NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Vol. 11.0

[Gallia-]

By 'warrior society'

The most "militarist" America in recent years is literally the United States of Bill Clinton (or Bush Jr. c. 2003, perhaps).

What would a militarist 'Israeli-like' American society look like given American principles and not being surrounded by hostile nations?

New York City.

1) High population of Ashkenazis
2) Not surrounded by enemies
3) Bastion of American principles

Maybe Boston is the runner up.

the bottom line was 'What would America do if it had less qualms about going to war.'

Not sure if you noticed but America is literally at war. This very instant. With multiple groups of people around the world.

[Vyzhva]

How could the USA turn into an ultimate warrior society, embracing the war machine in its vigilant quest to preserve its empire?

What would this society look like? What would such an American people fathom?

cue the spartan kick

[Gallia-]

Retrotechnical Capitalists might be able to answer this one: How do kill hyperglide?

I know the answer is "bigge!rokit" but apparently GBI is supposed to get some sort of LW KKV that gives it 15 km/s delta-v or something which can be used to attack hyperglides? Could Midgetman offer similar performance? Kinetic Energy Interceptor was "about" the same size as Midgetman, a bit heavier, but a bit physically smaller, so something the size of Midgetman might be a better starting point? My idea is that Galla has little anti-HGV/hypersonic bomber missile batteries scattered around to attack hypersonic weapons at reasonably long distances.

It's not something that can replace the fixed site Spartan/Sprint/Sentry sites (these are essentially a "keystone" in Galla's ABM system) but it is something that can keep the fixed site batteries from being exploded by defense suppression hyperglides if Galla never actually deploys a high delta-v Spartan-sized missile (somewhat unthinkable given how absolutely gigantic Spartan is) for the same job.

If the population-economic defense is a Sentinel-type mass raid series of complexes, then the force-in-being defense is mobile batteries of Midgetman-sized KEI/THAAD/PAC-3 I guess?

The Midgetman hyperglide killer will be put into Galla's sea-based ABM ship for tactical missile defense of carrier groups or something I guess.

The nuclear force proper is Peacekeeper/Trident II/Midgetman for strategic weapons and Pershing II/Pershing Ib/ATACMS for tactical weapons; and Ultrabomber/XB-70/Chibi!B-2 for successive tiers of atomic "deep attack" by aircraft.

[Austrasien]

Brilliant glide pebbles.

Pye wacket.

The ideal defensive interceptor would be a small hypersonic glide vehicle with a high L/D ratio.

[North Arkana]

The USA invests less than the Eastern European average.

However, it does invest more than is sensible on healthcare, to rather depressing outcomes at that.

But countries in Eastern Europe actually have a real threat to be afraid off. Well, as real as it gets these days anyway.

And there is literally no such thing as too much welfare.

The US also serves as the de facto military of multiple nations sooooo...

[Gallia-]

Pye wacket.

Flying Jukebox it is.

I'm mostly just concerned that Midgetman is too small though. He is half the size of GBI but he is also an ICBM so...

[Tule]

Retrotechnical Capitalists might be able to answer this one: How do kill hyperglide?

I know the answer is "bigge!rokit" but apparently GBI is supposed to get some sort of LW KKV that gives it 15 km/s delta-v or something which can be used to attack hyperglides? Could Midgetman offer similar performance? Kinetic Energy Interceptor was "about" the same size as Midgetman, a bit heavier, but a bit physically smaller, so something the size of Midgetman might be a better starting point? My idea is that Galla has little anti-HGV/hypersonic bomber missile batteries scattered around to attack hypersonic weapons at reasonably long distances.

It's not something that can replace the fixed site Spartan/Sprint/Sentry sites (these are essentially a "keystone" in Galla's ABM system) but it is something that can keep the fixed site batteries from being exploded by defense suppression hyperglides if Galla never actually deploys a high delta-v Spartan-sized missile (somewhat unthinkable given how absolutely gigantic Spartan is) for the same job.

If the population-economic defense is a Sentinel-type mass raid series of complexes, then the force-in-being defense is mobile batteries of Midgetman-sized KEI/THAAD/PAC-3 I guess?

The Midgetman hyperglide killer will be put into Galla's sea-based ABM ship for tactical missile defense of carrier groups or something I guess.

The nuclear force proper is Peacekeeper/Trident II/Midgetman for strategic weapons and Pershing II/Pershing Ib/ATACMS for tactical weapons; and Ultrabomber/XB-70/Chibi!B-2 for successive tiers of atomic "deep attack" by aircraft.

My main concern is how long the boost phase of the Midgetman is. You want the missile to accelerate very fast, especially since you're dealing with hyperglide RV's. Changing the motor is literally rocket science. Even if you use a very lightweight kill vehicle the original motor will probably be too sluggish and will also need some very precise thrust vectoring.

