NS Military Worldbuilding Thread No. 12

[Allanea]

US Marines are fairly good infantry even if they don't spend as much time training as Golani.

It's a spectrum rather than an on-off switch between 'totally incompetent cripples' and 'hardcore 9-month-training 120-IQ infantrymen who train as both light infantry and mechanized just in case'.

[The Fantasy tech Caliphate]

US Marines are fairly good infantry even if they don't spend as much time training as Golani.

It's a spectrum rather than an on-off switch between 'totally incompetent cripples' and 'hardcore 9-month-training 120-IQ infantrymen who train as both light infantry and mechanized just in case'.

True.
Thanks.

[Gallia-]

US Marines are fairly good infantry even if they don't spend as much time training as Golani.

It's a spectrum rather than an on-off switch between 'totally incompetent cripples' and 'hardcore 9-month-training 120-IQ infantrymen who train as both light infantry and mechanized just in case'.

Well yes, the issue is that when you say "anxiety disorder" in English, it tends to bring to mind "I was hospitalized for panic attacks going to the grocery store" rather than "sometimes I stutter" though. Given how much mental disorders depend on both social insulation and character insinuation, it really depends on the culture of the society at large, though.

Then again since when does anyone qualify statements in these threads? I guess if the guy was looking for examples of real life countries doing (relatively) odd but workable things he might look at Israel in general. I copied Ro'im Rachok for Dumbla, because I think it's cool that the IDF found a useful job for kids with autism to contribute to the army in meaningful ways.

[Dayganistan]

Trying to work out indirect fires for combat arms units. Currently I'm working with this:

MLRS and surface to surface missiles are divisional level assets
155mm howitzers at brigade level
120mm mortars at the the battalion level (this would be self propelled 120mm gun mortars in armoured and mechanized brigades, and traditional towed mortars in light infantry and airborne brigades)
81mm at company level
Each infantry platoon whether light or mechanized gets a 60mm mortar

Does this make sense at all? I'm especially confused with 60mm and 81mm mortars since they seem to have a lot of overlap with each other.

[NotTheKievanPeople]

So i saw this concept in Dmitry Stevanovich's twitter feed.


(Image)

It's a Russian concept of Asteroid terminal defense using R-36M/SS-18 Satan armed with Kinetic Kill Vehicle. This concept was apparently reviewed but now with new Sarmat ICBM. It would be capable of engaging 10-100 m diameter Asteroid. Guidance would be a network of Satellites. located at some 1.5 Mln km from Earth while another network is farther 150 mln.

I'm curious if this can be a good rapid strike weapon.. like say engaging carriers or maybe an AEW aircraft.

Generally no. If you loaded the 10-ton payload of the Sarmat with 28 W87 warheads you could barrage 740 square kilometers at 10 PSI, roughly the hardness of surface ships superstructures. This is about the location uncertainty for a manoeuvering ship moving 30 knots after 16.5 minutes. For an aircraft it's hopeless. A MaRV would be required to consistently hit manoeuvering ships. Aircraft would require additional mid-course maneuvers or a glide vehicle that can make very large terminal corrections.

Surprise attacks on surface ships are possible.

[Spirit of Hope]

Trying to work out indirect fires for combat arms units. Currently I'm working with this:

MLRS and surface to surface missiles are divisional level assets
155mm howitzers at brigade level
120mm mortars at the the battalion level (this would be self propelled 120mm gun mortars in armoured and mechanized brigades, and traditional towed mortars in light infantry and airborne brigades)
81mm at company level
Each infantry platoon whether light or mechanized gets a 60mm mortar

Does this make sense at all? I'm especially confused with 60mm and 81mm mortars since they seem to have a lot of overlap with each other.

It is a little to rigid and depends on what you mean by each category. Also is this across the board for all units? Mechanized/armored units will probably look different from airborne/air assault units.

There is a major difference in MLRS between HIMARS and TOS-1 as an example.

