you might as well just wear trousers at that point. If you're going to tailor the things, you might as well make them bespoke uniforms that the soldier pays $300 for like dress blues, because tailoring doesn't lend well to the modern machine mass production techniques of military uniforms. You will have a standard series of sizes, none of them will fit great, and they will be the barest functional stitching and cloth.

[New Hyannis]

Kilts aren't exactly a particularly covering garment. In North Africa, you will get sand in your panties; while in Europe you will get thorns in your crotch, and chafed skin in both places. Kilts have a lower range of motion than trousers and are more difficult to fully clean, especially when spending a large amount of your time in relatively gross places like "outside".

I imagine there was a similar problem for the Tommies who wore shorts in North Africa; the sand, that is. As to freedom of motion? In my own experience, that depends on whether the kilt is honestly well-made, and of course whether or not it is worn properly. In my direct experience, I had less of a problem with chaffing.

Also if you're going to kilt, it's plaid or bad.

Agreement. See my previous posts.

Also if you're wearing undershorts with your kilt, you might as well just wear trousers at that point.

Having worn a kilt myself, I personally disagree, but this reminds me of an old British Army joke always told in the Highland Regiments. The story goes that an old Scottish sergeant wearing his kilt is met by an English lady who asks him, out of curiosity, what is worn beneath the kilt.

"Nothing!" replies the Scotsman, cheerfully. "It's all in perfect working order!"

[Taihei Tengoku]

Yes that is a classic Scottish joke, sometimes the punchline is that he's wearing your wife's lipstick.

Either way I would not want to hit the deck wearing a skirt. I'd rather not have my femoral arteries (not to mention other "blood vessels") exposed to the world, and skivvies don't count as a layer

[New Hyannis]

Yes that is a classic Scottish joke, sometimes the punchline is that he's wearing your wife's lipstick.

I've heard that version as well.

Either way I would not want to hit the deck wearing a skirt. I'd rather not have my femoral arteries (not to mention other "blood vessels") exposed to the world, and skivvies don't count as a layer

It's a kilt, not a skirt, and we call it a kilt because we already kilt everybody who ever dared call it a skirt.

As to your femoral arteries? Soldiers die of their femoral arteries being hit by shrapnel when they were wearing trousers as well.

Honestly the main concern which comes to mind for me is chemical weapons, which are no longer nearly as commonly used as they once were.

[Taihei Tengoku]

My main concern is ants

e: ants near the femoral artery

[New Hyannis]

My main concern is ants

e: ants near the femoral artery

Hadn't you ever heard the old complaint?

"I got ants in my pants!"

If anything, I would posit that wearing a kilt would be a good thing in the event of a femoral artery being hit, as you have less cloth to move about to get to it, and it can be moved more easily.

That's just my opinion, of course.

[Husseinarti]

Pictured: The most optimal and effective clothing for a desert environment. At the very most, you don't have to wear your blouse when not on the front-line and when on the line, roll your sleeves but still wear some kind of lightweight, breathable gloves.

(also bayonets fixed for proper push of pike)

More than likely, in, you know, World War Two, the woolen uniforms worn by European armies probably didn't fare to well in you know, the fucking North African desert they were fighting in. Maybe, by some margin of error (I'm not clothing expert unlike you, who has worn a clothing before, wow) wool is bad when you wear in in a fucking desert.

Modern military fatigues work allot differently that wool from 1941. I know, big unknown thing, right? Modern clothing materials work better than 1941-era wool! Wow! Whoa!

Who'd 'ave thunk it.

My main concern is ants

e: ants near the femoral artery

Hadn't you ever heard the old complaint?

"I got ants in my pants!"

If anything, I would posit that wearing a kilt would be a good thing in the event of a femoral artery being hit, as you have less cloth to move about to get to it, and it can be moved more easily.

That's just my opinion, of course.

And opinions can be very wrong.

Very, very wrong.

Very, very, amazingly wrong.

You fucking know what happens when you get fucking sand into a wound? Especially fine grain Arabian 'Been doing this sand thing for 2000 years its fucking finer powder than the finest powdered sugar powder' sand? It gets fucking infected. You ever hear of medical sheers? Like every PV2 who has been in for 1 day probably has a pair, and at the very least, every Combat Life Saver has a pair on him.

[Taihei Tengoku]

My main concern is ants

e: ants near the femoral artery

Hadn't you ever heard the old complaint? :P

"I got ants in my pants!"

If anything, I would posit that wearing a kilt would be a good thing in the event of a femoral artery being hit, as you have less cloth to move about to get to it, and it can be moved more easily.

That's just my opinion, of course.

If you blouse your trousers ants don't get in, you can't blouse a kilt

[Gallia-]

(Image)

Pictured: the EM SIXTEH and bayonets

ftfy

[New Hyannis]

If you blouse your trousers ants don't get in, you can't blouse a kilt

True that, but you can brush your legs off if you need to. If the trousers legs un-blouse in the heat of the moment and they get in there?

