NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Vol. 11.0

[Republic of Penguinian Astronautia]

When planning naval forces from the ground up, is creating a coast guard a good place to start, and then adding on capabilities such as submarines and patrol aircraft? How can I design a coast guard?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

When planning naval forces from the ground up, is creating a coast guard a good place to start, and then adding on capabilities such as submarines and patrol aircraft? How can I design a coast guard?

You start with your geopolitical picture and then acquire schtuff to counter the threats you envision.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

[Cossack Peoples]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

It would prolly be very limited, as countries wouldn't want to militarize space.

If you're just talking about swatting satellites out of the sky, that's well within the limits of MT nations though, just requires some long-range SAM systems or a throwaway ICBM. Anti-ballistic missiles (which also fall under SAM systems) could be used to protect satellites, but if there are spaceships you can count on those either retreating or being overwhelmed by ICBM's.

[Spirit of Hope]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

You would already seen nations at war trying to take out each others satellites, weapons for that have existed for a while now.

[Saranidia]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

It would prolly be very limited, as countries wouldn't want to militarize space.

If you're just talking about swatting satellites out of the sky, that's well within the limits of MT nations though, just requires some long-range SAM systems or a throwaway ICBM. Anti-ballistic missiles (which also fall under SAM systems) could be used to protect satellites, but if there are spaceships you can count on those either retreating or being overwhelmed by ICBM's.

If it would be limited maybe a space cold-war.

Saranidia and the US both have a space force in this (Saranidia got one after America) and I guess Russia would too.
Saranidia has a couple of smallish towns on Mars now.

[Bulgar Rouge]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

The proposed scenario is already realistic as ASAT weapons exist and have been tested.

Furthermore some Russian design bureaus like Fakel, Keldysh and Reshetnev have excelled in developing space thrusters capable of moving one satellite in close proximity to another with a high degree of accuracy; Kosmos 2499 and Olymp-K come to mind. It's fully conceivable that by 2052 such a maneuver can be carried out to disable the target satellite with either a kinetic projectile or a laser beam.

Defenses against such a move and ASAT are already available, and it's mostly stealth. The USA had the Misty programme and will roll out Blackjack constellations which are supposed to be difficult to track in orbit and light enough to go unnoticed during launch (if you don't know it was launched, you won't look for it). USA-270 may have been a testbed for concealment in launch procedures; Zuma was possibly another example.

As for manned spaceships taking part in combat, very unlikely even if the technology is available. Space stations will remain largely international scientific ventures in the next 40 years at least.

Resource prospecting on the Moon is a very interesting, if theoretical, source of conflict, and not entirely outside the realm of possibility.

[The Akasha Colony]

When planning naval forces from the ground up, is creating a coast guard a good place to start, and then adding on capabilities such as submarines and patrol aircraft? How can I design a coast guard?

For small nations whose entire strategic objective is just to patrol their own waters to catch illegal fishers or smugglers, the role of a coast guard and a navy are rather similar so it is questionable to what degree a separate navy is needed in the first place.

For large navies with strategic objectives beyond finding narco-submarines, they are separate enough that they will have little in common with the coast guard, which is why they are separate in the first place.

[Austrasien]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

Yes. By this point, it will probably be necessary as the whole world will be under more-or-less continual observation at a very high resolution. Though commercial satellites will be a major part of this. Very lightweight optics and antennas are an area where huge improvements can be expected in the not too distant future, which will permit much smaller satellites (which are affordable for private enterprises and smaller states) to capture much better optical/infrared/radar imagery, comparable to what only the NRO can do now but with higher temporal resolution because the number of satellites will likely be larger.

[Bulgar Rouge]

In 2052 would some level of space warfare be realistic?
E.G. The space forces of 2 countries destroying the other country's intelligence satellites and protecting their own.