Division probably has long range fires (surface to surface missiles and/or long range MLRS) and a lot of 155mm howitzers.
Brigade probably has a some 155mm howitzers and may have some short range MLRS, but that also depends on your fire support philosophy.
I would say having 120mm, 81mm, and 60mm mortars all inside the battalion is a bit redundant. You would probably be best served by having only 1-2 of those, which would depend slightly on what type of unit and what it does.

[Gallia-]

It's probably better to draw a big chart tbh. For the barest minimum it would be something like:

HIMARS/PrSM for long range fire at a division, ~30 pieces.
M777 or some other towed piece in a BCT gun btn, ~20 pieces.
81mm mortar plt in a company, ~3-6 pieces.

This would be fine for airborne troops for instance.

An alternative might be:

HIMARS/PrSM for general long range fire, like 20-30 pieces.
120mm mortars in the battalion or company, 2-4 pieces each.
A single recoilless rifle in every infantry squad.

More can be added if needed I guess but it's hard to imagine what might not be met by that combination.

Dumbla has "shock" corps on paper, which are notional wartime formations built around reinforced artillery parks, with an artillery division in the corps, and each sub-formation of a division receiving a multiple rocket launcher/"smoke layer" unit (so every company has 3-4 70mm trailers, every battalion has 12-18 127mm MRLs, each brigade has a battery of 228mm MLRS, each division receives another artillery brigade, etc.) and a Chemical Assault Regiment (which is where the tiny 70mm MRLs come from etc.) for use as shock troops. It's not literally given to every company commander obviously, but each Corps would plan assaults down to the battalion and their attachments, while leaving the LTC in charge of how he achieves his allotted objectives within the time table given by Corps staff, so some company commanders might get them (a majority maybe) and the rest held in reserve by the LTC. The "shock" corps' "line" divisions is also where this horrific thing can be found: https://www.deviantart.com/kattsun/art/ ... -792477368 which is in 27-gun battalions (as opposed to a more "normal" 18-gun battalion) and assigned on a basis of three battalions per division. Similar formations of M109A7s exist for the mechanized and armored divisions.

The LTC also gets authority on deployment of his allotted stock of 2-5 KT 155mm-caliber tactical nuclear weapons, which Dumbla maintains at a crude ratio of between 3-4 per gun, so each battalion task force probably has 30-40 nukes to expend on strongpoints and stuff. It eats a lot of artillery pieces at first, but whatever gets put in front of the "shock" corps is just sorta supposed to be flattened with a combination of chemical, conventional, and atomic bombardment, so it probably pays for itself more than just feeding battalions with inadequate artillery support.

Then again Dumbla expects to build railroads under combat conditions, using prison labor and military police battalions, so I guess that helps with the logistical throughput.

[Dayganistan]

I guess this is what I would be looking at, essentially:

Division: HIMARS, K9
Brigade: K9 (armoured brigades), M777 (mechanized and airborne brigades)
Armoured infantry battalion: Patria NEMO on K21 hull
Mechanized infantry battalion: Same but on a wheeled hull
Light/airborne battalions: Towed 120mm mortar
Infantry company: 81mm mortars

Below the company there's plenty of fire support with every infantry squad getting two Alcotan-100s (or the option of replacing the two disposable launchers with a Carl Gustaf team, this is usually done with 1 squad per platoon which ends up being the "weapons" squad), and light brigades will tend to operate with infantry mobility vehicles with HMGs and GMGs if they're not conducting an airborne operation while mechanized/armoured infantry get IFVs with 40mm cannons. 60mm mortars might get handed out to airborne and SOF units on an as needed basis.

[Immoren]

Still thinking about giving manouvre brigades artillery regiments consisting of battalion of 155mm guns and battalion of either Tyulpan or 8inch M110 knock-offs with intent being that 155mm guns would support their parent brigade's manouvre battalions directly, while superheavy mortar and/or super heavy howitzer battalions from several brigades would be collected into ad-hoc artillery groups under division or equivalent unit commander's direct command to support larger operative artillery efforts, but I'm not sure.

