NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Type 08

[The Akasha Colony]

For power, which is a major limiting factor in robotics we use nuclear fuel cells. While limited for cost, safety and political reasons in real life they provide longer-lasting power than any battery.

They're also horrendously weight inefficient.

[Empire of Narnia]

For power, which is a major limiting factor in robotics we use nuclear fuel cells. While limited for cost, safety and political reasons in real life they provide longer-lasting power than any battery.

They're also horrendously weight inefficient.

Just because of radiation shielding.


Don't hug Chuck E. if you value your sperm count too highly.

[The Akasha Colony]

Just because of radiation shielding.

The shielding is only part of the problem. The biggest is the conversion of thermal energy to electrical or mechanical energy, which is a rather inefficient process. Certainly for the amount of power required by the proposed animatronics.

[Empire of Narnia]

Just because of radiation shielding.

The shielding is only part of the problem. The biggest is the conversion of thermal energy to electrical or mechanical energy, which is a rather inefficient process. Certainly for the amount of power required by the proposed animatronics.

You could compensate for it with lighter materials and just the efficient use of power. Traditional batteries could also be used for when sudden bursts of power are needed.

Does anybody know how hard it is to make carbon nanotubes? I know they are far too expensive for mass-production but since my nation's animatronics are one-offs maybe it would be feasible to make at least some parts out of them to save on weight.

[The Greater Aryan Race]

Just because of radiation shielding.

The shielding is only part of the problem. The biggest is the conversion of thermal energy to electrical or mechanical energy, which is a rather inefficient process. Certainly for the amount of power required by the proposed animatronics.

Not to mention the logistics nightmare in having to constantly maintain such devices in a battle-worthy condition.

[New Vihenia]

And yet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misty_(satellite)

Oh come on.

"The effect of the cone-shaped balloon on RF Stealth in S-band is analyzed in an academic article. It is found the RCS on the bore-sight direction can be decreased with the ballon, but not enough to hide it from modern Space Fence system.[7]"

At best one can make the RCS smaller and might be difficult to identify.. but not disappear.

[The Akasha Colony]

You could compensate for it with lighter materials and just the efficient use of power. Traditional batteries could also be used for when sudden bursts of power are needed.

Non-reactor nuclear batteries have conversion efficiencies measured in the single digits. The lower end of that spectrum, too. A few theorized designs claw their way into the double-digits, but fall well short of the 30-40+% efficiencies enjoyed by combustion engines and reactor-based nuclear plants. A bit of carbon fiber here and there doesn't overcome that, especially when the goal is to put out what I would guess is a similar amount of power as an actual battle tank, if not more.

For an application such as this, power-to-weight and power-to-volume in the short term are the most important factors, and nuclear power sources have poor characteristics in these regards at small scales.

Does anybody know how hard it is to make carbon nanotubes? I know they are far too expensive for mass-production but since my nation's animatronics are one-offs maybe it would be feasible to make at least some parts out of them to save on weight.

It's actually not tremendously difficult to make them. It's already been commercialized, it's simply a matter of making them economically competitive with "good enough" existing solutions.

CNTs wouldn't be useful for too much though since the exertion of force primarily requires good compressive strength to avoid buckling under pressure or impact, for which purposes CNTs are not very useful. They have extreme tensile strength, but are inferior to conventional metal alloys in compressive strength.

[Allanea]

And yet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misty_(satellite)

Oh come on.

"The effect of the cone-shaped balloon on RF Stealth in S-band is analyzed in an academic article. It is found the RCS on the bore-sight direction can be decreased with the ballon, but not enough to hide it from modern Space Fence system.[7]"

At best one can make the RCS smaller and might be difficult to identify.. but not disappear.

So literally like every other form of stealth ever.

[EstRADia]

OK, so I've had the idea of conscription for awhile and I have a question about it. My nation is very defensive over offense oriented, so I could see how conscription would put a lot of manpower at my disposal. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill. Including the fact that I am located in a very peaceful part of my RP world conscription may not bring enough benefits to justify the trade offs. That being said, I have contemplated the idea of conscription for less intense jobs like logistics, needed engineering(possible army corps of engineers esque thing), medical field, office work, MP, etc. Pretty much every job that doesn't require being directly involved to put your life on the line and fight for your country. Being conscripted to behind the scenes jobs instead of front line grunt work could raise overall morale due to not forcing people to fight for a country they may or may not like. This could also help with needed logistics and busy work to help make the military as a whole more efficient. If this sort of system was implemented I was also thinking that once a person was conscripted that they could choose where/what they wanted to work at/do. This could help those being conscripted feel more content by allowing them to choose a job that better fits their skills and interest. So, after explaining that, my main questions are whether it's worth initiating some sort of conscription policy for my nation. And if so, if the current plan I have in mind would work to a good amount of success.

