Infantry Discussion Thread 9: Parabellum [NO KAIJU]

[Rodrania]

Does this design make sense for an SMG? Should I make the barrel longer? (I'm trying to go for a barrel as small as possible while keeping the weapon acceptably accurate)

[Eisarn-Ara]

The barrel looks a little bit anorexic in regard to thickness, and maybe two more inches of barrel length?

[Fordorsia]

What if the bullet didn't have an outer shell, but it had the main body that kept it in place and the penetrator was sticking halfway out of the body? That way it hits the target first and isn't slowed by anything in front of it hitting first. When the body hits, it comes away from the penetrator as the penetrator goes into the target.

I don't know what I'm doing so I could have just described the exact thing that happens.

Uncapped APCR/HVAP ammo did exist but it was found that a ballistic tip helped the penetrator dig in and made it much less likely to shatter. The ballistic cap also allowed a more aerodynamic projectile.

Were there any advantages to it?


Well this is the beefed up longer version of the M25 Heavy Rifle that would be using this fancy new bullet. I supposed it could be quite the ambush weapon, depending on how effective the bullet turns out to be.

[Asgeirria]

Legion - Three battalions commanded by a Praefefor advised by a Grand Optio. 576 AIFVs, 72 GNGPs, 48 Cargos, 48 Ambulances, 48 Leopard 2A7 MBTs, six CPs, three BCPs, and a Boxer LCP.
Battalion - Two companies commanded by a Colonel, staffed by a Diogene (or onslaught augar), Cornitian, and two subcommanders. IFV complement of 192 AIFVs, 48 GNGPs, 16 Cargos, 16 Ambulances, 16 Leopard 2A7 MBTs, two Boxer CPs, a Boxer OWCP.
Company - Eight platoons commanded by a Centurion (captain) assisted by an Optio (Staff Sergeant in auxiliary units, master sergeant or commissioned Warrant Officer equivalent in assault units), 96 AIFVs, 24 GNGPs, 8 Boxer Cargos, 8 Boxer Ambulances 8 Leopard 2A7 MBTs, supplemented by a Boxer CP.
Platoon - Four squads commanded by a Tesserarius (1st lieutenant), 12 AIFVs and 3 Boxer GNGPs supplemented by a Boxer Cargo, a Boxer Ambulance, and a Leopard 2A7 MBT.
Squad - Three teams led by a Decurio (2nd lieutenant), rallying to a signifer (or onslaught lead, in assault squads) with the three squad AIFVs supplemented by a Boxer GNGP.
Team - A five man team (three riflemen (MDR-c Bullpup SMG), a specialist [sniper (bullpup m14 to keep barrel length but increase indoor or close quarters effectiveness), commando (UTAS-15 shotgun or PS90 carbine), or demolitions(PS90 carbinem, MBT LAW, and/or c4 or other explosives)], and SAW trooper(Pecheng PKP) led by a Decanus (sergeant or corporal, PS90 carbine), with a Boxer AIFV.

How effective/ineffective would this be in forest/mountain/urban warfare?

Assuming:

>Sufficient budget
>Two years of training, three-phase STANDARD
>Powered leg/back support STANDARD
>Light armor STANDARD: The Stag armor system weighs 110 pounds, and the plates provide immunity to smalls arms fire lower than 7.62, and up to 12 7.62 strikes on each plate. It protects against shrapnel and grenades blasts at a distance of 8 feet, and lowers fatalities by 70% at 5 feet, and ~25% at <4 feet.
>Heavy armor (NCOs, specialists): The Boar armor system weighs 410 pounds, which provides full-body protection from 7.62 ammunition and smaller. Many of the main plates can withstand 3-4 direct hits from .50 rounds, while the internal padding, shock absorbers, and heat sinks can protect the wearer from grenade explosions within 2-3 feet. Fatalies from mortar strikes within 10 feet are reduced from 60% to less than 2%. Fatalities from artillery strikes of 200mm at less than 15 feet are reduced from 85% to ~5%. Fatalities from direct hits from 20-35mm shells are reduced from 99% to 30%.
>Proper air support
>The technology and resources necessary for above assumptions is available
>WWII Wermacht command system, allowing for unit command autonomy, e.g. 2nd lt. can decide how he wants to accomplish tasks given.
>High morale
>Reasonably high quality officers

So, assuming optimal domestic conditions. Stuff like effectiveness when cut off from supply lines, assymetrical (in both directions) warfare, etc is open season. Thoughts on actual combat effectiveness, what could be improved, etc?

leaving out the silly armour issues the general feel of what you have posted is bloated and unweildy with portions of video game style class specialisations and not actually taking care about what your choosing on the side.

