Gallia- wrote:you need smelting and strip mining ships that assist in gathering the ore needed
these are the untold stories of the USMC
the united states mining corps
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/World_Devastator
Advertisement
by The Technocratic Syndicalists » Mon Aug 08, 2016 12:11 pm
Gallia- wrote:you need smelting and strip mining ships that assist in gathering the ore needed
these are the untold stories of the USMC
the united states mining corps
SDI AG Arcaenian Military Factbook | Task Force Atlas International Freedom Coalition |
by Prosorusiya » Wed Aug 10, 2016 4:00 pm
by The Soodean Imperium » Wed Aug 10, 2016 4:29 pm
Prosorusiya wrote:So once again I find myself musing over the state of my Navy, and the defending the coast of Dagestan. Recently, it has been brought to my attention that my country's GDP is extremely small, little more than some 18 billion dollars. Faced with the need to maintain a fairly large (7 Regiments strong, and mostly conscript) Army, and a small but capable Air Force, I have been pondering over making cuts to my Nation's Navy. I face limited threats, mainly from Russia, Turkmenistan, and Iran. On the other hand, I have limited points of interest to defend, with Machakala as my only civil port, and Kaspiysk as the Coast Guard & Navy's base. All other shipping is local fisher boats in the south, that i think the CG can probably protect. So the Navy as I see it would be mainly trying to defend the port and it's shipping. Fo that reason, I am considering cutting the Tarantul class corvette and two Sonya class minesweepers I currently operate, and brining my three Matka class missile boats back in commission. I might also have some inshore minesweepers too. My thought is that, given the Russians being my most likely threat, smaller ships with smaller crews would be more easily maintained and deployed, and that only the port of Machakala need be defended by the navy. Thought on this?
by The IASM » Thu Aug 11, 2016 3:10 pm
by The Soodean Imperium » Thu Aug 11, 2016 3:29 pm
The IASM wrote:Who is going to set up the next thread?
by Auroya » Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:06 pm
by The Technocratic Syndicalists » Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:23 pm
SDI AG Arcaenian Military Factbook | Task Force Atlas International Freedom Coalition |
by The Akasha Colony » Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:24 pm
The Soodean Imperium wrote:The IASM wrote:Who is going to set up the next thread?
Somebody reputable should, I'd do it myself if nobody steps forward but all I do is make unoriginal ship art
and unoriginal wiki articles to match them
by Prosorusiya » Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:41 pm
The Soodean Imperium wrote:Prosorusiya wrote:So once again I find myself musing over the state of my Navy, and the defending the coast of Dagestan. Recently, it has been brought to my attention that my country's GDP is extremely small, little more than some 18 billion dollars. Faced with the need to maintain a fairly large (7 Regiments strong, and mostly conscript) Army, and a small but capable Air Force, I have been pondering over making cuts to my Nation's Navy. I face limited threats, mainly from Russia, Turkmenistan, and Iran. On the other hand, I have limited points of interest to defend, with Machakala as my only civil port, and Kaspiysk as the Coast Guard & Navy's base. All other shipping is local fisher boats in the south, that i think the CG can probably protect. So the Navy as I see it would be mainly trying to defend the port and it's shipping. Fo that reason, I am considering cutting the Tarantul class corvette and two Sonya class minesweepers I currently operate, and brining my three Matka class missile boats back in commission. I might also have some inshore minesweepers too. My thought is that, given the Russians being my most likely threat, smaller ships with smaller crews would be more easily maintained and deployed, and that only the port of Machakala need be defended by the navy. Thought on this?
Matka-class missile boats may not be the best option. They have only a 25% smaller crew than the Tarantuls, but carry half the missile armament (though the missiles are P-15s so it doesn't really make a difference in 2016). The Naval Institute Guide to the Soviet Navy interprets their limited production run and lack of export as evidence that they were less reliable than other missile boats and missile corvettes in Soviet service but IDK if any Russian sources specifically refer to maintenance problems.
by Velkanika » Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:07 pm
The necessity of a navy, in the restricted sense of the word, springs, therefore, from the existence of a peaceful shipping, and disappears with it, except in the case of a nation which has aggressive tendencies, and keeps up a navy merely as a branch of the military establishment. 1
by The Soodean Imperium » Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:25 pm
Prosorusiya wrote:The Soodean Imperium wrote:Matka-class missile boats may not be the best option. They have only a 25% smaller crew than the Tarantuls, but carry half the missile armament (though the missiles are P-15s so it doesn't really make a difference in 2016). The Naval Institute Guide to the Soviet Navy interprets their limited production run and lack of export as evidence that they were less reliable than other missile boats and missile corvettes in Soviet service but IDK if any Russian sources specifically refer to maintenance problems.
