Jump to content

Codename Duchess

Members
  • Posts

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Rinaldi in Bundeswehr trains for a new deployment in the Baltics   
    Regarding the percentage debate, remember that NATO countries are obligated to spend 2% of their GDP on defense but few major European countries do. There’s no obligation to spend it wisely but it’s at least a start. 
     
    As for German military readiness, two examples painting a pretty bleak picture of the Sea and Air. 
     
    http://www.businessinsider.com/german-military-fighters-jets-not-ready-for-combat-2018-5
    https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/10/20/all-of-germanys-submarines-are-currently-down/
  2. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Kieme(ITA) in Armata soon to be in service.   
    *Ahem*



    Right video uploaded March 7, 2011.  Left video uploaded September 4, 2015.  I'm reminded of the Chinese using clips from Top Gun for their recruiting video.
  3. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in Why do mortars have almost no ammo, yet howitzers have gobs? Also...   
    All of the numbers I obtained were by ordering the named sections in QB (be it from the artillery tab, specialist teams, or formations), and visually confirming in the 3D world. Those are the number of rounds you will have available for the given weapons. Note again that for all on map weapons besides the Strykers, ammo is shared between tubes if they're in close proximity.

    Again, these numbers were obtained by ordering units and then actually checking them in the 3D world. I didn't pull any of it out of any bodily cavity.

    And you can actually see ammo for on map mortars outside the support placard. It's listed where ammo is normally listed left of the command options. Same goes for their support trucks.
  4. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Cheese in Super secret Russian training technique :)   
    That made my day. Thank you

    Personal favorite:
    https://youtu.be/rCrG6TzG-nw

    Edit: The embed game is weak in this one
  5. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from RabidOtters in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    What the actual f**k is going on.
  6. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Desertor in Difference between us army and russian army Squads   
    If the RPO's effectiveness indoors is increased, then so too does the M25.  The weapon can easily and consistently be set up to detonate inside an open window (presumably one someone is shooting out of).  Body armor or not, I'm going to bet that a 25mm grenade going off in your face is going to lay you down.
  7. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Wicky in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    What the actual f**k is going on.
  8. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from RabidOtters in Combat training ground near Luhansk?   
    "Anyone know if it is true about Top U.S. Commander  Heather Cole under arrest for choosing not to comply with orders to fire nukes at Russia?"

    What on earth are you talking about? She was relieved for a bad command climate. That article said nothing about any sort of Nuclear first strike. She probably just ran a ****ty shop. She isn't the first and won't be the last. Also the (branch) Times newspapers have had shoddy reporting in the past, so grain of salt.

    And is there a translation problem, or are you implying those guys were Chevron Oil Corporation Commandos? Because lol.
  9. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from L0ckAndL0ad in Armata soon to be in service.   
    Unfortunately I don't know of any way to answer that without delving too far into the political realm, which is both expressly forbidden in the forums and a line we've likely already crossed.  PM me if you want my opinion, but I'll try and summarize it below.

    What I will clean it up to say is I frankly don't see the need in the 21st century for either NATO or the Russians to maintain huge forces arrayed against each other.  NATO has no desire to go East, and presumably Russia has no desire to go West.  And yet both sides waste billions of dollars pointing tanks at each other and justify it because "well they started it". 

    What would I do if I was in charge of the Russian military?  I'd focus on my nuclear weapons for homeland defense.  Hordes and hordes of tanks is redundant at that point.  If you want an expeditionary force similar to the US there's a lot of restructuring that would need to be done which includes ditching all those tanks in storage.  The US has the economy to mix the two, Russia does not.

    Out of curiosity, what is the general status and array of ground forces in the east (aimed at China).  If we're talking implausible but possible, I'd say China going north would have been just as likely as NATO going east.
     
