NationStates

Help me here because I truly do not understand. Other than the obvious issue of clouds, shouldn't a sufficiently high-resolution camera be able to detect and identify ships out to the horizon (given how huge ships are, and how ships unlike persons follow a clear geometric shape that's fairly easy to identify), or at least identify 'ship' from 'more ocean' and send photos of them back home?

I suspect the camera thing is maybe a nod towards the UK MoD as simply taking pictures of ships was a big part of nimrod's role (and iirc most of what the stop gap herc misdions are). If they could off load that requirement from poseiden then there could be some big savings and potentially capability improvements available.

I see it more as a solution for surveilance and monitoring busy but usually quite peaceful shipping lanes and fishery grounds ie british waters than a real first line national security asset.

Crookfur wrote:I suspect the camera thing is maybe a nod towards the UK MoD as simply taking pictures of ships was a big part of nimrod's role (and iirc most of what the stop gap herc misdions are). If they could off load that requirement from poseiden then there could be some big savings and potentially capability improvements available.

I see it more as a solution for surveilance and monitoring busy but usually quite peaceful shipping lanes and fishery grounds ie british waters than a real first line national security asset.

And possibly pirates? I mean Somali pirates can hardly do anything to it.

Crookfur wrote:I suspect the camera thing is maybe a nod towards the UK MoD as simply taking pictures of ships was a big part of nimrod's role (and iirc most of what the stop gap herc misdions are). If they could off load that requirement from poseiden then there could be some big savings and potentially capability improvements available.

I see it more as a solution for surveilance and monitoring busy but usually quite peaceful shipping lanes and fishery grounds ie british waters than a real first line national security asset.

Cod War MMXLVIX when.

Allanea wrote:Help me here because I truly do not understand. Other than the obvious issue of clouds, shouldn't a sufficiently high-resolution camera be able to detect and identify ships out to the horizon (given how huge ships are, and how ships unlike persons follow a clear geometric shape that's fairly easy to identify), or at least identify 'ship' from 'more ocean' and send photos of them back home?

Which is something that would otherwise be done by a low altitude pass by a MPA or a helicopter, making it vulnerable to small arms and MPADS.

At what range would modern HD/IR cameras be able to spot ships?

"Viyk" would be the entity to ask about "cameras".

Perhaps he knows the capabilities of particular airborne FLIRs which are under 10-20 kg.

I am reading Brassey's Fighting Vehicles. It is a good introductory primer to tankii so far, even if it is somewhat biased towards British Everything (haha mobility haha rifled bores) being The Best.

Theodosiya wrote:Is there any specific research into what happened to human torso if it got hit by an Armor Piercing Incendiary and API-Tracer? If said poor schmuck wore armor or not? Bullet would be in 7.62x51, fired from DMR.

A more burny hole than usual if no armor. A more burny impact on the SAPI plate if wearing armor.

Allanea wrote:At what range would modern HD/IR cameras be able to spot ships?

In practice, for a relatively compact MWIR FLIR with a 10cm aperture this would correspond to roughly 130km for recognition and 60km for identification of a 150m long warship. Simple detection would be possible at over 500km based on resolution but this would probably not occur. Atmospheric effects would be a bigger limitation than resolution in practice but these cannot easily be estimated. But high altitude is a benefit here because most optical absorption and scattering occurs in the dense air ~2km above sea level, the higher the altitude the higher the angle of observation and all things equal the shorter the optical path length through this region.

The Canadian RADARSAT-2 operating in Ship Detection mode has an effective ground resolution of 35 meters, which corresponds almost exactly to the figures above (150/35=4.29). Though this is a side-looking radar infrared contrast is often just as good.

If I was making a stat block I'd put 100km. Actual range will vary a lot with the size of the ship and atmospheric conditions but this should be close enough.

This makes it sound like a FLIR/camera combo could reasonably be used as a supplement for radar for recognition of enemy warships - perhaps not to this full vast range, but to a range of a dozen kilometers from the drone.

Yes. Any MPA worth its salt has a FLIR turret.

Ok so, one of my infantry division circa 1937 is gonna consist of two infantry brigades, an artillery brigade and a much smaller support brigade. Very roughly speaking how should I distribute AT guns?
Should I give the inf brigades an AT gun coy or should I concentrate a mobile AT force that can be deployed where its needed?
I already plan on having the AAA battalions distributed equally to act as cover and to provide direct fire-support where needed.