Platoons don't need anything other than thier IFVs. Companies don't need extra vehciles other than an ambulance, a "cargo" APC, a couple of run about jeepalikes and maybe a 3 vehicle repair/fitter section (which i think is what you are trying to go for with the boxer GNGP, you really want the BDR).

A junior inf. officer does not need his own MBT. If you are going to include MBTs in an infantry regiment/brigade put them in thier own battalion or at least thier own companys at battalion level.

Numbers of sub units seem not too bad until suddenly the Company commander has 8 Fecking Lftn.s to look after (with no XO aparrently). Why on earth do you have 8 platoons in a company? I assume its some roman flavour thing.

Despite the aparent bloat the battalion is totally missing any form of support weapons capability. Where is the support company with its MGs, Mortars, ATGMs, snipers, recce and assault pioneer assets?

As to small arms the MDR-C is OK as long as you stick to the 16" barrel.
Bullpup M14s suck the biggest boabies in the world so why bother when stuff like the RFB exists? Alternatively any one of the precision ARalikes out here will happily do te same job without being that encumbering in CQB. No such thing as a squad level demo guy, you will have a rocket launcher for of the riflemen but thats about it.
Just make the "commando" a regular rifleman and issue a shotgun for one of them to carry slung and use when required.
Why does the machine gunner have a weapon totally incompatible with the logistics of the rest of the squad? For the PKP to make sense you have either rechambered them to 7.62mm NATO or rechambered your teams' precision rifles and the MGs on all your vehicles to 7.62x54mmR.
The PS90 is a silly comercial civilian toy, either use proper P90s or better yet MDR-Cs as it is hardly over encumbering.

This is exactly what I was looking for.
Okay, addressing the unwieldy company level, the high ratio of PL to CO is sort of supposed to be working on lower-level command autonomy. CO tells PL what needs to go accomplished, PL decides the best way to go about that. Should the autonomy of command begin farther up or farther down?

As far as the PKP, since we're not factoring the cost for rechambering, I was just looking at performance (power, accuracy, etc)

As far as specialization, the commando probably could use a P90 instead of shotgun. On further research, the UTAS is unreliable. I'm not too familiar on the RFB, but from my experience it doesn"'t have automatic? But I hear good things about reliability and accuracy. Weight isn't really an issue. Is there a better option performance-wise than the MDR-C?

[Rhodesialund]

Somewhat related, although more of a general subject.

Apparently there is a Rhodesian MAG 58 here in the US.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1857145_Rhodesian_MAG_58_restoration_thread__Thread_will_be_updated_throughout_the_process_.html

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

Generally speaking, exoskeletons are automatically unrealistic unless in PMT or beyond. The best thing you can get is a Raytheon XOS 2 leg set and, of course, battery power would make it extremely limited in range.

Christ on a hockey stick, did you even read what I wrote or did you go full tunnelvision on "exoskeleton"?

Okay, I'll try more detail:

>Light armor STANDARD: The Stag armor system weighs 110 pounds, and the plates provide immunity to smalls arms fire lower than 7.62, and up to 12 7.62 strikes on each plate. It protects against shrapnel and grenades blasts at a distance of 8 feet, and lowers fatalities by 70% at 5 feet, and ~25% at <4 feet.

I'm assuming your 7.62 is referring to 7.62mm NATO. Your average 7.62mm NATO/.308 AP round will go through half an inch of steel. The best current body armor that's light enough for soldiers can only take one, maybe two of these, and generally speaking the FMJ rounds and not in the armor-piercing version. Being able to stop a dozen of these rounds before failing means you probably have some thick, VERY heavy stuff.

Protecting from shrapnel is much more important, however, as shrapnel generally causes many more deaths. If you get caught under a 155mm airburst, kiss your ass goodbye unless you're buttoned up in an Abrams. But shrapnel from mortars, grenades, or man-portable rockets can be stopped by good body armor, so that's good. However, I emphasize weight. Keep it down at all costs. This is doubly true with exoskeletons; I don't even want to know(I actually do tho) how much the batteries which power a 110 pound suit weigh alone, and how far such a suit could walk if doing absolutely nothing else.