     
     
    Right with a nuclear weapon, and at that point it doesn't matter.
  10. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from sburke in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    I, for one, welcome our new mafia overlords.
  11. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Desertor in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    I, for one, welcome our new mafia overlords.
  12. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Nerdwing in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    I, for one, welcome our new mafia overlords.
  13. Downvote
    Codename Duchess reacted to Do Right in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    Wicky,
     
    Interesting, if they cut back, wonder if they are going to put the resources into  AVF robotic support type tanks and supplies instead.  
    As far as Crimea goes, I am baffled as to why everyone in Europe seems to be on Flouride or some sort of relaxant or they are being extorted, bribed, threatened into submission.  They had to know that Russia would want all of that land they lost, back.  So, why did they not see this ahead of time?  They need to realize  all the Mafias are ridding us off and are not to be trusted.  They are going to take Kiev next, I feel.  Why, because that is where I saw the Mafia at the CERN laboratory, I do have that picture if anyone is interested.  They intend to have control of this.  It is more that just a piece of technology.  It is their ticket to ride out of here or bring in reinforcements.  They think, if, they move a CERN laboratory closer to Putin, they will have mafia protection.  The last CERN failed (Swiss Zionist Mafia).  This new CERN is very expensive and many governments are being bullied,  to pay for it.   Russian planes have been flying over England recently, bulling them.  Russian has spies in MI-6,  London, forgot one of their names, go to Abel Danger.  This Russian mafia and other mafias in U.S., Australia, and more are blackmailing European (Recently Angela Merkel's, Germans, Poland, and other  world leaders by crashing their airplanes, school children even, using the Boeing uninterrupted Auto-Pilot +  Air Tranquilizer  (ATI)  to tranquilize pilots, crew, and passengers to terrorize countries into pouring money into the CERN Laboratory in Ukraine and other land grabs.   A list of flights where they used the BUAP + ATI  to force planes down for revenge to governments who failed to comply.  Adam Air 574, Kenya Airway 507, Speedbird 38, Turkish 1951, Colgan 3407, Air France 447, Air Afrikiyah 771, Sukhoi Superjet, MH370, MH17, QZ8501, and now the one downed in French Alps.  There is a reason why the co-pilot had steady breathing, he was out cold.  They own the mainstream news, so you will be reading from their mafia owned script writers.
     
    So, if we want to make life easier, now, and later, we need to take Putin seriously, one tank in Mariupol is not enough to  stop their advancing toward Kiev.  Check my sources, meanwhile,  ensure pilots have warning systems in the cockpit when the air is foul, extra oxygen to prevent the plane from being droned.  For more on this see Abeldanger.net, on Livestream as Abel danger.   Around 1995, one of the airlines in Europe filed a suit for 800 million because their 747's airplane technologists for Lafthunsa, Germanwings is an affiliate, (recent France crash ,pay back) for filing this suit where technicians, found extra stuff in a electric equipment  compartment (E&E).   They filed, to get Boeing to pay for having to remove the components on all of the jets they purchased from Boeing.  To protect Boeing and us, these need to be removed immediately.  New York Bronx, Base 1 Technologies Clinton aides activated the patented devices BUAP + ATI to kill revenge Yvonne Selke, a Pentagon spy in the satellite mapping branch of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency.  This is how they  revenge after being fired from key positions or to kill a whistleblower or to kill  Yvonne Salik.  We provided Ukraine with satellite imagery because Putin had control of Ukraines therefore always had the upper hand.  The mafia is trying to intimidate the Pentagon so we will stop sharing intelligence with Ukraine.
     
    Let us put an end to mafia controlled banking, markets, and manufacturers exploiting humanity.  If they can blackmail our Pentagon, world governments, we have no representation.  Find out more, we have to wake up,  Airbus, FAA, JAA all know about this, so why aren't they doing anything about it, they are complicit.  Soon,  people who don't know about it,  will.   Covering up by killing off any whistleblowers exposing this, is a very dark world.  Not the world I want to hand over to my children. 
    http://new.livestream.com/abeldanger
  14. Upvote
    Codename Duchess reacted to panzersaurkrautwerfer in Trenchant analysis of post-Soviet playbook & why Crimea's not the same   
    I gotta say, the old Kettler is much better than the new false Kettler.  
  15. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Apocal in Combat training ground near Luhansk?   
    "Anyone know if it is true about Top U.S. Commander  Heather Cole under arrest for choosing not to comply with orders to fire nukes at Russia?"

