NS Military Worldbuilding Thread No. 12

[Hurtful Thoughts]

I need small arms and tanks

Just look for ray guns with a British aesthetic.

The ones in UFO were just FN FALs painted silver.

[Dtn]

no they weren't

U.F.O. used generic future guns designed by Derek Meddings just like every other Anderson series.

[Cossack Peoples]

I've asked a lot today already but can I ask what the hell supercavitating torpedoes are for? Are they meant to hit other torps or strike back at subs that jumped them? Are they just for sped purposes?

[Gallia-]

You shoot it down a launch transient bearing and run away quickly in the other direction.

Or anytime else having a very fast torpedo is useful.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

You shoot it down a launch transient bearing and run away quickly in the other direction.

Or anytime else having a very fast torpedo is useful.

Doubly useful if you already got an mk48 on ur arse and u want to take the capitalist down with you in a multi kT nookular explosion.
(Then again :ru.wikipedia: says Shkval can only be launched no further down than 100 feet so ???)

[Gallia-]

I was thinking more a replacement for straight runner torpedoes.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

BTW talking about torpedoes… Are Kaitens (albeit in a more modernized sense, like giving the pilot a better suited room, electronics and control suite, etc. still viable? It should be noted that we’re not talking about having things like ethics involved because this never was a problem for my nation IC’ly- it regularly did and does things way more unethical than suicide tactics

On second note where could such ethical acceptability of using humans as a, although valuable but neither the less expendable, resource be useful in a modern age of electronics and technology? Human-guided bombs are not exactly suprerior to computer-guided ones…

[Cossack Peoples]

just use pidgeon guided bombs

birdbrains will be smarter than us until we're a Kardashev type 3

[The Dolphin Isles]

BTW talking about torpedoes… Are Kaitens (albeit in a more modernized sense, like giving the pilot a better suited room, electronics and control suite, etc. still viable? It should be noted that we’re not talking about having things like ethics involved because this never was a problem for my nation IC’ly- it regularly did and does things way more unethical than suicide tactics

On second note where could such ethical acceptability of using humans as a, although valuable but neither the less expendable, resource be useful in a modern age of electronics and technology? Human-guided bombs are not exactly suprerior to computer-guided ones…

I think we see this trope a lot where suicide weapons are viewed as a cheap method of inflicting massive casualties as a materially inferior force. Something about the triumph of will over material. However, no matter how large the costs of a material weapon are, they will almost always be more cost effective than a weapon designed to kill the operator. Despite the trope of human lives being viewed as cheap by some militaries, they inherently are not. Human capital is ultimately a resource just as much as time and money is. Additionally, it takes a lot more time and money to train a person than to manufacture a wire guidance system.

The only times you really see a weapons that benefit from a one-way human operated trip is in severe edge cases like VBIEDs and human guided torpedoes prior to computer guidance systems (in which case, I’d still argue that the Italian and British commando human torpedoes of the time were more effective since you at least have a chance of recovering some of your investment into the weapon system).

[Gonswanza]

just use pidgeon guided bombs

birdbrains will be smarter than us until we're a Kardashev type 3

Terminal guidance systems say hello.

[Dtn]

we’re not talking about having things like ethics involved because this never was a problem for my nation IC’ly- it regularly did and does things way more unethical than suicide tactics

This is hardly surprising - "ethics" is the difference between an actual kamikaze and the typical NS cartoon villain who acts without recognizable human motivation.

*fanged grin*


Why would you put "electronics" in a suicide torpedo lol

[Nationalist Northumbria]

Is it advisable to join your country's armed forces to gain useful knowledge for NS RPs?

[Gonswanza]

Is it advisable to join your country's armed forces to gain useful knowledge for NS RPs?

Uh, no. Most if not everyone does it by flying by the seat of their pants. Plus referencing google for some useful knowledge.

[The Corparation]

The pro-strat is to get a job at one of your country's asparagus farms to apply your useful NS RP knowledge to your country's armed forces.

[South Americanastan]

Is it advisable to join your country's armed forces to gain useful knowledge for NS RPs?