To tl;dr that, drop everything about the suit's armor except a helmet and flak vest. Maybe a few other gimmicks if you're feeling 'roided up. But, if these guys are mountain soldiers, than you try doing a forced 20 kilometer march with 110 pounds of suit on top of the regular infantryman's gear.

>Heavy armor (NCOs, specialists): The Boar armor system weighs 410 pounds, which provides full-body protection from 7.62 ammunition and smaller. Many of the main plates can withstand 3-4 direct hits from .50 rounds, while the internal padding, shock absorbers, and heat sinks can protect the wearer from grenade explosions within 2-3 feet. Fatalities from mortar strikes within 10 feet are reduced from 60% to less than 2%. Fatalities from artillery strikes of 200mm at less than 15 feet are reduced from 85% to ~5%. Fatalities from direct hits from 20-35mm shells are reduced from 99% to 30%.

This is where it gets silly. 410 pounds?? Protection against HMG rounds? Let me fill you in on an automotive secret:

A large car battery will weigh on the order of 30-35lbs. Try lifting one; they're heavy. And they run out of juice fast. The reason car batteries last so long is because the car's engine will recharge it as it runs. It can't be recharged forever, of course, but it's not like the two AA batteries in a television remote that last for months on their own.

What do you have to recharge a 410 pound suit? What do you have powering it? Weight adds up fast, and these sorts of suits are far more likely to be the suit version of a King Tiger than a Sherman: Heavy, a huge target, a nightmare for the people who maintain them, a severe burden on logistics due to the high wear and tear of parts, and unlikely to go very far from home base due to their high fuel consumption. If you really, really want it, then use them as defensive weapons - but if the enemy is that close to your operating bases, throwing these things into the fight would probably just mean more of your guys killed.

I get that these things are cool. I grew up on Halo, MechWarrior, etc. But there's a reason that real militaries have the limited plans for actual exoskeletons that they do.

Of course, there are places where lifting heavy weights would actually come in very handy: Maintenance, for one - need to get under that Humvee? Jacks are boring, use an exoskeleton. Trying to repair a broken torsion bar on a tank? Exoskeleton will yank that thing out. Or ordnance: Tired of using seven-man teams and a hydraulic lift to put a 500lbs bomb on an aircraft wing? Exoskel. Need faster reloading on 155mm arty? Yes, use an exosuit for that. All of these examples are places where you probably wouldn't be far from external power sources; a nuclear aircraft carrier would easily power dozens of these exoskeletons.

In the field? Not so much.

EDIT: Almost missed that one part:

>WWII Wermacht command system, allowing for unit command autonomy, e.g. 2nd lt. can decide how he wants to accomplish tasks given.

You can do a lot better than Wehrmacht. A lot worse, granted, but a lot better. The Wehrmacht General Staff agreed that it would take not very long - six weeks, if I recall - to defeat the USSR. And they didn't think the USA would be in a position to enter any wars for decades.

[Allanea]

A heavy assault suit - which exists IRL and protects against 7.62mm and individual hits of .50 BMG on the main plates - weighs less than that.

The powered armor part is just plain unneeded.

[Rhodesialund]

This is exactly what I was looking for.
Okay, addressing the unwieldy company level, the high ratio of PL to CO is sort of supposed to be working on lower-level command autonomy. CO tells PL what needs to go accomplished, PL decides the best way to go about that. Should the autonomy of command begin farther up or farther down?

As far as the PKP, since we're not factoring the cost for rechambering, I was just looking at performance (power, accuracy, etc)

As far as specialization, the commando probably could use a P90 instead of shotgun. On further research, the UTAS is unreliable. I'm not too familiar on the RFB, but from my experience it doesn"'t have automatic? But I hear good things about reliability and accuracy. Weight isn't really an issue. Is there a better option performance-wise than the MDR-C?

Having shot the RFB before, it's kinda a hit or miss when it comes to reliability. That can be blamed on the manufacturer though. Accuracy is average, nothing to write home about, but it gets the job done in a satisfactory manner.

As to shotguns, just stick with a pump 870. If you are insistent on it being semi-auto, go with the Benelli M4.

[United Daene Peoples]

With all these parts I bring you my budget exoskeleton.

With some minor electrical motor support with regular mechincal movement powering a small reserve, quick detachment locks, a mini custome fan and heater with independant tubing, coupled with night, thermal, and infared monocles. All wrapped up in one for a charming little FT war.

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

Uncapped APCR/HVAP ammo did exist but it was found that a ballistic tip helped the penetrator dig in and made it much less likely to shatter. The ballistic cap also allowed a more aerodynamic projectile.

