NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Vol. 11.0

[The Akasha Colony]

Honestly I'd say that coup was their patriotic duty. I mean, it's not like they tried to bring France down or something. They were defending what was left of the French empire from the weakness and moral defeatism of its people. Had they succeeded maybe France would now be leading Europe instead of marching down the road to becoming a province of Germany along side the rest of us.

You can rah rah all you like about muh empire but when Germany is winning the economic race hands-down it's rather hard to provide a persuasive counterargument to aligning with Germany. The last few times the French have tried to halt German political expansion even with the "strength" (read: liability) of their empire at their back, it didn't go so well.

de Gaulle was right to let Algeria go. Far from being a useful hedge against Germany, the distractions of maintaining a crumbling empire would have diverted attention from Europe and drained France of money and manpower. The old model of empire was crumbling and no amount of hemming and hawing from a middle-tier power was ever going to stop it.

[New Vihenia]

Why would you need artillery fire support from a submarine you can put missiles in? I think the problem is coming from far too much multi-role, not enough specialists.

Well mission expansions. Like nowadays.. who would guess today's submarine can actively launch,recover and conduct surveillance through unmanned system. the Vertical Launcher undergo same "evolution" that it may carry other thing than cruise missiles. One potential is the Vertical Gun.

This one is from General Dynamics :
http://cizadlo.us/Shipbucket/martin

[Kazarogkai]

All mortars all day, what could go wrong?

Experimental Standard B Heavy Infantry Division(20,736)

Division HQ Company(288)
Discipline Company(288)
Cavalry Squadron (144)
Armored Car Squadron(144)
Signaler Battalion(864)
Engineer Battalion(864)
Military Hospital Battalion(864)
Division Supply Train Battalion(864)
Division Artillery Battalion(864)

A Service Battery(144)
B Dual Cannon Battery(144) 6
C 4x Heavy Mortar Battery(144) 6

3x Infantry Regiment(5184)

A Regimental HQ Company(144)
B Signal Company(144)
C Engineer Battery(144)
D Bicycle Rifle Squadron(144)
E Field Hospital(144)
F Regimental Supply Train (144)
G Regimental Artillery Battalion(864)

a Service Battery(144)
b Dual Cannon Battery(144) 6
c 4x Medium Mortar Battery(144) 6

H 4x Infantry Battalion(864)

a Service Company(144)
b Heavy Weapons Battery(144) 6+6
c 4x Foot Rifle Company(144) 12+3+3

Division Weapons Compliment

A Infantry Support Weapons

144 Grenade Discharger(2 in/51mm, Infantry Mortar)
144 Armour Hunter Rifle(50 cal/12.7mm)
72 HMG(50 cal/12.7 mm)
576 LMG(25 cal/6.35 mm)

B Artillery

24 Dual Cannon(2 in/51mm, Armour-Hunter/Air-Defense, Auto Cannon)
24 H Mortar(8 in/203 mm)
72 M Mortar(6 in/152 mm)
72 L Mortar(4 in/102 mm)

Joke

[Purpelia]

Honestly I'd say that coup was their patriotic duty. I mean, it's not like they tried to bring France down or something. They were defending what was left of the French empire from the weakness and moral defeatism of its people. Had they succeeded maybe France would now be leading Europe instead of marching down the road to becoming a province of Germany along side the rest of us.

Hey, leave the Yanks out of it. I can't count the last time the Jerries did something we actually supported except recovery from both of their world conquest attempts.

The rest of us, lowercase. As in the plural of me. As in the rest of us here in Europe. As in 4th Reich EU.

You can rah rah all you like about muh empire but when Germany is winning the economic race hands-down it's rather hard to provide a persuasive counterargument to aligning with Germany. The last few times the French have tried to halt German political expansion even with the "strength" (read: liability) of their empire at their back, it didn't go so well.

de Gaulle was right to let Algeria go. Far from being a useful hedge against Germany, the distractions of maintaining a crumbling empire would have diverted attention from Europe and drained France of money and manpower. The old model of empire was crumbling and no amount of hemming and hawing from a middle-tier power was ever going to stop it.

Personally I am anticolonialist my self on moral grounds. But my point is simply that you can understand their viewpoint. And it wasn't treasonous. They saw them self as saving France instead of assaulting it.

[Kassaran]

Hey, leave the Yanks out of it. I can't count the last time the Jerries did something we actually supported except recovery from both of their world conquest attempts.

The rest of us, lowercase. As in the plural of me. As in the rest of us here in Europe. As in 4th Reich EU.

Oh, I know what you said and what I said. I didn't know of you were lump-summing the United States into "us" or not.

[Purpelia]

The rest of us, lowercase. As in the plural of me. As in the rest of us here in Europe. As in 4th Reich EU.

Oh, I know what you said and what I said. I didn't know of you were lump-summing the United States into "us" or not.

I am shocked and confused as to why you would ever even have a microparticle of a thought that I would ever include those people with us.

