NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #5

[Vitaphone Racing]

Bad weather will degrade radar and IR to some extent, plus at the low altitudes you'd expect for an airfield attack vision and hearing are still important. The chances of encountering defending patrols is smaller.

Historically bad weather has been preferred for low-level attacks - even before the proliferation of very expensive all-weather navigation and targeting aids, which would seem to be wasted if only used on clear nights.

You do not want to fly below 2,000 feet above ground level in bad weather, it's extremely dangerous at best and probably suicidal. Between microbursts, ridiculously bad turbulence, and the general lack of visibility you better have one hell of a pilot if you plan on sending an aircraft toting a bomb load through that.

So bad or good weather for a strategic-sized air operation?

It could be useful to achieve tactical surprise at serious risk of death if a pilot has to fly through much more then a light rain storm while simultaneously trying not to catch a SAM.

When you say "bad weather, it's extremely dangerous at best and probably suicidal", are you talking about typhoons or something stronger?

[Kouralia]

It's abridged. The actual version is 1,200 pages.

Oh well, the 400 page abridged Unclassified version is good enough for me.

[Gallia-]

All APP-6A publications are public domain afaik.

[Velkanika]

You do not want to fly below 2,000 feet above ground level in bad weather, it's extremely dangerous at best and probably suicidal. Between microbursts, ridiculously bad turbulence, and the general lack of visibility you better have one hell of a pilot if you plan on sending an aircraft toting a bomb load through that.

It could be useful to achieve tactical surprise at serious risk of death if a pilot has to fly through much more then a light rain storm while simultaneously trying not to catch a SAM.

When you say "bad weather, it's extremely dangerous at best and probably suicidal", are you talking about typhoons or something stronger?

Moderate or greater intensity rain storms and any kind of lightening/hail storm or worse is the definition of bad weather that it's stupid to fly into. There's not enough visibility and too much turbulence, crosswinds, downdrafts, or other kinds of very unexpected airflow at work to safely fly below 5,000 feet.

No amount of training can make this any less of a stupid idea, Galla.

[Gallia-]

The difference between stupidity and bravery is often the outcome.

[Vitaphone Racing]

When you say "bad weather, it's extremely dangerous at best and probably suicidal", are you talking about typhoons or something stronger?

Moderate or greater intensity rain storms and any kind of lightening/hail storm or worse is the definition of bad weather that it's stupid to fly into. There's not enough visibility and too much turbulence, crosswinds, downdrafts, or other kinds of very unexpected airflow at work to safely fly below 5,000 feet.

You're overstating the problem so much that it's not funny. Aircraft, civilian and military, operate in "bad weather" on a daily basis worldwide. Not enough visibility? Fly off the dash. Too much turbulence? Don't have loose shit in the cabin. Crosswinds? Trim some yaw. Downdrafts? Keep your throttle at a high setting. Unexpected airflow? Leave yourself a safety margin. They're all non-issues and have been since 1960 at least.

[Triplebaconation]

Nobody flies through thunderstorms if they can help it - since they're usually localized this isn't really a problem. Rain isn't a big deal.

[Velkanika]

The difference between stupidity and bravery is often the outcome.

True, but that still doesn't make this any less of a dangerous scenario. If there is a situation where doing this would be worth the risk I'd be rather surprised. It's better to simply wait for acceptable weather over the target, which given how quickly the weather can change shouldn't take long.

---

Moderate or greater intensity rain storms and any kind of lightening/hail storm or worse is the definition of bad weather that it's stupid to fly into. There's not enough visibility and too much turbulence, crosswinds, downdrafts, or other kinds of very unexpected airflow at work to safely fly below 5,000 feet.

You're overstating the problem so much that it's not funny. Aircraft, civilian and military, operate in "bad weather" on a daily basis worldwide. Not enough visibility? Fly off the dash. Too much turbulence? Don't have loose shit in the cabin. Crosswinds? Trim some yaw. Downdrafts? Keep your throttle at a high setting. Unexpected airflow? Leave yourself a safety margin. They're all non-issues and have been since 1960 at least.

How well could you manage trimming your aircraft while keeping an eye out for enemy aircraft, worrying about the SAM radars that are tripping your RWR every so often, and ridiculously rough ride while flying a bomb truck at low altitude with only 500 yards of visibility? Oh, and there's some hills and trees involved. I have enough simulator time to know this is a shitty situation to try and fly in, let alone fight in.

You want to know how aircraft operate in bad weather? THEY FLY OVER IT.

[Vitaphone Racing]

The difference between stupidity and bravery is often the outcome.

True, but that still doesn't make this any less of a dangerous scenario. If there is a situation where doing this would be worth the risk I'd be rather surprised. It's better to simply wait for acceptable weather over the target, which given how quickly the weather can change shouldn't take long.

---

You're overstating the problem so much that it's not funny. Aircraft, civilian and military, operate in "bad weather" on a daily basis worldwide. Not enough visibility? Fly off the dash. Too much turbulence? Don't have loose shit in the cabin. Crosswinds? Trim some yaw. Downdrafts? Keep your throttle at a high setting. Unexpected airflow? Leave yourself a safety margin. They're all non-issues and have been since 1960 at least.

How well could you manage trimming your aircraft while keeping an eye out for enemy aircraft, worrying about the SAM radars that are tripping your RWR every so often, and ridiculously rough ride while flying a bomb truck at low altitude with only 500 yards of visibility?