[Nachmere]

OK, so I've had the idea of conscription for awhile and I have a question about it. My nation is very defensive over offense oriented, so I could see how conscription would put a lot of manpower at my disposal. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill. Including the fact that I am located in a very peaceful part of my RP world conscription may not bring enough benefits to justify the trade offs. That being said, I have contemplated the idea of conscription for less intense jobs like logistics, needed engineering(possible army corps of engineers esque thing), medical field, office work, MP, etc. Pretty much every job that doesn't require being directly involved to put your life on the line and fight for your country. Being conscripted to behind the scenes jobs instead of front line grunt work could raise overall morale due to not forcing people to fight for a country they may or may not like. This could also help with needed logistics and busy work to help make the military as a whole more efficient. If this sort of system was implemented I was also thinking that once a person was conscripted that they could choose where/what they wanted to work at/do. This could help those being conscripted feel more content by allowing them to choose a job that better fits their skills and interest. So, after explaining that, my main questions are whether it's worth initiating some sort of conscription policy for my nation. And if so, if the current plan I have in mind would work to a good amount of success.

1) you assume moral is higher for people conscripted to rear echelon units. this is not my experience.

2) some of the fields you mentioned are as training intensive as combat posting (medical for instance).

3) choosing postings is good generally, however consider that not everyone can do every job. even highly flexible conscription forces still give only limited options to each conscript.

4) If you feel conscription is not really needed, dont do it. why would you?

5) an alternative idea for you if you insist on conscription to keep troop numbers high for a war:
have a standing all volunteer high quality force.
conscript everyone for 6 months of training and keep them in reserves until age 40, with 2 weeks of training per year. organize these reserves in local units with defensive purpose, and assign them commanders from your standing volunteer army, or from people who have served in that standing army and become reservists as well.

[The Akasha Colony]

OK, so I've had the idea of conscription for awhile and I have a question about it. My nation is very defensive over offense oriented, so I could see how conscription would put a lot of manpower at my disposal. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill. Including the fact that I am located in a very peaceful part of my RP world conscription may not bring enough benefits to justify the trade offs. That being said, I have contemplated the idea of conscription for less intense jobs like logistics, needed engineering(possible army corps of engineers esque thing), medical field, office work, MP, etc. Pretty much every job that doesn't require being directly involved to put your life on the line and fight for your country. Being conscripted to behind the scenes jobs instead of front line grunt work could raise overall morale due to not forcing people to fight for a country they may or may not like. This could also help with needed logistics and busy work to help make the military as a whole more efficient. If this sort of system was implemented I was also thinking that once a person was conscripted that they could choose where/what they wanted to work at/do. This could help those being conscripted feel more content by allowing them to choose a job that better fits their skills and interest. So, after explaining that, my main questions are whether it's worth initiating some sort of conscription policy for my nation. And if so, if the current plan I have in mind would work to a good amount of success.

The question is primarily one of whether you can meet your perceived defense needs without a draft, or require one to make up for expected shortfalls.

It's also a matter of culture. A number of nations such as Switzerland and Singapore maintain conscription because it is considered part of the culture of these states. Neither is likely to ever be seriously threatened in a war (Switzerland especially), but conscription and basic military service is more or less considered both a rite of passage and something of an indoctrination tool into the expected norms of national service. Others, such as Israel and South Korea, maintain it for military purposes, although given the length that these conscription programs have been in place, it can be argued that they're starting to become cultural as well.

A draft is a cheap way to increase military size, since conscripts can be paid very little (they don't get to leave and pursue other jobs during their term of service). But the notion of a peacetime draft is not something that every nation can culturally accept. Nations in the Anglo-American tradition tend to strongly object to the notion of compulsory service in most instances outside of full-scale war. As a result, a volunteer force is more politically expedient and paying bonuses and competitive salaries (for a higher cost per soldier) is considered more readily acceptable than implementing a conscription program.

[Allanea]

. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill.

This is a myth. Israel has conscription and there's no evidence that its combat troops are somehow deficient in terms of training.

[Nachmere]

. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill.

This is a myth. Israel has conscription and there's no evidence that its combat troops are somehow deficient in terms of training.

Well, when you do aa 3(!) conscription yes.

[EstRADia]

OK, so I've had the idea of conscription for awhile and I have a question about it. My nation is very defensive over offense oriented, so I could see how conscription would put a lot of manpower at my disposal. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill. Including the fact that I am located in a very peaceful part of my RP world conscription may not bring enough benefits to justify the trade offs. That being said, I have contemplated the idea of conscription for less intense jobs like logistics, needed engineering(possible army corps of engineers esque thing), medical field, office work, MP, etc. Pretty much every job that doesn't require being directly involved to put your life on the line and fight for your country. Being conscripted to behind the scenes jobs instead of front line grunt work could raise overall morale due to not forcing people to fight for a country they may or may not like. This could also help with needed logistics and busy work to help make the military as a whole more efficient. If this sort of system was implemented I was also thinking that once a person was conscripted that they could choose where/what they wanted to work at/do. This could help those being conscripted feel more content by allowing them to choose a job that better fits their skills and interest. So, after explaining that, my main questions are whether it's worth initiating some sort of conscription policy for my nation. And if so, if the current plan I have in mind would work to a good amount of success.