Yes. By this point, it will probably be necessary as the whole world will be under more-or-less continual observation at a very high resolution. Though commercial satellites will be a major part of this. Very lightweight optics and antennas are an area where huge improvements can be expected in the not too distant future, which will permit much smaller satellites (which are affordable for private enterprises and smaller states) to capture much better optical/infrared/radar imagery, comparable to what only the NRO can do now but with higher temporal resolution because the number of satellites will likely be larger.

That is already the case, for the most part.

[Austrasien]

That is already the case, for the most part.

Sort of. There are commercial constellations with excellent temporal resolution but mediocre-poor ground resolution and state-owned satellite constellations with excellent ground resolution but poor temporal resolution. The NROs collective assets definitely come close but they aren't numerous enough to provide continuous or near-continuous coverage.

Future satellites will likely provide the best of both: Continous or nearly continuous surveillance and very high ground resolution. A particularly important capability of future surveillance satellites will be detection and tracking of moving vehicles, aircraft and humans. Missions currently undertaken by drones, AWACS, MPA, ground radars and the like will be possible from space.

But yes to an extent this is already possible.

[United Earthlings]

When planning naval forces from the ground up, is creating a coast guard a good place to start, and then adding on capabilities such as submarines and patrol aircraft? How can I design a coast guard?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_guard#Role

Find a real life Coast Guard that as closely matches what you have imaged/designed for your NS nation, copy-paste then adjust accordingly the things you believe would be different.

[Immoren]

When planning naval forces from the ground up, is creating a coast guard a good place to start, and then adding on capabilities such as submarines and patrol aircraft? How can I design a coast guard?

For small nations whose entire strategic objective is just to patrol their own waters to catch illegal fishers or smugglers, the role of a coast guard and a navy are rather similar so it is questionable to what degree a separate navy is needed in the first place.

For large navies with strategic objectives beyond finding narco-submarines, they are separate enough that they will have little in common with the coast guard, which is why they are separate in the first place.

Doesn't border control et all fall under Coast Guard's jurisdiction?
Our (Finnish) navy and coast guard are separate and despite being not that large, but that's because Coast Guards are just units of wider Border Guard that are responsible for areas of country that have edge of water on border. And I guess it comes to other administrative and personel issues too. lol

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

When planning naval forces from the ground up, is creating a coast guard a good place to start, and then adding on capabilities such as submarines and patrol aircraft? How can I design a coast guard?

For small nations whose entire strategic objective is just to patrol their own waters to catch illegal fishers or smugglers, the role of a coast guard and a navy are rather similar so it is questionable to what degree a separate navy is needed in the first place.

For large navies with strategic objectives beyond finding narco-submarines, they are separate enough that they will have little in common with the coast guard, which is why they are separate in the first place.

Makes sense.
Also
by types of nation
Imperialistic nations: large Navies entirely separate from the coast guard.
Navy is used to expand the territories.

Landlocked nafions:
No coast guard,
Maybe no navy.
non-interventionist island nations:
Coast guard for most things and a Navy for pirates and in case they're attacked.

duties of each
Coastal defence: coast guard unless you have a civilian coast guard.

Anti-smuggling: coast guard*

Countering pirates in international waters: Navy

Offensives into other nations: Navy

Marines: separate from either or Navy


*or border guard in some cases like the UK.

[Cossack Peoples]

I noticed earlier on Forum 7 that someone criticized another for having no dedicated battle rifle, and that brings me to asking this; what types of rifles/automatic weapons should a well-rounded infantry force have, and what are the tactical applications for each? My country right now has a spammy carbine, but should we expand to include battle rifles, submachine guns, etc.?

[Crookfur]

I noticed earlier on Forum 7 that someone criticized another for having no dedicated battle rifle, and that brings me to asking this; what types of rifles/automatic weapons should a well-rounded infantry force have, and what are the tactical applications for each? My country right now has a spammy carbine, but should we expand to include battle rifles, submachine guns, etc.?