Easily, I'd use the autotrim function.

Oh, and there's some hills and trees involved.

They'd be fucking huge trees if they're 500 feet high. I'd fully expect to have some terrain following radar which would alert me of hills though.

I have enough simulator time to know this is a shitty situation to try and fly in, let alone fight in

.
Huge difference between shitty and suicidal. It's like you think aircraft don't ever fly at night or something.

You want to know how aircraft operate in bad weather? THEY FLY OVER IT.

You've never been in an airliner taking off or landing in bad weather? Do you fly much?

[Velkanika]

Oh, and there's some hills and trees involved.

They'd be fucking huge trees if they're 500 feet high. I'd fully expect to have some terrain following radar which would alert me of hills though.

So you're looking at your radar instead of threats outside now.

Huge difference between shitty and suicidal. It's like you think aircraft don't ever fly at night or something.

There's a huge difference between IFR and a bloody storm.

You've never been in an airliner taking off or landing in bad weather? Do you fly much?

I've flow before. They wait for conditions to lighten up enough so they won't die, hence all those storm delays that have a tendency to disrupt departure and arrival schedules an entire ocean away.

[Triplebaconation]

Yes. Thunderstorms routinely disrupt global travel.

[Vitaphone Racing]

They'd be fucking huge trees if they're 500 feet high. I'd fully expect to have some terrain following radar which would alert me of hills though.

So you're looking at your radar instead of threats outside now.

Usually there'd be a second pilot for that or the process would be so automated that it's simple. I'm assuming any "experience" you've had has been in a very simple simulator or in a very low-end light aircraft, seeing how many misconceptions you have about technology. You could always read more.

Huge difference between shitty and suicidal. It's like you think aircraft don't ever fly at night or something.

There's a huge difference between IFR and a bloody storm.

And yet neither are what you'd call extremely dangerous or suicidal to anything beyond an inexperienced pilot.

You've never been in an airliner taking off or landing in bad weather? Do you fly much?

I've flow before. They wait for conditions to lighten up enough so they won't die, hence all those storm delays that have a tendency to disrupt departure and arrival schedules an entire ocean away.

They wait for conditions to lighten up when they have the opportunity to do so. If you have to fly through a storm, you have to fly through a storm. Even still, the chances of a crash from flying through a storm are minimal and every crash from some weather related cause since the late 1980's has had some secondary factor as well, like a pilot who had no idea of what to do. I don't know why you keep making it seem like a 50/50 between life and death. Nobody has said it's perfectly safe or that doing this is easy, so if you're not arguing that it's impossibly dangerous then I don't know what you're arguing.

[Questers]

I have flown through quite a lot of storms. It's not really a big thing.

[Questers]

How would a government military react to a Swedish Rhapsody numbers station? Would it ignore it and dismiss it as nothing? I was thinking of using these to spoof anti-spy operations.

As far as I know, because numbers stations use one time pads, intelligence services don't try to decrypt the actual message. What they can see however is when the message changes and at what time/how frequently, it might give a loose indication.

[Gallia-]

I have flown through quite a lot of storms. It's not really a big thing.

Yeah you say that.

Then you find out you're living on Lost: The Planet.

Sixth Sense was probably directed by a Questerian.

[Firmador]

How would bad weather (I guess heavy rains, maybe up to typhoon level?) affect ground or air based radar and IR detection ranges?

Also, what do you guys think of this ns tank: http://iiwiki.com/wiki/T-11_Victory

[Firmador]

I meant IR as well, if anyone would be so kind**

[Questers]

Also I may note, since the Ragon Air Force is....bad. The Ragon depend on their three pilot families to have kids, and teach them how to fly a plan first thing.

Do you actually think that this is a thing anyone would do or is it obvious to you how contrived this is?

Deus ex machina is a thing.This is like the opposite of it.

[Registug]

It's usually referred to as Diabolus Ex Machina

[Pharthan]

-snip-

-snip-

*Sits back and eats popcorn.*

Oh, yeah, this is good stuff.

I keep thinking, "But, you can just.. oh, Vitaphone's got it. Oh, wow, that's interesting. I never knew about that."

[Imperializt Russia]

(Image)

My favourite.

Okay... So that's an Unknown, Air/Space Forces... I got nothing.

Someone made the NATO symbol for an alien space ship?

It's Unknown - Space Station

Looks a little like the Cypher drone.

What is the "ladybugs" symbol used for?
A similar-looking symbol in an APP-6A list I found describes it as "Vandalism/Rape/Loot/Ransack/Plunder/Sack".
"Neutral vagabond"?

(Image)

My favourite.



It's Unknown - Space Station

Oh, cool. Is there a website which has the full collection of symbols on it, as Wiki is lacking in some regards.

I found this.
http://www.vs.rs/content/attachments/AP ... ymbols.pdf

[Kampala-]

It's looting by an unknown party.

[Purpelia]

Am I missing something here or does that PDF have absolutely nothing to do with the words you are using, only the symbol shown?

[Firmador]

How would bad weather (I guess heavy rains, maybe up to typhoon level?) affect ground or air based radar and IR detection ranges?

Also, what do you guys think of this ns tank: http://iiwiki.com/wiki/T-11_Victory

?

[Imperializt Russia]

Am I missing something here or does that PDF have absolutely nothing to do with the words you are using, only the symbol shown?

Not sure I get what you mean.