Yes, you'll have permanent firsthand knowledge of the exact amount of back pain and what "Military Grade" really means.

[Gallia-]

On second note where could such ethical acceptability of using humans as a (...) resource be useful in a modern age of electronics

Is the electronic more expensive than a person? Then it is ethical to use suicide bombers.

Simple as!

A society that relies heavily on human guidance systems is not particularly advanced in terms of heavy industry or manufacturing, obviously. It's likely agrarian, with a high birth rate, and relies on using suicide bombers in sedans filled with ANFO or vests of jury-rigged hand grenades, to kill lots of people in densely packed spaces halfway across the world. It's much cheaper for a agrarian society with seven to ten kids per woman per birth cohort to wage war in this manner than it is for them to do it the hard way and try to build ICBMs or stealth bombers.

Japan in WW2 is somewhat of an outlier in that it relied on a massive crash training program to produce large amounts of poorly trained pilots to conduct suicide missions. Pilots would launch from a fighter base and either return if they didn't find a target, or find a target and attack it relentlessly (ideally). It was demographically, materially, and industrially inferior to the United States. The only solutions available were sending pilots through a grueling 600 hour flight training course designed for peacetime buildup to produce arguably the best fighter pilots in the world at the time, or teach an 18 year old how to fly and land and what ships looked like. Given how much propaganda was laced with honorable death for nation, it's questionable whether kamikazes were a result of then-decades of nationalist propaganda, or an actual conscious decision on part of material shortages after the Battle of Midway and Coral Sea destroyed the 1st Air Fleet's elite fighter pilot corpus. There is arguments for both and both are likely true simultaneously, but I doubt Japan came out of the Taisho period determined to throw Tanaka Taro at a Lexington or North Carolina with nothing more than a 500 lbs AP bomb and fuel tanks strapped to his Zero's wings, it just happened that life gave them lemons and they made the best of it with what they had.

Militant Islamists are rather similar in this regard except even worse off industrially. It just turns out that because wars kill a lot of people producing propaganda that extols the virtues of dying for your nation is good.

However, no matter how large the costs of a material weapon are, they will almost always be more cost effective than a weapon designed to kill the operator.

He doesn't know about comparative advantage. ):

[Gonswanza]

On second note where could such ethical acceptability of using humans as a (...) resource be useful in a modern age of electronics

Is the electronic more expensive than a person? Then it is ethical to use suicide bombers.

Simple as!

A society that relies heavily on human guidance systems is not particularly advanced in terms of heavy industry or manufacturing, obviously. It's likely agrarian, with a high birth rate, and relies on using suicide bombers in sedans filled with ANFO or vests of jury-rigged hand grenades, to kill lots of people in densely packed spaces halfway across the world. It's much cheaper for a agrarian society with seven to ten kids per woman per birth cohort to wage war in this manner than it is for them to do it the hard way and try to build ICBMs or stealth bombers.

Japan in WW2 is somewhat of an outlier in that it relied on a massive crash training program to produce large amounts of poorly trained pilots to conduct suicide missions. Pilots would launch from a fighter base and either return if they didn't find a target, or find a target and attack it relentlessly (ideally). It was demographically, materially, and industrially inferior to the United States. The only solutions available were sending pilots through a grueling 600 hour flight training course designed for peacetime buildup to produce arguably the best fighter pilots in the world at the time, or teach an 18 year old how to fly and land and what ships looked like. Given how much propaganda was laced with honorable death for nation, it's questionable whether kamikazes were a result of then-decades of nationalist propaganda, or an actual conscious decision on part of material shortages after the Battle of Midway and Coral Sea destroyed the 1st Air Fleet's elite fighter pilot corpus. There is arguments for both and both are likely true simultaneously, but I doubt Japan came out of the Taisho period determined to throw Tanaka Taro at a Lexington or North Carolina with nothing more than a 500 lbs AP bomb and fuel tanks strapped to his Zero's wings, it just happened that life gave them lemons and they made the best of it with what they had.

Militant Islamists are rather similar in this regard except even worse off industrially. It just turns out that because wars kill a lot of people producing propaganda that extols the virtues of dying for your nation is good.