Maybe something like ship-based Arrow 3 batteries would do the trick? Only the Arrow 3's are on steroids.

EDIT: Eyeballing videos of the Midgetman and the GBI does suggest that the two seem to accelerate roughly as fast. I suppose it's doable.

[New Castillan Empire]

So I reviewed the whole pike-and-shot thing, and I finally figured out how to make it work.

The rifles would have to function on the idea that they sacrifice fire rate for raw power, in which now we have laser muskets that'd be as powerful as RPG rounds. The pikes are energy based and would project an energy barrier for the formation.

One major problem is fighting in enclosed areas, especially urban combat zones, which is where explosives and artillery would come into play. I'd shell and bombard my foes until they have no choice but to face me out in the open, in which then I could probably deploy several more waves surrounding them thanks to numberwanking and force them to succumb or die.

The horsebound cavalry and vehicles would also have a major roles. They'd work as scouts, for one, but also to flank the formation to deter the enemy and also lead charges once the enemy is weakened.

[NeuPolska]

Watch out with that siege shit, Gayla chewed my ass out for that sort of thinking

[Omnum]

I want to build a military realistic to my nations stats and factbooks... how should I start??

Look at your neighbors. Are they big strong and aggressive or small hippie states?
You might not need an army at all, or only a very small one.

Look at your geography. Are you an island state? Focus on building a navy. Is it flat? Focus on mechanized forces. etc.

Look at your economy. What can you afford?

Look at your demographics. How many soldiers do you need? How many can you field? If you have al ot of people relative to your enemies you can fight a war of annihilation, if you are small relative to your enemies you'll need to fight a war of erosion, or find an ally to protect you.

What is a war of erosion?

[Gallia-]

So I reviewed the whole pike-and-shot thing, and I finally figured out how to make it work.

The rifles would have to function on the idea that they sacrifice fire rate for raw power, in which now we have laser muskets that'd be as powerful as RPG rounds. The pikes are energy based and would project an energy barrier for the formation.

One major problem is fighting in enclosed areas, especially urban combat zones, which is where explosives and artillery would come into play. I'd shell and bombard my foes until they have no choice but to face me out in the open, in which then I could probably deploy several more waves surrounding them thanks to numberwanking and force them to succumb or die.

The horsebound cavalry and vehicles would also have a major roles. They'd work as scouts, for one, but also to flank the formation to deter the enemy and also lead charges once the enemy is weakened.

Holtzmann shields or some other Arbitrary Space Magic Thing are basically what you want. Except a laser musket would make it atomize a few thousand dudes I guess. So maybe snip that part out idk.

Look at your neighbors. Are they big strong and aggressive or small hippie states?
You might not need an army at all, or only a very small one.

Look at your geography. Are you an island state? Focus on building a navy. Is it flat? Focus on mechanized forces. etc.

Look at your economy. What can you afford?

Look at your demographics. How many soldiers do you need? How many can you field? If you have al ot of people relative to your enemies you can fight a war of annihilation, if you are small relative to your enemies you'll need to fight a war of erosion, or find an ally to protect you.

What is a war of erosion?

A war fought by seawalls and windbreaks.

[Tekeristan]

Look at your neighbors. Are they big strong and aggressive or small hippie states?
You might not need an army at all, or only a very small one.

Look at your geography. Are you an island state? Focus on building a navy. Is it flat? Focus on mechanized forces. etc.

Look at your economy. What can you afford?

Look at your demographics. How many soldiers do you need? How many can you field? If you have al ot of people relative to your enemies you can fight a war of annihilation, if you are small relative to your enemies you'll need to fight a war of erosion, or find an ally to protect you.

What is a war of erosion?

The real war.
My step dad, as creative as he is, has a tiny company called Erosion Services. <:P

A war fought by seawalls and windbreaks.

And straw mats, and silt fences, cover crops, landscape planning, run off ponds..

[Tule]

Look at your neighbors. Are they big strong and aggressive or small hippie states?
You might not need an army at all, or only a very small one.

Look at your geography. Are you an island state? Focus on building a navy. Is it flat? Focus on mechanized forces. etc.

Look at your economy. What can you afford?

Look at your demographics. How many soldiers do you need? How many can you field? If you have al ot of people relative to your enemies you can fight a war of annihilation, if you are small relative to your enemies you'll need to fight a war of erosion, or find an ally to protect you.

What is a war of erosion?

Ignore that phrase. I'm not sure where I got it from. Ever notice how a fact you think you know turns out to not to be a fact at all? And you can't remember where you got it from?

Anyway. If you're a smaller state facing a big state your options are more limited. You will have to spend more resources on your military to match your rival, assuming that's possible. If that is not enough you will have to adopt a different strategy.