    What on earth are you talking about? She was relieved for a bad command climate. That article said nothing about any sort of Nuclear first strike. She probably just ran a ****ty shop. She isn't the first and won't be the last. Also the (branch) Times newspapers have had shoddy reporting in the past, so grain of salt.

    And is there a translation problem, or are you implying those guys were Chevron Oil Corporation Commandos? Because lol.
  16. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from LukeFF in Combat training ground near Luhansk?   
    "Anyone know if it is true about Top U.S. Commander  Heather Cole under arrest for choosing not to comply with orders to fire nukes at Russia?"

    What on earth are you talking about? She was relieved for a bad command climate. That article said nothing about any sort of Nuclear first strike. She probably just ran a ****ty shop. She isn't the first and won't be the last. Also the (branch) Times newspapers have had shoddy reporting in the past, so grain of salt.

    And is there a translation problem, or are you implying those guys were Chevron Oil Corporation Commandos? Because lol.
  17. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Haggard Sketchy in ECM thoughts--From VT to PD?   
    EW level would effect the effectiveness of airburst artillery shells.
  18. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from LukeFF in Other Tanks   
    I remember reading in Newsweek (or Time?) that training, equipping, transporting, and caring for a US Infantryman in Iraq cost $1 Million. Having been inside the military I totally believe that. I also believe you could do it for much less, but you get what you pay for. The only time such shortcuts would be made is in a WW3 scenario where Russia decides Europe has been naughty. By comparison, my flight training from API to the fleet has been estimated as $2-3 million, depending on who you ask. That doesn't include the capital costs of the aircraft, carrier, airfield, etc. If you look up the per day costs of USN carrier deployments you will be amazed. They're not cheap.

    As for the argument that a Javelin costs $80k or whatever, that doesn't stop anyone. The infantryman is not going to be worried about the economic burden of his shot, only if he needs to take it to survive/carry out his mission. Javelin is and was used against infantry and technicals and all sorts of soft targets in Iraq and Afghanistan all the time. The cost of the missile is the problem of someone in the Pentagon or the Capitol, and they're not going to call you up and tell you to not blast some guy planting an IED 2 km away.
  19. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Vanir Ausf B in Why doesn't the US Air Support roster in CMBS have the A-10 on it?   
    Yeah you can get JDAMs and LGBs out of it, so it's as capable as any other jet we have in CMBS.

    I'm 100% biased for obvious reasons, but the Super Hornet and the Growler are very capable platforms.  Maneuverable, high payload, great sensors, etc.  They only lack in acceleration (which new engines could fix - and be a whole lot cheaper than a new fleet of jets) and their range is average.  They are also the stealthiest non-stealth aircraft in the US arsenal (I'd claim the world but I won't go that far) incorporating a lot of RCS reducing features.  And then you get the Advanced Super Hornet which adds a stealth weapons pod, conformal fuel tanks, and new engines to overcome all those weaknesses.  And you could still buy 2-3 per F-35, on a new and proven airframe.  Plus 2 engines is always better than one when your only alternative is swimming.

    And it has a gun.

    So yeah, the F-35C sucks.
     
  20. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from nsKb in US Anti Aircraft defences   
    First computer games I ever played (this is elementary school) were Novalogic's Armored Fist 2 and F-22 Lightning II, in equal amounts.  The more I think about it, the more a whole lot of things start to make sense because of that...
     