1) you assume moral is higher for people conscripted to rear echelon units. this is not my experience.

2) some of the fields you mentioned are as training intensive as combat posting (medical for instance).

3) choosing postings is good generally, however consider that not everyone can do every job. even highly flexible conscription forces still give only limited options to each conscript.

4) If you feel conscription is not really needed, dont do it. why would you?

5) an alternative idea for you if you insist on conscription to keep troop numbers high for a war:
have a standing all volunteer high quality force.
conscript everyone for 6 months of training and keep them in reserves until age 40, with 2 weeks of training per year. organize these reserves in local units with defensive purpose, and assign them commanders from your standing volunteer army, or from people who have served in that standing army and become reservists as well.

1) You do have a point. Although, and this is just an assumption, if you weren't happy that you got conscripted I'd think that you'd be in favor of doing support work rather than being placed on the front lines.

2) True. I haven't worked everything out yet, including the standards for conscription like age and amount of education needed before being able to be conscripted. (say if you were attending medical school, you wouldn't be able to be conscripted until you either finished it or dropped out. Just an ide)

3) Of course. This was just an initial idea. There's probably be some sort of standard needed to be met in order to be allowed a desired job. That or training. Probably training.

4)It was just an extreme idea, seemed kinda logical if I really wanted to go all out with national defense.

[EstRADia]

OK, so I've had the idea of conscription for awhile and I have a question about it. My nation is very defensive over offense oriented, so I could see how conscription would put a lot of manpower at my disposal. But, with more troops comes less training and over all skill. Including the fact that I am located in a very peaceful part of my RP world conscription may not bring enough benefits to justify the trade offs. That being said, I have contemplated the idea of conscription for less intense jobs like logistics, needed engineering(possible army corps of engineers esque thing), medical field, office work, MP, etc. Pretty much every job that doesn't require being directly involved to put your life on the line and fight for your country. Being conscripted to behind the scenes jobs instead of front line grunt work could raise overall morale due to not forcing people to fight for a country they may or may not like. This could also help with needed logistics and busy work to help make the military as a whole more efficient. If this sort of system was implemented I was also thinking that once a person was conscripted that they could choose where/what they wanted to work at/do. This could help those being conscripted feel more content by allowing them to choose a job that better fits their skills and interest. So, after explaining that, my main questions are whether it's worth initiating some sort of conscription policy for my nation. And if so, if the current plan I have in mind would work to a good amount of success.

The question is primarily one of whether you can meet your perceived defense needs without a draft, or require one to make up for expected shortfalls.

It's also a matter of culture. A number of nations such as Switzerland and Singapore maintain conscription because it is considered part of the culture of these states. Neither is likely to ever be seriously threatened in a war (Switzerland especially), but conscription and basic military service is more or less considered both a rite of passage and something of an indoctrination tool into the expected norms of national service. Others, such as Israel and South Korea, maintain it for military purposes, although given the length that these conscription programs have been in place, it can be argued that they're starting to become cultural as well.

A draft is a cheap way to increase military size, since conscripts can be paid very little (they don't get to leave and pursue other jobs during their term of service). But the notion of a peacetime draft is not something that every nation can culturally accept. Nations in the Anglo-American tradition tend to strongly object to the notion of compulsory service in most instances outside of full-scale war. As a result, a volunteer force is more politically expedient and paying bonuses and competitive salaries (for a higher cost per soldier) is considered more readily acceptable than implementing a conscription program.

This is a great point. ICly, national defense is highly ingrained into Estradian society. "If you want peace, prepare for war." and all that jazz. And although I'd think the general populace would be fine with conscription if it meant better protecting the nation they love, there has always been a high standard of individual freedom/separation from the government. In simpler terms, the people don't get forced by the government to do certain things. (That aren't integral to the running of the nation like taxes or education) This shows is the lack of compulsory gun ownership, more choice in education subjects, etc. So, conscription would conflict with that ideology. I'll probably just scrap that idea, or put it on the far back burner for the time being.

[Schwere Panzer Abieltung 502]

Real animatronics like at Chuck E. Cheese's are bolted to the floor and can only perform pre-programmed movements from a central computer. Our animatronics however use the latest in robotics and advanced materials such as titanium alloy to keep them relevant on the battlefield. For power, which is a major limiting factor in robotics we use nuclear fuel cells. While limited for cost, safety and political reasons in real life they provide longer-lasting power than any battery.