From what I understand, the Matka has a top weight problem, more than a maintenance one, hence why most were relegated to the Caspian. Also, I think they were pretty quickly superseded by the Tarantula, as the Matka was basically an extreme upgrade of the old Osa class (they use the same machinery) rather than a larger, more seaworthy vessel. I'm thinking of carrying out the modification which gives them 8 Kh-35 launch tubes (seen on armament test vessel R-44 IRL).
I am thinking of savings in terms of being able to maintain the vessels: since they are smaller, I presume they would be easier to service with limited dry-docking facilities? Also, what does the book that you mentioned have to say about the Turya-class? They are close sisters to the Matias, and also served in the Caspian. Were their torpedo tubes useful for surface attacks as well as ASW?
Alos, do you think an inshore minesweeper would be more useful than the larger standard minesweepers to me?
The Akasha Colony wrote:Do eet.
by Prosorusiya » Thu Aug 11, 2016 7:52 pm
by Triplebaconation » Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:46 pm
by Rich and Corporations » Sat Aug 13, 2016 2:35 am
Corporate Confederacy DEFENSE ALERT LEVEL PEACE ▓ Factbook [url=iiwiki.com/wiki/Corporate_Confederacy]Wiki Article[/url] | Neptonia |
by Pharthan » Sat Aug 13, 2016 4:05 pm
Rich and Corporations wrote:should spaceships really be allowed?
they aren't ships anymore than landships...
HALCYON ARMS STOREFRONT
by The Selkie » Sun Aug 14, 2016 1:55 am
Allanea wrote:Why would I die if my ship's engine breakds down? I mean unless it's sinking I'll just call for help or boat back to shore like Alain Bombarde.
I play PT, MT and a bit FT. I am into character-RPs.
by Allanea » Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:10 am
The Selkie wrote:Allanea wrote:Why would I die if my ship's engine breakds down? I mean unless it's sinking I'll just call for help or boat back to shore like Alain Bombarde.
In space? Eh... depending on which SciFi-pattern you follow, engine failure can end with you drifting for a while or loosing power or a few other unpleasant things - things you want to avoid, I guess.
On the sea... it might end badly, if you sit in the middle of the Pacific Ocean on your nutshell or if you are close to/in a dangerous sea area.
by Taviana SSR » Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:14 am
by New Chilokver » Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:42 am
Allanea wrote:Why would I die if my ship's engine breakds down? I mean unless it's sinking I'll just call for help or boat back to shore like Alain Bombarde.
About User Hong Kong-Australian Male Pro: Yeah Neutral: Meh Con: Nah | | [1] | [2] | [3] | [4] | [5] | [HOI I - Peacetime conditions] Head of Government: President Sohum Jain Population: 195.10 million GDP (nominal): $6.39 trillion Military personnel: 523.5k IIWiki | There is no news. | | Other Stuff
|
by Allanea » Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:47 am
New Chilokver wrote:Allanea wrote:Why would I die if my ship's engine breakds down? I mean unless it's sinking I'll just call for help or boat back to shore like Alain Bombarde.
Essentially, your ship is not only your weaponry and means of transportation, it's also the only thing keeping you alive from the elements, whether that be hypothermia and drowning or asphyxiation in a vacuum.
by Pharthan » Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:14 pm
Allanea wrote:New Chilokver wrote:Essentially, your ship is not only your weaponry and means of transportation, it's also the only thing keeping you alive from the elements, whether that be hypothermia and drowning or asphyxiation in a vacuum.
Obviously your ship outright sinking is a bad thing and you could die if it did. (Although that's far from guaranteed, in modern shipwrecks most victims tend to survive, unless it's a submarine).
But that's not what I asked about. I was talking about the specific issue about the engine of a surface ship breaking down.
HALCYON ARMS STOREFRONT
by Rich and Corporations » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:51 am
Corporate Confederacy DEFENSE ALERT LEVEL PEACE ▓ Factbook [url=iiwiki.com/wiki/Corporate_Confederacy]Wiki Article[/url] | Neptonia |
by Allanea » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:54 am
Rich and Corporations wrote:great news everyone, a submarine company sprung a leak
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 1472027129
by Rich and Corporations » Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:01 am
Allanea wrote:Rich and Corporations wrote:great news everyone, a submarine company sprung a leak
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 1472027129
Subscriber-only article.
Corporate Confederacy DEFENSE ALERT LEVEL PEACE ▓ Factbook [url=iiwiki.com/wiki/Corporate_Confederacy]Wiki Article[/url] | Neptonia |
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: Middle Green Irthistan
Advertisement