You fucking know what happens when you get fucking sand into a wound? Especially fine grain Arabian 'Been doing this sand thing for 2000 years its fucking finer powder than the finest powdered sugar powder' sand? It gets fucking infected. You ever hear of medical sheers? Like every PV2 who has been in for 1 day probably has a pair, and at the very least, every Combat Life Saver has a pair on him.

Is the cursing supposed to be impressive? Rhetorical question.

In any case, I have heard of medical sheers, and I could argue it is one more piece of kit the soldier must carry, and that ounces make pounds, and that now he must have his trousers replaced, but honestly I'm not disagreeing that there is no pressing reason to wear a kilt instead of pants, but most of the arguments against wearing them at all seem weak to me.

Not to mention when you are shot or stabbed while wearing clothes, one concern as any physician will tell you is keeping bits of fabric and the like from getting stuck inside, so as to avoid serious infections which I imagine are no less disastrous if left untreated than what sand can cause.

I've heard some interesting points raised here, and I am grateful. For now, I will bid you all adieu, and be about my business.

Gallia and Taihei? Thank you very much for a calm, reasonable discussion on the issue.

[Austrasien]

If its not tactical sandals and flood pants why live.

[The Akasha Colony]

Bit of a silly question perhaps, but is the kilt at all practical as modern field wear? I'm fairly sure the answer is no, even with the reduced prevalence of chemical and biological munitions and the like, but I just felt I'd ask and get some opinions.

I'm talking about something akin to this, for the record, so you all know before replying.

I know you said you've left the thread, but w/e, I feel like answering anyway.

And it's basically the same answer others have given you: no, they're not really practical.

There are a lot of problems, the biggest one simply being that it doesn't actually cover and protect the legs, which is a pretty big deal. There are lots of things on the battlefield that even a simple layer of modern cloth can protect against, chief among them light shrapnel and incendiary flash effects, such as from an explosion. Given that explosive weapons are the biggest killers on the battlefield, this is rather important. It's one of the reasons why military uniforms have been steadily moving in the direction of increasing body coverage and increasing fire resistance even if it makes them more expensive to produce. Chemical weapons are a relatively minor issue compared to conventional explosives.

Whatever benefits a kilt may provide in terms of ventilation or whatever are either no longer necessary or overriden by other concerns. The wool uniforms previously in use have been replaced by modern uniforms made of nylon/cotton blends and other synthetics that improve breathability while also maintaining modern protective standards. The expanding coverage of body armor also makes kilts relatively troublesome; groin protectors entered widespread service as a result of experiences in the Middle East and many new body armor concepts and proposals have suggested the addition of upper thigh protection as well. These plates can be easily strapped to the legs over a pair of trousers but would be impossible to strap over a kilt.

Trousers are also simply easier to produce. They are much more agnostic in regards to proper fit, as they can be secured by a belt at the waist, by knee pads at the knees, and tucked into the boots at the bottom, neatly dealing with any excess cloth or fit issues. Thus, they lend themselves well to mass production in a handful of standard sizes, one of the most important factors in modern military procurement.

5.11's tactical duty kilt is basically a meme product. And I say this as someone who owns a reasonable amount of 5.11 gear. It's not meant to be a serious tactical product but instead to appeal to the edgy, "manly" crowd. The only place I've seen them worn is at pop culture cons.

[North Arkana]

Quite interesting today, helping out with my unit's inventory pack up before we get moved to the next station. I don't think many people realize how massively built the blades of a bayonet are built. I mean, these things had blades 1/4 to 1/3 of an inch thick.

[Crookfur]

Kilts weren't a particularly practical price of battlefield clothing back when highland troops in the colonies were choosing to wear trousers rather than the, at that point, new short kilt. However it was military very fashionable so stuck around with things like neck stocks and other horrors. Up until ww1 the few advantages (longer wear life, surprisingly good cold and wet weather comfor and a , distinctive look with a ferocious heritage) largely out weighted or were even with the issues.

WW1 pretty much demonstrated that the days of the kilt as part of field battle dress was over and today it has no place in a military outside of dress or possibly off duty uniform. Using materials other than heavy wool also pretty much removes most of the benefits of a kilt. Heck a modernised great kilt/plaid makes more sense bits that really just a more complicated poncho.

And this comes from someone who loves to wear a kilt and is fully in love with the image of the kilted soldier.

[Crookfur]

Hadn't you ever heard the old complaint?

"I got ants in my pants!"

If anything, I would posit that wearing a kilt would be a good thing in the event of a femoral artery being hit, as you have less cloth to move about to get to it, and it can be moved more easily.

That's just my opinion, of course.

If you blouse your trousers ants don't get in, you can't blouse a kilt

Technically you can but it involves needle and thread and pretending to be a dutch sailor.

[-Celibrae-]

Does anyone know where the Pereh fits in the IDF structure?