At this point a military is no longer something you use to destroy your enemy's ability to wage war. It becomes a deterrent basically.
It's goal is now to threaten damage to the enemy that the enemy considers unacceptable. Through losses in men and materiel, or money or international reputation or something else that the enemy considers too great to make an invasion desirable. At this point a military also becomes a bargaining chip. Even if an imminent war is unwinnable you can force a better peace settlement on the negotiating table by threatening costly military action, thus turning an unconditional surrender into a conditional surrender, a better outcome.

Another option is to rely on an ally for protection in exchange for something else that the ally considers worth protecting you for, usually an advantageous strategic location or resource.
You could for instance be a country that controls an important shipping canal, if that is the case there is a good chance that there is a bigger country willing to protect you if you let it use the canal.

A war fought by seawalls and windbreaks.

No, you're describing a War of Weathering.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Attritionism (((((((((((((((

[The Dolphin Isles]

A war fought by seawalls and windbreaks.

And straw mats, and silt fences, cover crops, landscape planning, run off ponds..

Oooo. Don't forget the barrier islands, marshes, reefs, sandbars, etc.

The sea doesn't stand a chance against our superior fortifications.

[Gallia-]

Attritionism (((((((((((((((

Attacking the enemy directly at his strongest point is the fastest way to win. ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Whether it's possible to successfully do this or not is another question, of course. But that is why America invented the atomic bomb and why true Marxist armies always use them first at any sign of imperialist aggression.

No, you're describing a War of Weathering.

Weathering is something a lawn chair does. Erosion is something nature does to topsoil and coasts.

[Tule]

No, you're describing a War of Weathering.

Weathering is something a lawn chair does. Erosion is something nature does to topsoil and coasts.

That's better. I was under the impression that you thought seawater and wind by themselves cause erosion, which they don't. They cause weathering.

If the wind and the water is carrying stuff that has already been weathered, then you have erosion.

Pine needle juice is a better example of weathering than a lawn chair. Lawn chairs are actually pretty damn terrible at weathering and being weathered. Polymers are like that.

[Gallia-]

A good lawn chair is made of canvas and steel, obviously.

[Multiversal Venn-Copard]

Here's a hypothetical for a thing I'm writing, unrelated to NS or anything. Please forgive me here for anything stupid; realism is essentially the opposite of my warfare familiarity.

In a near-future environment (say, 2030s or so), how would you go about attacking a navy whose specialty is in obscene levels of missile defense? Say, they've got anti-missile lasers equipped on all of their ships, detection way past the horizon, and enough missile countermeasures and CIWS to blow apart anything that gets within fifty kilometers or more. Their doctrine is to stop missiles, because they figure that all the other world navies are too heavily reliant on them, or something, and they want to go back to the good old days of cannons and such instead.

Could torpedoes work to counter this? Are long-range torpedo attacks expected to be a viable option in the near future, and would submarines be more suitable for the role, or might aircraft still have a niche there? Or would there be a better alternative? I at least assume a navy wouldn't need to start pulling out the railguns or trying to build battleships or anything at this point, right?

[Purpelia]

Torpedoes carry atomic warheads. Repeat that phrase in your mind a couple times.

[Crookfur]

Here's a hypothetical for a thing I'm writing, unrelated to NS or anything. Please forgive me here for anything stupid; realism is essentially the opposite of my warfare familiarity.

In a near-future environment (say, 2030s or so), how would you go about attacking a navy whose specialty is in obscene levels of missile defense? Say, they've got anti-missile lasers equipped on all of their ships, detection way past the horizon, and enough missile countermeasures and CIWS to blow apart anything that gets within fifty kilometers or more. Their doctrine is to stop missiles, because they figure that all the other world navies are too heavily reliant on them, or something, and they want to go back to the good old days of cannons and such instead.

Could torpedoes work to counter this? Are long-range torpedo attacks expected to be a viable option in the near future, and would submarines be more suitable for the role, or might aircraft still have a niche there? Or would there be a better alternative? I at least assume a navy wouldn't need to start pulling out the railguns or trying to build battleships or anything at this point, right?

If they have that much missile counter measures then they have no room for any offensive systems so feel free to just avoid them.

[Kampala-]

Standard is a pretty formidable missile countermeasure. ;_;

[North Arkana]

Here's a hypothetical for a thing I'm writing, unrelated to NS or anything. Please forgive me here for anything stupid; realism is essentially the opposite of my warfare familiarity.

In a near-future environment (say, 2030s or so), how would you go about attacking a navy whose specialty is in obscene levels of missile defense? Say, they've got anti-missile lasers equipped on all of their ships, detection way past the horizon, and enough missile countermeasures and CIWS to blow apart anything that gets within fifty kilometers or more. Their doctrine is to stop missiles, because they figure that all the other world navies are too heavily reliant on them, or something, and they want to go back to the good old days of cannons and such instead.