Also is stripping divisional artillery down to a small amount of howitzer and leaving it with mainly heavy mortars and such and concentrating artillery in a central army group force for breakthrough purposes a really bad idea?

Unrelated but I've stumbled upon the meme machine known as Zhang Zhaozhong. This guy right here is a employed military theorist for the PLA Navy and is living proof that Chinese dominance is probably a meme. Among other things, he has non-ironically stated the following:

• Stated that China's rampant smog pollution is beneficial, as it will render US military laser systems useless.
• Stated that the U.S. military would not take Baghdad, only hours before they seized Saddam's palace.
• Stated that Libyan rebels would never find Gaddafi AS THEY WERE DRAGGING HIM OUT OF HIS HIDEOUT.
• Stated that the seaweed fishing nets used by Chinese fishermen in the Yellow Sea could act as a effective determent against nuclear submarines.
• Stated that Chinese fishing boats could destroy the USS Zumwalt.

One wonders how anyone in PLA command takes this guy seriously.

Mancunian Northumbria wrote:Ok so, one of my infantry division circa 1937 is gonna consist of two infantry brigades, an artillery brigade and a much smaller support brigade. Very roughly speaking how should I distribute AT guns?
Should I give the inf brigades an AT gun coy or should I concentrate a mobile AT force that can be deployed where its needed?
I already plan on having the AAA battalions distributed equally to act as cover and to provide direct fire-support where needed.

Also is stripping divisional artillery down to a small amount of howitzer and leaving it with mainly heavy mortars and such and concentrating artillery in a central army group force for breakthrough purposes a really bad idea?

You probably still want guns in the division. A high-power artillery brigade has the Official Bruchmuller Stamp of Approval but a division's AOR is too deep and too wide to cover with just mortars.

Western Pacific Territories wrote:Unrelated but I've stumbled upon the meme machine known as Zhang Zhaozhong. This guy right here is a employed military theorist for the PLA Navy and is living proof that Chinese dominance is probably a meme. Among other things, he has non-ironically stated the following:

• Stated that China's rampant smog pollution is beneficial, as it will render US military laser systems useless.
• Stated that the U.S. military would not take Baghdad, only hours before they seized Saddam's palace.
• Stated that Libyan rebels would never find Gaddafi AS THEY WERE DRAGGING HIM OUT OF HIS HIDEOUT.
• Stated that the seaweed fishing nets used by Chinese fishermen in the Yellow Sea could act as a effective determent against nuclear submarines.
• Stated that Chinese fishing boats could destroy the USS Zumwalt.

One wonders how anyone in PLA command takes this guy seriously.

Most of the PLA's publicity is aimed at firing up Chinese nationalists. He seems like a perfect choice.

Can I get some thoughts and suggestions on a Circa 1820-1830 Chinese military garb?

I'm thinking because I have muskets and cannons and what not, I'm thinking some heavier headwear may be present to help preserve hearing for those whom still can remember what it is like to have good hearing. Some standardized uniforms are going to be in place, in part due to rising industrialization, so feel free to offer some minimalist, yet substantial gear I could be using to supplement my fighting men on the frontlines.

Mancunian Northumbria wrote:Ok so, one of my infantry division circa 1937 is gonna consist of two infantry brigades, an artillery brigade and a much smaller support brigade. Very roughly speaking how should I distribute AT guns?
Should I give the inf brigades an AT gun coy or should I concentrate a mobile AT force that can be deployed where its needed?
I already plan on having the AAA battalions distributed equally to act as cover and to provide direct fire-support where needed.

How much authority is delegated to the brigades? A more independent brigade would probably favor more distributed assets, while a more division-centric structure would probably favor a concentrated division-level force.

Also is stripping divisional artillery down to a small amount of howitzer and leaving it with mainly heavy mortars and such and concentrating artillery in a central army group force for breakthrough purposes a really bad idea?

I wouldn't say it's a really bad one, although it does leave the divisions rather vulnerable in the event they are attacked. Mortars and howitzers of the era are probably not sufficient to cover the entire division's expected area of operations though, at the very least some field guns would be needed.