[Gallia-]

It's not gonna need to reach orbit but one can potentially use it as a say.. artillery fire support the same manner of what USN think for Zummwalt.

Why would you need artillery fire support from a submarine you can put missiles in? I think the problem is coming from far too much multi-role, not enough specialists.

While cost may not be significantly cheaper per shot (and more expensive), the benefits are that a gun can probably have more ammunition than you can carry rockets, even small rockets like POLAR. To carry more ammo you end up needing an entire extra submarine, and that is almost certainly more expensive over 20 years than swallowing a one-time pill of ammo.

A Virginia Payload Module will give you 28 rockets of POLAR's size. 7 if we're talking about NATACMS. A VGAS installation gives you closer to 100-200. Despite memes about cost of ammunition which are a bit irrelevant in a large war scenario, as ammunition will be procured in big quantities, it's actually cheaper to mount an order of magnitude more ammo on a boat than it is to build more boats. The gun is a very small part of the cost here, the problems tend to come when you package it with less good/developed ideas like mega radar stealth, supercomputer powered dual band radars, and turbine integrated electric propulsion.

The dinky little 5" BTERM, which was far less ambitious and expensive (essentially, it was a Excaliburized 5" RAP), had a range comparable to the U.S. Army's M31 rocket, but you can of course carry far more 5" shells than you can POLAR rockets.

It would be really cool for a very special purpose module for shore bombardment for submarines to basically wear as a hat.

[Kassaran]

Oh, I know what you said and what I said. I didn't know of you were lump-summing the United States into "us" or not.

I am shocked and confused as to why you would ever even have a microparticle of a thought that I would ever include those people with us.

Now I just feel hurt you refer to us so distantly Purp. America-san is very displeased with your sudden lack of proper deference and respecc.

While cost may not be significantly cheaper per shot (and more expensive), the benefits are that a gun can probably have more ammunition than you can carry rockets, even small rockets like POLAR.

A Virginia Payload Module will give you 28 rockets. A VGAS installation gives you closer to 200. Despite memes about cost of ammunition which are a bit irrelevant in a large war scenario, as ammunition will be procured in big quantities, it's actually cheaper to mount an order of magnitude more ammo on a boat than it is to build more boats.

The dinky little 5" BTERM, which was far less ambitious and expensive (essentially, it was a Excaliburized 5" RAP), had a range comparable to the U.S. Army's M31 rocket, but you can carry far more 5" shells than you can POLAR rockets.

It would be really cool for a very special purpose module for shore bombardment for submarines to basically wear as a hat.

This makes more sense and it also seems like a cute new thing to draw onto ship-girls. I for one support our new hat-wearing submarine-girl overlords.

[Purpelia]

Speaking of guns on subs. I know the following can be done with modern technology easily enough. I also know it'd be a bad idea to do for many reasons now and in any other time. But my question is simply technical. How early could it be done and be FUNCTIONAL and PRACTICAL FROM A MECHANICAL STANDPOINT. Not a tactical or strategic one. In those it just won't work.

The idea is as follows. Take a battleship grade gun. So 12-16 inches, what ever is vogue at the time of construction for main batteries. Mount it inside a submarine in a spinal mount. Sort of like a casemate tank destroyer. The sub fires from under the surface to conceal where its shooting from. And it aims by turning and tilting the whole ship. The idea is of course to aim at static targets like coastal forts, harbors or other such stuff. Potentially even as a terror weapon against civilians.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Does executing your troops for rape lower morale overall?

Bear in mind this is in the context of a society where rapists are highly vilified (to the extent that most people support capital punishment for them), especially in military culture

[Purpelia]

Does executing your troops for rape lower morale overall?

Bear in mind this is in the context of a society where rapists are highly vilified (to the extent that most people support capital punishment for them), especially in military culture

If your society really hates rapists so much than I imagine some form of punishment enacted by the troops them self in a controlled environment might actually raise morale. As in have the guys squad mates lynch him.

[Gallia-]

Since people's morale is tied to crimes that they do in the intangible, alien sense, and not what society thinks of them, you should just charge him with the highly precise and effective "hooliganism" crime and execute him for that. Only the people who know that he is really being executed for rape will suffer sleepless nights over it, but that is a small price to pay for maintaining the national morale.

[Purpelia]

Why are we assuming information about the whole incident ever has to leave those involved and the MP's?

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Does executing your troops for rape lower morale overall?

Bear in mind this is in the context of a society where rapists are highly vilified (to the extent that most people support capital punishment for them), especially in military culture

If your society really hates rapists so much than I imagine some form of punishment enacted by the troops them self in a controlled environment might actually raise morale. As in have the guys squad mates lynch him.

Interesting

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Since people's morale is tied to crimes that they do in the intangible, alien sense, and not what society thinks of them, you should just charge him with the highly precise and effective "hooliganism" crime and execute him for that. Only the people who know that he is really being executed for rape will suffer sleepless nights over it, but that is a small price to pay for maintaining the national morale.

Why would they be happier about him being executed for "hooliganism" than for rape?