No reason you need a battle rifle. Yeah a decently accurate semi automatic rifle in a "full calibre rifle round" is nice to have as a marksman/precision/sniper rifle but you can achieve more or less the same thing with a decently accurate small calibre assault rifle and a scope, at least for squad/section level work.
Sub machine guns are really just tools for special forces and law enforcement these days

[Crookfur]

As for a list of what you need/would be nice to have it would look as follows:

A regular 16 to 18" barrelled small calibre high velocity rifle as your main stay.
A short, 12" barreled version of the above for special types and maybe drivers etc.
Some kind of light machine gun in your main round, be it a heavy barrelled version of your rifle, with or without a belt feeding conversion or a ground up design (again with or without belt feed).
A general purpose machine gun.
A designated marksman rifle. This could again be your rifle but with a heavy barrel, bigger scope and other fiddly bits but most militaries have found that by the time you put the extra mass and size in you might as well up the calibre too.
An actual precision sniper/long range rifle should be on the list but these will mostly live at battalion level.

[Cossack Peoples]

As for a list of what you need/would be nice to have it would look as follows:

A regular 16 to 18" barrelled small calibre high velocity rifle as your main stay.
A short, 12" barreled version of the above for special types and maybe drivers etc.
Some kind of light machine gun in your main round, be it a heavy barrelled version of your rifle, with or without a belt feeding conversion or a ground up design (again with or without belt feed).
A general purpose machine gun.
A designated marksman rifle. This could again be your rifle but with a heavy barrel, bigger scope and other fiddly bits but most militaries have found that by the time you put the extra mass and size in you might as well up the calibre too.
An actual precision sniper/long range rifle should be on the list but these will mostly live at battalion level.

Thanks, I'll get around to filling in these gaps in my military. Would certainly suck to be a marksman and be equipped with a AK with only iron sights.

[Dukin Donuts]

As for a list of what you need/would be nice to have it would look as follows:

A regular 16 to 18" barrelled small calibre high velocity rifle as your main stay.
A short, 12" barreled version of the above for special types and maybe drivers etc.
Some kind of light machine gun in your main round, be it a heavy barrelled version of your rifle, with or without a belt feeding conversion or a ground up design (again with or without belt feed).
A general purpose machine gun.
A designated marksman rifle. This could again be your rifle but with a heavy barrel, bigger scope and other fiddly bits but most militaries have found that by the time you put the extra mass and size in you might as well up the calibre too.
An actual precision sniper/long range rifle should be on the list but these will mostly live at battalion level.

As the person that was criticized in that particular post for not having a battle rifle I need some help finding some suitable guns that would fit my nation’s retro theme.

I was looking for a particular mod to the M16 I believe that added an extra barrel above the normal one for a larger round.

[Taihei Tengoku]

You can do much worse than M16A1.

[Dukin Donuts]

You can do much worse than M16A1.

A M16 doesn’t fit the jet-packing out of a ICBM transport vibe that acts as my primary force projection.

[Gallia-]

It's literally the gun that defines the "Space Age" for two generations of Americans?

It's made of aluminum, stellite, and nylon, what more could you want?

[Spirit of Hope]

You can do much worse than M16A1.

A M16 doesn’t fit the jet-packing out of a ICBM transport vibe that acts as my primary force projection.

Obviously the G11 is the best option, but you mentioned an overbarell grenade launcher, so maybe look at the XM29 or Daewoo K11.

[Taihei Tengoku]

You can do much worse than M16A1.

A M16 doesn’t fit the jet-packing out of a ICBM transport vibe that acts as my primary force projection.

AAI SPIW then

[Dukin Donuts]

A M16 doesn’t fit the jet-packing out of a ICBM transport vibe that acts as my primary force projection.

AAI SPIW then

A M16 doesn’t fit the jet-packing out of a ICBM transport vibe that acts as my primary force projection.

Obviously the G11 is the best option, but you mentioned an overbarell grenade launcher, so maybe look at the XM29 or Daewoo K11.

Just what I was looking for. I’ll use the M16 as a standard issue rifle for New England soldiers and the more advanced stuff for my Rocket Commando Corp.