Western Pacific Territories wrote:Unrelated but I've stumbled upon the meme machine known as Zhang Zhaozhong. This guy right here is a employed military theorist for the PLA Navy and is living proof that Chinese dominance is probably a meme. Among other things, he has non-ironically stated the following:

• Stated that China's rampant smog pollution is beneficial, as it will render US military laser systems useless.
• Stated that the U.S. military would not take Baghdad, only hours before they seized Saddam's palace.
• Stated that Libyan rebels would never find Gaddafi AS THEY WERE DRAGGING HIM OUT OF HIS HIDEOUT.
• Stated that the seaweed fishing nets used by Chinese fishermen in the Yellow Sea could act as a effective determent against nuclear submarines.
• Stated that Chinese fishing boats could destroy the USS Zumwalt.

One wonders how anyone in PLA command takes this guy seriously.

I doubt anyone who has any real influence in the PLA does.

But it's good propaganda. Just like how the Russians like to issue ridiculous claims about world events, such as Ukraine or NATO itself shooting down MH17 even in the face of incontrovertible evidence that Russian equipment was used. Or claims about the performance of their future weapons development programs, which are either vaporware or end up radically scaled back. A supersonic blended wing transport with a 200-ton payload capacity and 80 units in service by 2024? Cool story bro. They're not trying to persuade Western analysts and experts, or even the Western general population. It feeds the base and keeps them riled up and supportive of the regime.

It's a useful distraction especially in a nation with carefully censored media that is broadly complementary of the regime even on a bad day. Who's going to publicly refute a PLA official?

Ironically enough, Donald Trump is a perfect example of how the whole thing works: get someone bombastic enough with little or no regard for the truth to continue repeating obvious falsehoods that appeal to a segment of the population and they'll eat it hook, line, and sinker. People can believe anything if they want to believe it, they just need to be "encouraged" by people with enough confidence.

Kassaran wrote:Can I get some thoughts and suggestions on a Circa 1820-1830 Chinese military garb?

I'm thinking because I have muskets and cannons and what not, I'm thinking some heavier headwear may be present to help preserve hearing for those whom still can remember what it is like to have good hearing. Some standardized uniforms are going to be in place, in part due to rising industrialization, so feel free to offer some minimalist, yet substantial gear I could be using to supplement my fighting men on the frontlines.

By the time hearing loss is a problem it's probably time to leave the service. Not like much attention was paid to it anyway, since there wasn't very much understanding of how it occurred and how to prevent it.

Any simple cotton or wool jacket and trousers will do. And a belt to hold the cartridge box. Everything beyond this is basically just flourish and aesthetics.

The Akasha Colony wrote:

Western Pacific Territories wrote:Unrelated but I've stumbled upon the meme machine known as Zhang Zhaozhong. This guy right here is a employed military theorist for the PLA Navy and is living proof that Chinese dominance is probably a meme. Among other things, he has non-ironically stated the following:

• Stated that China's rampant smog pollution is beneficial, as it will render US military laser systems useless.
• Stated that the U.S. military would not take Baghdad, only hours before they seized Saddam's palace.
• Stated that Libyan rebels would never find Gaddafi AS THEY WERE DRAGGING HIM OUT OF HIS HIDEOUT.
• Stated that the seaweed fishing nets used by Chinese fishermen in the Yellow Sea could act as a effective determent against nuclear submarines.
• Stated that Chinese fishing boats could destroy the USS Zumwalt.

One wonders how anyone in PLA command takes this guy seriously.

I doubt anyone who has any real influence in the PLA does.

But it's good propaganda. Just like how the Russians like to issue ridiculous claims about world events, such as Ukraine or NATO itself shooting down MH17 even in the face of incontrovertible evidence that Russian equipment was used. Or claims about the performance of their future weapons development programs, which are either vaporware or end up radically scaled back. A supersonic blended wing transport with a 200-ton payload capacity and 80 units in service by 2024? Cool story bro. They're not trying to persuade Western analysts and experts, or even the Western general population. It feeds the base and keeps them riled up and supportive of the regime.

It's a useful distraction especially in a nation with carefully censored media that is broadly complementary of the regime even on a bad day. Who's going to publicly refute a PLA official?

Ironically enough, Donald Trump is a perfect example of how the whole thing works: get someone bombastic enough with little or no regard for the truth to continue repeating obvious falsehoods that appeal to a segment of the population and they'll eat it hook, line, and sinker. People can believe anything if they want to believe it, they just need to be "encouraged" by people with enough confidence.

It's a very popular tactic, all the way back to some infamous users.