[Purpelia]

Is it just me or is the engine on a T-34 significantly larger than those on other tanks? Aside from the M4 which had a giant radial that is.

[Gallia-]

Since people's morale is tied to crimes that they do in the intangible, alien sense, and not what society thinks of them, you should just charge him with the highly precise and effective "hooliganism" crime and execute him for that. Only the people who know that he is really being executed for rape will suffer sleepless nights over it, but that is a small price to pay for maintaining the national morale.

Why would they be happier about him being executed for "hooliganism" than for rape?

Because hooliganism is the worst of all crimes.

You are literally asking "does executing someone found guilty of a crime that people in my fictional society think is worthy of execution bad for morale".

The answer is obvious because it's a bit of a tautology.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Why would they be happier about him being executed for "hooliganism" than for rape?

Because hooliganism is the worst of all crimes.

You are literally asking "does executing someone found guilty of a crime that people in my fictional society think is worthy of execution bad for morale".

The answer is obvious because it's a bit of a tautology.

Why is hooliganism the worst of all crimes?

[Purpelia]

Why is hooliganism the worst of all crimes?

He is saying the following. If your people really, really, really hate rape there are two main end results of executing someone for doing it.
1. Your people are joyous with glee over the just punishment of a wrongdoer.
2. Your people are disgusted that one of them could commit such a horrible wrong.

And both of those are going to happen at the same time. If #1 overpowers #2 than you are golden. Everything is fine and great. If however you are concerned about #2 overpowering #1 and leading to a loss of morale you can just hide it by making up a vague generic crime like "hooliganism" to punish instead.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Why is hooliganism the worst of all crimes?

He is saying the following. If your people really, really, really hate rape there are two main end results of executing someone for doing it.
1. Your people are joyous with glee over the just punishment of a wrongdoer.
2. Your people are disgusted that one of them could commit such a horrible wrong.

And both of those are going to happen at the same time. If #1 overpowers #2 than you are golden. Everything is fine and great. If however you are concerned about #2 overpowering #1 and leading to a loss of morale you can just hide it by making up a vague generic crime like "hooliganism" to punish instead.

Ok but if they didn't know why he was being executed they might be upset about the execution of one of their own.
Soldiers, even the lowliest Private, generally expect legal privileges.

[Purpelia]

He is saying the following. If your people really, really, really hate rape there are two main end results of executing someone for doing it.
1. Your people are joyous with glee over the just punishment of a wrongdoer.
2. Your people are disgusted that one of them could commit such a horrible wrong.

And both of those are going to happen at the same time. If #1 overpowers #2 than you are golden. Everything is fine and great. If however you are concerned about #2 overpowering #1 and leading to a loss of morale you can just hide it by making up a vague generic crime like "hooliganism" to punish instead.

Ok but if they didn't know why he was being executed they might be upset about the execution of one of their own.
Soldiers, even the lowliest Private, generally expect legal privileges.

As said, you weigh #1 and #2 and make your choice. Either you try to hide it for fear of #2 outweighing #1 or you go all in and make a public show of it for hope of #1 blowing #2 away.

Or you do what every sane and sensible nation does and be utterly and completely unforgivably boring and just give him a fair trial, put him on death row and forget about him for years until everyone stops caring.

[Amidia-]

He is saying the following. If your people really, really, really hate rape there are two main end results of executing someone for doing it.
1. Your people are joyous with glee over the just punishment of a wrongdoer.
2. Your people are disgusted that one of them could commit such a horrible wrong.

And both of those are going to happen at the same time. If #1 overpowers #2 than you are golden. Everything is fine and great. If however you are concerned about #2 overpowering #1 and leading to a loss of morale you can just hide it by making up a vague generic crime like "hooliganism" to punish instead.

Ok but if they didn't know why he was being executed they might be upset about the execution of one of their own.
Soldiers, even the lowliest Private, generally expect legal privileges.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by legal privileges but if your nations military expects to be above the law you have a an issue

[Kassaran]

Ok but if they didn't know why he was being executed they might be upset about the execution of one of their own.
Soldiers, even the lowliest Private, generally expect legal privileges.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by legal privileges but if your nations military expects to be above the law you have a an issue

Pretty sure they meant trial before sentencing. Courts martial would definitely have him, but it's less like civilian courts. It's far more weighted in military situations to disprove the accusation.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Ok but if they didn't know why he was being executed they might be upset about the execution of one of their own.
Soldiers, even the lowliest Private, generally expect legal privileges.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by legal privileges but if your nations military expects to be above the law you have a an issue

They're not above the law overall but they are above certain morality laws and cannot be punished in public.

[Kassaran]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by legal privileges but if your nations military expects to be above the law you have a an issue

They're not above the law overall but they are above certain morality laws and cannot be punished in public.

'Morality' laws are just another way of saying 'social laws'. I disagree with you wholeheartedly there as Soldiers must be subject to more strict and stringent public/social laws and regulations. Unless you run a conscription hellhole where you can hide away soldiers from the public eye for their term of contract.