However, no matter how large the costs of a material weapon are, they will almost always be more cost effective than a weapon designed to kill the operator.

He doesn't know about comparative advantage. ):

Its funny too since the result of most kamikaze attacks is a plane-shaped burn mark on the side of a ship.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

If this had happened in 1942 it would've been a great IJN victory. To send a fleet carrier home for the rest of the war with just 1 pilot, 1 plane and 2 medium bombs.

[Gallia-]

It did several times.

Lexington I think was sunk by damage from two AP bombs and two torpedoes, and subsequent fuel fires/explosions.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Also kamikazes effectively sank Mitscher's flagship rip

[Gallia-]

Yes kamikazes were very effective despite USN AAA probably being the best in the war.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

It did several times.

Lexington I think was sunk by damage from two AP bombs and two torpedoes, and subsequent fuel fires/explosions.

I think the major problem with the RL kamikaze was generally that they’ve lacked effective aircraft, equipment and tactics. If I’m correct, by 1944 when these attacks began, due to USN employing very effective air defense system (things like VT shells n shit), torpedo or dive bomber life expectancy was already low enough for suicide tactics to actually lead to less casualties then conventional attacks.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Now ignoring the fact that it would be pretty unrealistic for a nation that’s regularly employing suicide attacks to develop things like PGM’s and other (because rule of cool), how would they be employable in a modern military? Not just as terrorist attacks but as regular units? For example, one-way nuclear bombers (because loading fuel for a one way trip and saving the weight off the landing gear is good)

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

just builds loads of manned cruise missiles. fuel them with vodka/M-Stoff and hydrogen peroxide idk.

[Gallia-]

It did several times.

Lexington I think was sunk by damage from two AP bombs and two torpedoes, and subsequent fuel fires/explosions.

I think the major problem with the RL kamikaze was generally that they’ve lacked effective aircraft, equipment and tactics.

This really isn't true (Japan had the most experienced and practiced pilots and some of the best performing naval fighters and bombers of the early war) at all but okay.

If I’m correct

You're not.

You actually have it backwards. The IJN had a 600-hour pilot training regime that they tried continuously to reduce to little effect (they had fewer people than America by a significant margin) and relied on getting a good wallop in because they knew they couldn't sustain a slog with America. They were expecting to knock America out quickly with their extremely well trained fighter-bombers and continuously do this to force America to surrender on terms favorable to them. They effectively accomplished this but America didn't surrender. Then they lost.

Kamikazes were just a recognition that training pilots to take off and land and dive at enemy ships was more effective than having planes take off, drop their bombs, and get shot down by a CAP on the way back.

It's pretty much that simple. There's no super science wizardry or complex thought process going into it.

It's just better to have a poorly trained pilot drive his plane into a carrier and possibly kill a couple people, than to get shot in the back and die on his way back to base, because you don't have enough time to train real good pilots anymore.

Not just as terrorist attacks but as regular units?

Is there a difference between these things?

The only difference I can see is that one uses people as the main triggering mechanism and the other uses a Rube Goldberg machine of industrial products. The targets (troop concentrations, random blobs of civilians/insurgents, checkpoints, etc.) are essentially the same if you ask anyone living in Helmand. Historically, the optimal strategy to win wars in the modern era is to employ sedans and pickup trucks with large amounts of plastique inside them on checkpoints and crowded areas, and people wearing photographers vests filled with nails and bricks of Semtex.

Suicide attacks and manually controlled land mines certainly have a better track record than laser guided bombers and cruise missiles, at least.

The thing you're missing is that these things tend to be mutually exclusive (people use PGMs because they have low birthrates because they have powerful industrial societies, which necessarily have low birth rates but productive factories, and vice versa) and that one is generally used in recognition of greater goals which are simple (suicide bombing --> get rid of foreign occupiers) and one is generally used in lieu of recognition that your goals are complex and inscrutable, even to yourself (carpet bomb Helmand --> liberate women and install voting rights), though.

If you used PGMs to bomb <insurgents> who were trying to convert random people to <religion/belief/idea> by way of the suicide bombing of <popular gathering of people> for <alien reasons> you can expect the PGMs will win.