All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.
It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

Western Pacific Territories wrote:Unrelated but I've stumbled upon the meme machine known as Zhang Zhaozhong. This guy right here is a employed military theorist for the PLA Navy and is living proof that Chinese dominance is probably a meme. Among other things, he has non-ironically stated the following:

• Stated that China's rampant smog pollution is beneficial, as it will render US military laser systems useless.
• Stated that the U.S. military would not take Baghdad, only hours before they seized Saddam's palace.
• Stated that Libyan rebels would never find Gaddafi AS THEY WERE DRAGGING HIM OUT OF HIS HIDEOUT.
• Stated that the seaweed fishing nets used by Chinese fishermen in the Yellow Sea could act as a effective determent against nuclear submarines.
• Stated that Chinese fishing boats could destroy the USS Zumwalt.

One wonders how anyone in PLA command takes this guy seriously.

He also claimed on a telly show that poor Japan was never going to dare to name a capital ship Kaga again. We know how that turned out. <.<

I'm trying and failing to find info on how the US National Guard is officered. How high up the chain of command would you be able to find 'amateurs', for want of a better word? Would, say, battalions be commanded by reservists, for instance?

It's a useful distraction especially in a nation with carefully censored media that is broadly complementary of the regime even on a bad day. Who's going to publicly refute a PLA official?

Even in a country that's got reasonably free press, any political movement (including the ones I like) has some Big Lies or Big Myths that are spread by papers and websites and groups associated with the movement, which members believe almost without question. Leftists have theirs, right-wingers have theirs, libertarians have theirs. Anyone can rattle off a dozen examples of things their opponents believe that are totally bogus. (And with some self-introspection - things people on their side believe that are totally bogus).

Arthurista wrote:I'm trying and failing to find info on how the US National Guard is officered. How high up the chain of command would you be able to find 'amateurs', for want of a better word? Would, say, battalions be commanded by reservists, for instance?

Fairly high. Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa climbed to the rank of lieutenant colonel and command of the 185th CSSB before retiring, all while pursuing her political career in Iowa and a year after winning election to the Senate. Beau Biden also rose to the rank of major in the Delaware ARNG as a JAG officer while also serving as the state's attorney general.

These are individual examples but they aren't unusual. It's also one of the reasons the National Guard has disproportionate political influence, as its members can run for office while still serving, unlike the active service.

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Fairly high. Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa climbed to the rank of lieutenant colonel and command of the 185th CSSB before retiring, all while pursuing her political career in Iowa and a year after winning election to the Senate. Beau Biden also rose to the rank of major in the Delaware ARNG as a JAG officer while also serving as the state's attorney general.

These are individual examples but they aren't unusual. It's also one of the reasons the National Guard has disproportionate political influence, as its members can run for office while still serving, unlike the active service.

Nevermind, stupid me just remembered that the NG is state-based while the Armed Forces are Federal.

Arthurista wrote:I'm trying and failing to find info on how the US National Guard is officered. How high up the chain of command would you be able to find 'amateurs', for want of a better word? Would, say, battalions be commanded by reservists, for instance?

It's "officered" like it's "enlistedered": one weekend a month, two weeks a year.

The U.S. Army Reserve doesn't do anything with the National Guard, the Reserve is responsible for managing combat support and combat service support units in the Army's strategic manpower pool. The National Guard is responsible for the Army's reserve combat formations, which means they're responsible for something like 8 tank and mechanized divisions, 8 artillery brigades (for the divisions), 3 air defense artillery regiments, 4 aviation groups, 8 engineering brigades, etc. The Guard has enough formations (on paper) to generate about three corps-sized formations. The Army Reserve provides bridging, engineering, psychological operations, medical (iirc), and combat support (trucks) to the Regular Army, while the National Guard is more self-contained and can fight a war by itself for a little bit

If you can tolerate the fact that the U.S. National Guard has what are possibly the worst mechanized infantry, gunners, and tankers in the Western [European] world, that is, they're OK I guess. They're still probably a fair sight better than Category V Soviet reservists. The NGs even have a Special Forces Group they can parachute behind the Iron Curtain Bamboo Curtain, presumably armed with the same M3A1s and CAR-15s that their c. 2017 users previously toted around in Desert Storm in a Simpler Time: One weekend a month two weeks a year vs. 100 hours community service.

Battalions, brigades, divisions, and perhaps corps (if there would ever be a National Guard corps) would be commanded by "part-time" officers, too.