[Gallia-]

esoteric artillery like that should be in its own units at a corps or army level tho

it's not very uhhh versatile

one shell a minute is kinda bad for 95% of battalion attacks and uhhh

the one time it's good it will be a very obvious tough fortress like the Baby Dude Fort

aka Razman's MTV Cribs

AKA an apartment block that was turned inside out by a anti-concrete tulip round puz saw or sth

it would be like giving every battalion a su-25 squadron or something

in reality every battalion should only have like a flight of su-25s and every brigade could have a su-25 sqdn in DS

not really enough su-25s or enough worthwhile targets for a whole battalion to make use of a dozen of them

ditto weird oversized artillery pieces

incidentally the "shock" corps has a High Power Artillery Brigade with long range 7" guns and 12" heavy mortars

theyre intended to be doled out to the divisions (along with the Chemical Assault Regiment) to reinforce success against really tough ombres

they have more nuclear shells than typical (like 6) and the 12" mortars fire shells with yields up to probably like 20 KT so it sits at a neat little point between the 2-5 KT 155mm shell and the 50-150 KT nuclear ATACMS

[Gonswanza]

Quick, tell me the best, most cost-efficient way to take down a flying carrier. Ignoring the physics behind it of course. As a hypothetical. Like, say, some country somehow made anti-grav devices real and made a flying carrier, and now they are going to park it near or in my airspace to flip me off and deny trade.

[Gallia-]

the only way to make the aircraft carrier worse: make it float lol

just shoot it with a missile e-z

[Hahoalki]

the only way to make the aircraft carrier worse: make it float lol

just shoot it with a missile e-z

Wait... are aircraft carriers bad?

I thought that the cost of a glide bomb was way lower than the cost of a guided missile. Is it just that, when you factor in the costs of the carrier, the jets maintenance, and jet fuel, that's no longer the case?

EDIT: to clarify, I'm talking about aircraft carriers that cruise on the ocean normally, not weird flying ones.

[Gonswanza]

the only way to make the aircraft carrier worse: make it float lol

just shoot it with a missile e-z

Wait... are aircraft carriers bad?

I thought that the cost of a glide bomb was way lower than the cost of a guided missile. Is it just that, when you factor in the costs of the carrier, the jets maintenance, and jet fuel, that's no longer the case?

Flying aircraft carriers.

Though I suppose I could amuse the idea of dropping a bomb on a flying target given it's also stationary, but then comes the problem of sheer altitude and altitude difference between the bomber carrying the bomb and the carrier itself.

[Gallia-]

the only way to make the aircraft carrier worse: make it float lol

just shoot it with a missile e-z

Wait... are aircraft carriers bad?

I thought that the cost of a glide bomb was way lower than the cost of a guided missile. Is it just that, when you factor in the costs of the carrier, the jets maintenance, and jet fuel, that's no longer the case?

EDIT: to clarify, I'm talking about aircraft carriers that cruise on the ocean normally, not weird flying ones.

perhaps i should have put fly but i was thinking of Laputa AFB so i wrote float i guess

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Does this make sense at all? I'm especially confused with 60mm and 81mm mortars since they seem to have a lot of overlap with each other.

60mm is more for support/suppression/immediate-action in the open (smoke, illumination, forcing a unit to cover), 81mm is more for deliberate destruction of fortifications.

[Immoren]

esoteric artillery like that should be in its own units at a corps or army level tho

it's not very uhhh versatile

one shell a minute is kinda bad for 95% of battalion attacks and uhhh

the one time it's good it will be a very obvious tough fortress like the Baby Dude Fort

aka Razman's MTV Cribs

AKA an apartment block that was turned inside out by a anti-concrete tulip round puz saw or sth

it would be like giving every battalion a su-25 squadron or something

in reality every battalion should only have like a flight of su-25s and every brigade could have a su-25 sqdn in DS

not really enough su-25s or enough worthwhile targets for a whole battalion to make use of a dozen of them

ditto weird oversized artillery pieces

incidentally the "shock" corps has a High Power Artillery Brigade with long range 7" guns and 12" heavy mortars

theyre intended to be doled out to the divisions (along with the Chemical Assault Regiment) to reinforce success against really tough ombres

they have more nuclear shells than typical (like 6) and the 12" mortars fire shells with yields up to probably like 20 KT so it sits at a neat little point between the 2-5 KT 155mm shell and the 50-150 KT nuclear ATACMS

Yeah I got that. That train of thought was mostly because I had "this is NS" in my mind.