    Totally viable, but it's very context dependent.  You'd have two options, either high altitude to stay above the engagement envelope, or a low "toss."  With a high altitude engagement, any sort of SHORAD isn't going to reach you.  Even the missiles on Tunguska or the SA-13 won't be able to touch you.  Even the Pantsir missiles would be unlikely to reach you at 30k feet.  The problem then becomes your visibility to Strategic SAMs (or SA-11/SA-15 style systems) so you need a plan to deal with those.  A LGB is better against mobile targets because it can adjust on the move, whereas your non GBU-54 (Laser JDAM) goes off coordinates.  You can easily find and guide a target from altitude with a pod, and if not then there are multiple ways someone on the ground could guide the bomb in.  It doesn't even need to be a guided bomb really, air defenses and especially their sensors are very fragile (even on armored chassis) so a near miss with a non-guided bomb will still likely knock that system out, at least for a while.  CBUs are even better because only one bomblet needs to hit to pretty much gaurantee a mission-kill.

    A low level approach with a toss is the other option.  A guided bomb makes this very effective in terms of accuracy, and even un-guided bombs can still hit accurately thanks to the computer systems on the aircraft.  This let's you approach from low (nominally beneath Strategic SAM engagement envelopes) and thus sneakier, but simple physics will tell you that you get better range dropping from altitude.  There's a good chance of being within missile range of most SHORAD systems (not so much MANPADS), so this is best done in a manner where you can dive back behind cover.  You will also need someone else (plane or otherwise) to designate the target if you're using lasers. 

    As you can see, there are tradeoffs between the two methods, and either one still leaves you at risk.  Bombs play by the rules of physics, so you can only get so much range out of them and you're going to be going against a missile that is attempting to burn up to your altitude.  It really just depends there.  The better solution is HARM (for Radar) or Mavericks.  There are other standoff weapons too.  Much better standoff range for SHORAD systems, and both are more of a "sure thing" as you put it due to their accuracy, warhead, and range. 
  21. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from nsKb in US Anti Aircraft defences   
    My terrestrialy inclined friend here is correct. A dead jet is a useless jet. The dynamics and nature of air vs. land warfare means it's probably far easier to sneak a company of Abrams into Red Square than it is to get a 4 ship of F-16s to the Russian-Ukrainian border.
    The type of CAS mission where it would be absolutely 100% necessary that the strike gets through to save ground forces is the type of mission that will get tasked a heavy SEAD and CAP escort to establish local and likely temporary air superiority for a one time strike. Any other strike will result in unacceptable losses to the aircraft and low probability of success. It just won't be worth it. The USAF already hates the CAS mission and has structured itself for the strike and interdiction missions when it has to go air to ground. (Interdiction is behind the lines attacks on enemy ground forces, like bombing troop columns - not something that happens in CM). Those types of missions will feature the heavy escort with lots of planning. My own USN, if committed, would assist in winning the air war before thinking of going air to ground. I don't want to get personal, but you have an USA tank officer (the ground pounder in need) and a USN F/A pilot (the cowardly flyboy who carries the bombs and missiles) saying how this would go down. Its worth considering.

    Again, a dead plane does no one any good. A live plane can kill a Sukhoi today and tomorrow so that it can kill tanks next week when there are no more sukhois. I cannot emphasize this enough.
  22. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from LUCASWILLEN05 in Maybe an Idea for future CAS-Assets   
    I wouldn't imagine these would be used in an environment that wasn't target rich or in a prolonged andccontinuous conflict. They won't retrofit existing Tomahawks with a recovery system, they'll just use them when they can guarantee someone somewhere will have a target. Tomahawk is old and the last batch has been ordered with a replacement missile starting development/procurement in 2017. Right now, the Navy cannot reload VLS at sea, so these won't be wasted.
  23. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Cuddles the Warmonger in Why doesn't the US Air Support roster in CMBS have the A-10 on it?   
    The GAU-8 was great against tanks when it was designed, and yes it will mess up BMPs and the like, but against modern Russian MBTs against anything less than a rear attack (not as guaranteed as you'd think), penetration is unlikely.  True it will mess up all the "soft" sensors and the like on top, but it probably won't even get a mobility kill with the gun alone.  This post links to a semi tongue-in-cheek coloring book for A-10 pilots on where to engage T-62s.  Another noteworthy quote from this article which cites Combat Aircraft magazine regarding 1980s Germany:

    "According to Combat Aircraft magazine, the flying branch predicted that, if the A-10s went into action, seven percent of the jets would be lost per 100 sorties. Since each pilot was expected to fly at most four missions per day, each base would in theory generate more than 250 sorties daily. At this pace, a seven-percent loss rate per 100 flights equaled at least 10 A-10s shot down at each FOL every 24 hours — and that’s being conservative.
     