Were there any advantages to it?


Well this is the beefed up longer version of the M25 Heavy Rifle that would be using this fancy new bullet. I supposed it could be quite the ambush weapon, depending on how effective the bullet turns out to be.

You're going to have to get pretty close to kill a lot of tanks in early WWII. Some are easy pickings, but a T-34 lookalike is not going to be fun for the gun crew(or the T-34 crew, but they never have fun).

I'd say go squeezebore, even though you can only fire special APCR ammo. They limit the gun in effectiveness, but depending on how you issue them, have one gun per four(for example) be squeezebore and train that crew to be more effective in tank killing(e.g. train them to know weak spots in common enemy tanks, which was done in some times and places in WWII). The rest can be normal crews firing HE/AP combinations. Or whatever.

[Fordorsia]

Were there any advantages to it?


Well this is the beefed up longer version of the M25 Heavy Rifle that would be using this fancy new bullet. I supposed it could be quite the ambush weapon, depending on how effective the bullet turns out to be.
(Image)

You're going to have to get pretty close to kill a lot of tanks in early WWII. Some are easy pickings, but a T-34 lookalike is not going to be fun for the gun crew(or the T-34 crew, but they never have fun).

I'd say go squeezebore, even though you can only fire special APCR ammo. They limit the gun in effectiveness, but depending on how you issue them, have one gun per four(for example) be squeezebore and train that crew to be more effective in tank killing(e.g. train them to know weak spots in common enemy tanks, which was done in some times and places in WWII). The rest can be normal crews firing HE/AP combinations. Or whatever.

Possibly, but hitting the side of a T-34, it's only the upper hull and the lower hull behind the wheels that would be a hard target. It would go straight through the lower sides and even anywhere on the turret withing 400m. For early WWII I think it would be adequate with the standard ammo. Then if this HVAP one I would like is even better than 50mm at 100m, then great.

[Asgeirria]

>The technology and resources necessary for above assumptions is available

This is what you're missing.

[Korva]

Q: How effective would this thing be if we assume it would be very effective?
A: Very effective

[Triplebaconation]

This is where it gets silly. 410 pounds?? Protection against HMG rounds? Let me fill you in on an automotive secret:

A large car battery will weigh on the order of 30-35lbs. Try lifting one; they're heavy. And they run out of juice fast. The reason car batteries last so long is because the car's engine will recharge it as it runs. It can't be recharged forever, of course, but it's not like the two AA batteries in a television remote that last for months on their own.

Car batteries?

[Puzikas]

Q: How effective would this thing be if we assume it would be very effective?
A: Very effective

spectacular.

[Kassaran]

Q: How effective would this thing be if we assume it would be very effective?
A: Very effective

Marvelous. I think you just earned a spot in my Sig...

[Crookfur]

leaving out the silly armour issues the general feel of what you have posted is bloated and unweildy with portions of video game style class specialisations and not actually taking care about what your choosing on the side.

Platoons don't need anything other than thier IFVs. Companies don't need extra vehciles other than an ambulance, a "cargo" APC, a couple of run about jeepalikes and maybe a 3 vehicle repair/fitter section (which i think is what you are trying to go for with the boxer GNGP, you really want the BDR).

A junior inf. officer does not need his own MBT. If you are going to include MBTs in an infantry regiment/brigade put them in thier own battalion or at least thier own companys at battalion level.

Numbers of sub units seem not too bad until suddenly the Company commander has 8 Fecking Lftn.s to look after (with no XO aparrently). Why on earth do you have 8 platoons in a company? I assume its some roman flavour thing.

Despite the aparent bloat the battalion is totally missing any form of support weapons capability. Where is the support company with its MGs, Mortars, ATGMs, snipers, recce and assault pioneer assets?

As to small arms the MDR-C is OK as long as you stick to the 16" barrel.
Bullpup M14s suck the biggest boabies in the world so why bother when stuff like the RFB exists? Alternatively any one of the precision ARalikes out here will happily do te same job without being that encumbering in CQB. No such thing as a squad level demo guy, you will have a rocket launcher for of the riflemen but thats about it.
Just make the "commando" a regular rifleman and issue a shotgun for one of them to carry slung and use when required.
Why does the machine gunner have a weapon totally incompatible with the logistics of the rest of the squad? For the PKP to make sense you have either rechambered them to 7.62mm NATO or rechambered your teams' precision rifles and the MGs on all your vehicles to 7.62x54mmR.
The PS90 is a silly comercial civilian toy, either use proper P90s or better yet MDR-Cs as it is hardly over encumbering.