Could torpedoes work to counter this? Are long-range torpedo attacks expected to be a viable option in the near future, and would submarines be more suitable for the role, or might aircraft still have a niche there? Or would there be a better alternative? I at least assume a navy wouldn't need to start pulling out the railguns or trying to build battleships or anything at this point, right?

Missile delivered torpedoes. They just drop ship breaking torpedoes outside of interception range, but close enough for the torpedo to be operating at sprint speed settings. It means you don't need to make any changes to your ships except make sure they have the sensors and speed to maintain stand-off with the hostile fleet.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

Retrotechnical Capitalists might be able to answer this one: How do kill hyperglide?

I know the answer is "bigge!rokit" but apparently GBI is supposed to get some sort of LW KKV that gives it 15 km/s delta-v or something which can be used to attack hyperglides? Could Midgetman offer similar performance? Kinetic Energy Interceptor was "about" the same size as Midgetman, a bit heavier, but a bit physically smaller, so something the size of Midgetman might be a better starting point? My idea is that Galla has little anti-HGV/hypersonic bomber missile batteries scattered around to attack hypersonic weapons at reasonably long distances.

It's not something that can replace the fixed site Spartan/Sprint/Sentry sites (these are essentially a "keystone" in Galla's ABM system) but it is something that can keep the fixed site batteries from being exploded by defense suppression hyperglides if Galla never actually deploys a high delta-v Spartan-sized missile (somewhat unthinkable given how absolutely gigantic Spartan is) for the same job.

If the population-economic defense is a Sentinel-type mass raid series of complexes, then the force-in-being defense is mobile batteries of Midgetman-sized KEI/THAAD/PAC-3 I guess?

The Midgetman hyperglide killer will be put into Galla's sea-based ABM ship for tactical missile defense of carrier groups or something I guess.

The nuclear force proper is Peacekeeper/Trident II/Midgetman for strategic weapons and Pershing II/Pershing Ib/ATACMS for tactical weapons; and Ultrabomber/XB-70/Chibi!B-2 for successive tiers of atomic "deep attack" by aircraft.

H E D I

EKKV's like the one on GBI and SM-3 are useless in-atmosphere. If it has at least twice the delta-V of the base version THAAD-ER might be up to the task, although AFAIK THAAD has an intercept floor of ~40 km due to seeker aerodynamic heating concerns (not a problem for HEDI which has a cooled seeker window). 130-150 kft (40-45 km) is around where an HGV type weapon would perform it's pull-up maneuver and begin it's glide phase so a 40 km intercept floor would leave you unable top attack the weapon through the majority of its glide phase. Now even if you have some mega-HEDI interceptor that can swat HGVs if the HGV has a decent hypersonic L/D ratio and cross-range (2.0-4.0, 2000-4000 nmi) it could however simply be programmed to fly around the known interceptor sites on-route to the target.

Best defense no surprise is boost phase. Like Kyiv said endo-atmospheric capable BP interceptors would work although you would need thousands of them to get any kind of decent coverage over any single area and tens of thousands if you wanted to cover the entire globe 24/7. Putting BP interceptors in really low orbits to intercept HGV boosters would also give them a very short orbital life due to drag effects, maybe a week or so unless they also use their on-board delta-V for station keeping (which would obviously reduce the delta-V they have for intercepts). HF/DF based SBL, preferably the 10m 20-30 MW SDI version, IMO would be the best option. You can snipe the boosters while they're still burning and attack HGVs throughout there entire flight trajectory.

[Kampala-]

No lasers. No orbital doom grids. No station keeping.

It's truck mobile and it intercepts one HGV a rocket for places that are at the edge of the fixed-site defense bubbles. It's a small intercept vehicle with a alumina or synthetic diamond IR window that attacks HGVs at "reasonable" (IDK what this is) distance and is lofted by a Midgetman on launch-on-warning by a stacked TPY-2 or something.

How much delta-v is THAAD-ER supposed to have? The GBI thing was supposed to be 15 km/s or something like that but I'm not sure what entails, and it's double GBI's current delta-v AFAIK?

I don't know a lot about HGVs except old things like Lockheed AXE so I'm not sure what modern vehicles would be capable of, but I want to have a better than even chance of killing one. It doens't have to be The Best or whatever since Galla is fielding a fairly immature weapon against a fairly hypothetical threat (the interceptor HGV presumably exists in the oughties or maybe even late 90s) but it has to be something I guess.

Is it best if I give you an idea of the threat Galla is facing (or rather, thinks it's facing)? It's not fighting the actual USSR (this is really a lie, since Cyber Mongolians have ICBMs, but whatever) but more like Mega!Mitterrand. If Mitterrand were a diehard fascist.