Other direction I had that was that regiment would've battalion of 105/122mm pieces and battalion of 155mm pieces. Or just two battalions of either light or heavy artillery. Although I'm not sure if lightweight six inch guns and heavy mortars have reduced any lighter guns obsolete outside special applications.
But not everything not everything has to be optimized I guess and legacy equipment gives some historicity.


----

----

[New Vihenia]

So given the current Ruso-Ukraina war and the artillery duel that follows, which apparently includes thousands of shells being churned out daily. How that might affect the design of future tube artillery ?
There are images and accounts of worn out and overheated barrel, God knows how's the rifling of course.

I'm kinda feel that the barrel is something one could improve upon more, what do you guys think of adopting say a cooled barrel similar to naval guns, instead of water of course oil could be used. This however could probably bring trouble in disposing the heat, maybe in shape of some heat exchanger on side or back. It could probably help keep the barrel "straight" and retaining accuracy and firing rate as long as possible.

The other thing would adopting smoothbore gun which maybe could extend the barrel life a bit as there are no rifiling to concern about. However, this necessitating fin stabilized munitions, which could means old stocks cannot be used or some "finning" program have to be made.

[Noocratic Callipolis]

Have there been any otherwise matriarchal cultures where male military leaders could still have a relatively high degree of power?

To illustrate what I mean, Anglo-Saxon England was mostly patriarchal (like almost all societies ever) but abbesses could still control large estates of land and vote for the next King in the Witan

[NotTheKievanPeople]

Wait... are aircraft carriers bad?

I thought that the cost of a glide bomb was way lower than the cost of a guided missile. Is it just that, when you factor in the costs of the carrier, the jets maintenance, and jet fuel, that's no longer the case?

Flying aircraft carriers.

Though I suppose I could amuse the idea of dropping a bomb on a flying target given it's also stationary, but then comes the problem of sheer altitude and altitude difference between the bomber carrying the bomb and the carrier itself.

Bombs can be chucked upwards.

[NotTheKievanPeople]

Have there been any otherwise matriarchal cultures where male military leaders could still have a relatively high degree of power?

No. The existence of a matriarchal culture is hypothetical.

[Gonswanza]

Flying aircraft carriers.

Though I suppose I could amuse the idea of dropping a bomb on a flying target given it's also stationary, but then comes the problem of sheer altitude and altitude difference between the bomber carrying the bomb and the carrier itself.

Bombs can be chucked upwards.

Fam, no, I don't think you know how it's supposed to work... Or why that's even used, because it clearly isn't used for what you think it's used.

[NotTheKievanPeople]

Fam, no, I don't think you know how it's supposed to work... Or why that's even used, because it clearly isn't used for what you think it's used.

Gonswanzan pilots can't pull up I suppose, sad!

[Noocratic Callipolis]

Have there been any otherwise matriarchal cultures where male military leaders could still have a relatively high degree of power?

No. The existence of a matriarchal culture is hypothetical.

At one time most political leaders amongst the Mosuo were women and even at present women tend to control the family’s finances and domestic life in that culture.

That’s one of a few examples.

[Gonswanza]

Fam, no, I don't think you know how it's supposed to work... Or why that's even used, because it clearly isn't used for what you think it's used.

Gonswanzan pilots can't pull up I suppose, sad!

Fam... You do realize bomb lobbing was used to increase standoff distance and (well, in WWII) loft bombs over obstacles onto targets.

People didn't bomb bridges by lobbing bombs, they either dropped a crapton of bombs from above, or use a precision-guided bomb to strike the pylons.

Or just use a cruise missile to wipe it off the face of the earth.

Now, a flying carrier? Just throw missiles at it. Or drop an iron bomb on it and hope it works. "Lobbing" a bomb would just mean a lost aircraft and a bomb maybe denting the armor below or even failing to fuse and just glancing off, if at all.