This is exactly what I was looking for.
Okay, addressing the unwieldy company level, the high ratio of PL to CO is sort of supposed to be working on lower-level command autonomy. CO tells PL what needs to go accomplished, PL decides the best way to go about that. Should the autonomy of command begin farther up or farther down?

As far as the PKP, since we're not factoring the cost for rechambering, I was just looking at performance (power, accuracy, etc)

As far as specialization, the commando probably could use a P90 instead of shotgun. On further research, the UTAS is unreliable. I'm not too familiar on the RFB, but from my experience it doesn"'t have automatic? But I hear good things about reliability and accuracy. Weight isn't really an issue. Is there a better option performance-wise than the MDR-C?

It's not really about the independence or otherwise of the subordinate commanders. With 8 units to direct the captain has to come up with 8 tasks and handle requests for help/support, situation reports and the supply chain to 8 different groups. In even the armies with the best junior officers and greatest command delagation comanders don't have to deal with more than 3 or 4 primary subordinate units.

[Eisarn-Ara]

Hey Crookfur, how does a 2.64 inch "Hand Mortar" sound as an infantry support tool in 1842?




I'm going to use ammunition somewhat based off of those 3 inch hotchkiss shells, just a tad smaller, for obvious reasons.

[Tsadokion]

Hey Crookfur, how does a 2.64 inch "Hand Mortar" sound as an infantry support tool in 1842?

(Image)


I'm going to use ammunition somewhat based off of those 3 inch hotchkiss shells, just a tad smaller, for obvious reasons.

You will keep the larger one for artillery or something similar right?

[Purpelia]

Well this is the beefed up longer version of the M25 Heavy Rifle that would be using this fancy new bullet. I supposed it could be quite the ambush weapon, depending on how effective the bullet turns out to be.
(Image)

To be honest I very much doubt this would be an adequate anti tank weapon into WW2. Really I'd say you are looking at performance better than the French 2.5cm but worse, or at least no better than the German funky 2.8cm. It's going to work well until say 41-42 but once heavier stuff starts rolling around not even 5cm was enough.

[Asgeirria]

Q: How effective would this thing be if we assume it was possible
A: Very effective

Not the detailed answer I was looking for but at least you're asking the right question now

[Fordorsia]

Well this is the beefed up longer version of the M25 Heavy Rifle that would be using this fancy new bullet. I supposed it could be quite the ambush weapon, depending on how effective the bullet turns out to be.
(Image)

To be honest I very much doubt this would be an adequate anti tank weapon into WW2. Really I'd say you are looking at performance better than the French 2.5cm but worse, or at least no better than the German funky 2.8cm. It's going to work well until say 41-42 but once heavier stuff starts rolling around not even 5cm was enough.

The sPzB 41 did use a tungsten core so that would explain the better penetratio, but it's not better by very much. At 100m and 500m my peetration is on the lower and of its estimated penetration, but it's not a huge difference. A better bullet for mine would make a big difference.

[Purpelia]

To be honest I very much doubt this would be an adequate anti tank weapon into WW2. Really I'd say you are looking at performance better than the French 2.5cm but worse, or at least no better than the German funky 2.8cm. It's going to work well until say 41-42 but once heavier stuff starts rolling around not even 5cm was enough.

The sPzB 41 did use a tungsten core so that would explain the better penetratio, but it's not better by very much. At 100m and 500m my peetration is on the lower and of its estimated penetration, but it's not a huge difference. A better bullet for mine would make a big difference.

It also used a squeezebore round which is essentially the closest thing you can get to proper APDS before you get the DS. You are not going to get much better round design in the period for a high speed maximum kill AP round.

[Rodrania]

Today I got bored and decided to experiment a bit with WW2 era weaponry, so I took a Panzerschreck and did some modifications to it because why not. I guess it could be used in a modern environment with the modifications I gave it (Minimal, I guess) as it now uses 84mm HEAT rounds. Should I make it shorter? Maybe move the second grip a bit back?

[Ardavia]

Q: How effective would this thing be if we assume it was possible
A: Very effective

Not the detailed answer I was looking for but at least you're asking the right question now

if you're going to handwave away all problems that people point out with "let's assume that's not a problem because reasons", there isn't any reason to ask if there are problems in the first place, is there?