'The latest in robotics' include robots that can barely walk on a flat and level surface without falling down. On a good day.

You can say the majority of your military is based off the US military, and if you need help with that, great. But your animatronics - and the things you were asking about before - are pure fantasy. Realism need not apply.

On be other hand, I am having FNAF flashbacks.

[Korva]

'The latest in robotics' include robots that can barely walk on a flat and level surface without falling down. On a good day.

Around two years ago I went to the DARPA Robotics challenge in South Florida. It was like watching paint dry.

NASA's entry stared at a doorknob for like 15 minutes before opening it and then promptly falling flat on its face.

[Tyrolo]

I have a question:

What is the longest possible range of a high power flame thrower? It is very large and on a Spider-Mech/Tank.

Its The Top Plasma Canon looking thing

[Neo Philippine Empire]

I have a question:

What is the longest possible range of a high power flame thrower? It is very large and on a Spider-Mech/Tank.

(Image)

Its The Top Plasma Canon looking thing

I thought that the Geneva convention banned flamethrowers or something.

What is the size of this thing?

[Auroya]

flame thrower

no

on a Spider-Mech/Tank.

no.

However, this is one of the most :II: things I've seen this month, so there's that.

[Dostanuot Loj]

'The latest in robotics' include robots that can barely walk on a flat and level surface without falling down. On a good day.

Around two years ago I went to the DARPA Robotics challenge in South Florida. It was like watching paint dry.

NASA's entry stared at a doorknob for like 15 minutes before opening it and then promptly falling flat on its face.

I took an introduction to human communication course first year university (BA in Linguistics) where we talked about the differences between language and communication, and how animals and now computers don't have languages. The major differences being the ability to discuss and understand complex, abstract concepts. Bees or dolphins can communicate the location of real things, of physical relationships, but only humans can communicate about the meaning of their own existence. Computers are in the same boat, right now. This is a big hurdle in artificial intelligence.

My point here though is, if you step back and look at how mind-numbingly complex and conceptually abstract many of the things we do by the time we hit puberty with ease, it really puts into perspective the difficulties in creating a machine that can even mimic them, let alone do them. Or, the flip side, if you look at how hard it is to make computers and machines do what we can do with ease, it puts our own complexity into perspective.

The human being is a fantastic thing, it's going to be a long long time before we can replace it fully, if we ever can.

[Nachmere]

Around two years ago I went to the DARPA Robotics challenge in South Florida. It was like watching paint dry.

NASA's entry stared at a doorknob for like 15 minutes before opening it and then promptly falling flat on its face.

I took an introduction to human communication course first year university (BA in Linguistics) where we talked about the differences between language and communication, and how animals and now computers don't have languages. The major differences being the ability to discuss and understand complex, abstract concepts. Bees or dolphins can communicate the location of real things, of physical relationships, but only humans can communicate about the meaning of their own existence. Computers are in the same boat, right now. This is a big hurdle in artificial intelligence.

My point here though is, if you step back and look at how mind-numbingly complex and conceptually abstract many of the things we do by the time we hit puberty with ease, it really puts into perspective the difficulties in creating a machine that can even mimic them, let alone do them. Or, the flip side, if you look at how hard it is to make computers and machines do what we can do with ease, it puts our own complexity into perspective.

The human being is a fantastic thing, it's going to be a long long time before we can replace it fully, if we ever can.

i am not sure the entire range of human capabilities is needed to walk(drive) around and shoot people with small arms though.

[Dostanuot Loj]

I took an introduction to human communication course first year university (BA in Linguistics) where we talked about the differences between language and communication, and how animals and now computers don't have languages. The major differences being the ability to discuss and understand complex, abstract concepts. Bees or dolphins can communicate the location of real things, of physical relationships, but only humans can communicate about the meaning of their own existence. Computers are in the same boat, right now. This is a big hurdle in artificial intelligence.

My point here though is, if you step back and look at how mind-numbingly complex and conceptually abstract many of the things we do by the time we hit puberty with ease, it really puts into perspective the difficulties in creating a machine that can even mimic them, let alone do them. Or, the flip side, if you look at how hard it is to make computers and machines do what we can do with ease, it puts our own complexity into perspective.

The human being is a fantastic thing, it's going to be a long long time before we can replace it fully, if we ever can.

i am not sure the entire range of human capabilities is needed to walk(drive) around and shoot people with small arms though.

We can make a machine that will drive around and indiscriminately kill pretty easily.
It's the whole discrimination thing we are working on.

[New Vihenia]

We can make a machine that will drive around and indiscriminately kill pretty easily.
It's the whole discrimination thing we are working on.

How long till we can have fully autonomous gunnery in tank ?

[Tyrolo]

flame thrower

no

on a Spider-Mech/Tank.

no.

However, this is one of the most :II: things I've seen this month, so there's that.

Not Sure How To Respond to that lol