    At that rate, in less than two weeks the entire A-10 force at the time — around 700 jets — would have been destroyed and the pilots killed, injured, captured or, at the least, very shook up."
    Also, if it were to go into battle against a modern force, it would not load up every single pylon with every single weapon it could take because that would be suicide.  You'd get maybe 4 Mavericks and a laser guided bomb on a heavy loadout.  Any more and maneuverability is severely compromised, which is a death sentence in this theater.  A loadout like that is much more comparable to faster jets with better defensive measures.  Including, and I hate myself for saying it, the F-35
  24. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Noltyboy in Why doesn't the US Air Support roster in CMBS have the A-10 on it?   
    The GAU-8 was great against tanks when it was designed, and yes it will mess up BMPs and the like, but against modern Russian MBTs against anything less than a rear attack (not as guaranteed as you'd think), penetration is unlikely.  True it will mess up all the "soft" sensors and the like on top, but it probably won't even get a mobility kill with the gun alone.  This post links to a semi tongue-in-cheek coloring book for A-10 pilots on where to engage T-62s.  Another noteworthy quote from this article which cites Combat Aircraft magazine regarding 1980s Germany:

    "According to Combat Aircraft magazine, the flying branch predicted that, if the A-10s went into action, seven percent of the jets would be lost per 100 sorties. Since each pilot was expected to fly at most four missions per day, each base would in theory generate more than 250 sorties daily. At this pace, a seven-percent loss rate per 100 flights equaled at least 10 A-10s shot down at each FOL every 24 hours — and that’s being conservative.
     
    At that rate, in less than two weeks the entire A-10 force at the time — around 700 jets — would have been destroyed and the pilots killed, injured, captured or, at the least, very shook up."
    Also, if it were to go into battle against a modern force, it would not load up every single pylon with every single weapon it could take because that would be suicide.  You'd get maybe 4 Mavericks and a laser guided bomb on a heavy loadout.  Any more and maneuverability is severely compromised, which is a death sentence in this theater.  A loadout like that is much more comparable to faster jets with better defensive measures.  Including, and I hate myself for saying it, the F-35
  25. Upvote
    Codename Duchess got a reaction from Kraft in Why doesn't the US Air Support roster in CMBS have the A-10 on it?   
    The GAU-8 was great against tanks when it was designed, and yes it will mess up BMPs and the like, but against modern Russian MBTs against anything less than a rear attack (not as guaranteed as you'd think), penetration is unlikely.  True it will mess up all the "soft" sensors and the like on top, but it probably won't even get a mobility kill with the gun alone.  This post links to a semi tongue-in-cheek coloring book for A-10 pilots on where to engage T-62s.  Another noteworthy quote from this article which cites Combat Aircraft magazine regarding 1980s Germany:

    "According to Combat Aircraft magazine, the flying branch predicted that, if the A-10s went into action, seven percent of the jets would be lost per 100 sorties. Since each pilot was expected to fly at most four missions per day, each base would in theory generate more than 250 sorties daily. At this pace, a seven-percent loss rate per 100 flights equaled at least 10 A-10s shot down at each FOL every 24 hours — and that’s being conservative.
     
    At that rate, in less than two weeks the entire A-10 force at the time — around 700 jets — would have been destroyed and the pilots killed, injured, captured or, at the least, very shook up."
    Also, if it were to go into battle against a modern force, it would not load up every single pylon with every single weapon it could take because that would be suicide.  You'd get maybe 4 Mavericks and a laser guided bomb on a heavy loadout.  Any more and maneuverability is severely compromised, which is a death sentence in this theater.  A loadout like that is much more comparable to faster jets with better defensive measures.  Including, and I hate myself for saying it, the F-35
×
×
  • Create New...