Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RAM]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_bomb They would likely be effective, but expensive, require some measure of precision, and be rather difficult to justify the existence of. It would be expensive but I imagine that it could be justified at least for facilities which impede further bombings...

[Funk]

Ok so we need faster planes, lets try:
A) using nitrous oxide,by injecting it to raise the amount of oxygen in the fuel, so we can fly higher.
B) add a methanol and water injector we can raise the boost pressure on our planes superchargers, with luck this may be good for some 300kw but only at low altitudes.
 

[RAM]

Or we could use my rocket pods idea, it wouldn't get them high for very long, but it should give them at least one good pass...

[Ukrainian Ranger]

RAM, please describe any situation where such boosters will be effective enough to compensate decreased operational range and cruise speed of the fighter?

[3_14159]

Peregrine class Escort Destroyer. An improved light combatant designed to replace both the Alexis AND the popular devotion ASW ships. This 1750-ton design uses two twin-120mm cannon turrets as it's primary anti-ship armament(complemented by 4 torpedo tubes), 8 twin HVG-40 mounts and 6 GVS-25 Jackhammers for AA, radar and sonar, and two hedgehog mounts as well as two depth-charge racks(with multiple reloads for each, and including new proximity fuses on both depth-charges and hedgehog mortars) as wells as the latest in torpedo defenses. This design should try to accomplish 50 kph(about 27 knots)

I'm not able to really critique the design, however, neither hedgehogs nor depth charges are going to profit from proximity fuses, as proximity fuses can't really work in water. At least, radar-based (which I currently assume ours to be) can't.
Hedgehogs are basically mini-explosives that have a contact fuse. They do their damage by detonating on the sub's hull. If they don't, they are too far away.

[RAM]

RAM, please describe any situation where such boosters will be effective enough to compensate decreased operational range and cruise speed of the fighter?

Fighter uses them to gain altitude more quickly immediately after taking off to intercept enemy planes.
Fighter climbs to maximum altitude then uses rockets to climb higher.
Fighter notices that they have lost a lot of altitude and speed chasing another plane and uses the pods to recover potential energy.

Why would detachable pods ever be a hindrance? Well, except for adding mechanisms, controls, and potentially being something that you don't want to drop on the wrong spot... But those are, for the most part, minor issues and the additional flight options should be worth it.

[10ebbor10]

While rocket pods have their uses, I think they're better for slower, larger planes, where they are significantly more effective.

Our cargo plane would benefit greatly from rockets and parachute addition. Might be able to cut required runway length in half.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Fighter uses them to gain altitude more quickly immediately after taking off to intercept enemy planes.

That ( and ability to launch from shorter runway ) is a viable use, but with our radars our fighters shouldn't be caught on surprise

Fighter climbs to maximum altitude then uses rockets to climb higher.

And has it's engine dead...  Maximum attitude it's mostly ability of engine to work in low oxygen environment.

Fighter notices that they have lost a lot of altitude and speed chasing another plane and uses the pods to recover potential energy.

You see, sane fighter pilot will drop those pods as soon as they see enemy fighter. Why? Because 1) getting one bullet in that rocket is an instakill  2) due to increased weight and increased drag it will lose too much speed and maneuverability

Also, that pods will take place of several machineguns. Isn't that bad trade-off?

[3_14159]

Firstly, we need to decide on one of the Howitzers to be produced. While I do not particularly like the big calibre, I'm proposing we choose Prototype C. While the heaviest and therefore slowest, it would relegate the Cod to mostly a single role: Counter-Battery fire. That is, find out where the enemy is firing from, and eliminate the artillery. Range is absolutely essential for that.

So, now. Analysis time.

Land war:
We are currently in a stalemate, though we have a small advantage. Currently, their tanks can stop ours with a single hit, more or less, while we have to swarm them. By introducing the new tank cannon, we can do the same to them, with the effect that, through higher mobility, we have the advantage.
Conclusion: We need that new tank gun on either a new tank or the K-1 or Badger TDs. Since they should be the fastest, I'd say K-1.
Against their artillery, we need either air superiority or our own artillery. With 47 Hammers (which are, btw, effective just too few), and another 47 coming out of the factory this year, this will remain so.
Conclusion: More Hammers.
Probably constructing another heavy tank factory would be best, producing both.

Air war
Over Capia: The Lightning seems to do good, but not decisively so. Here I don't have any particular idea except beginning the design on a new plane generation.
The Shark, however, seems to work awesomely, especially against artillery positions. I like it.

Over our homeland: Well, here it looks the other way around. They are throwing effective bombers at us, however without any fighter escorts. I'm thinking of using Sharks against them, since they seem to be so effective.

Sea war
Enemy fleet: The tendency to start surface actions is worrying. Since they are able to return out of our fighter's range, my first impulse would be to design a long-range naval bomber, probably using torpedoes. Maybe modify the transport plane (probably not).
Convoys: We are harassing them good for our limited subs. I do not know how to stop their subs any better.
Lastly, remember: Capia doesn't have any shipyards any more.

My proposals this turn, probably: Begin using proximity fuzes for AA guns and artillery (design or production?) and design a naval bomber.

[Funk]

Rocket pods do have there uses but none of then is really for fighters, unlike both of my booters which will fit in side the plane, add only a minimal weight and are dog fight safe.

im with you  3_14159 on choosing Prototype C.

[RAM]

I would like to pursue both C and B. They should both have their uses. Note that all three variants are working prototypes, so we could put all three into production...

I really dislike the 78mm calibre, and am not too fond to the overpowered gun, but I agree that, given that we have it, we should put it on the K-1 and get it out there.
 I would prefer to spam Cods than Hammers. Hammers are easier to produce, but if we could get, say, 50 Cods to bear on a single battlefield. T'would be glorious... Which is why I want to rush the Cod into production, get at least one per month, preferably two. But one per month would suffice to slowly build up the numbers until we have enough to be effective, hopefully their range will keep most of them alive... But yes, artillery is good, no such thing as too many Hammers...

I think that we just need more lightnings until we get a look at the new engine and 25mm gun. The 25mm may well be too much for a dogfighter... Also, my rocket pods should provide a small boost to Lightnings in the interim, but they would need some minor refitting to gain the pod mountings... Hopefully Pod mountings for lightnings are included in the pod proposal, I did leave that point a little ambiguous, but surely they will need a working system to test it...
My ground attack craft would have been better... Sending them against bombers is a grand idea, but once again altitude could be an issue, and ironically enough, my design probably wouldn't have been as compatible with rocket pods... But yes, I think that the air war really need quantity right now.

Unless they have carriers, airships should be fairly effective at just following the enemy surface-fleet and harassing them, should make their supply situation more pressing and keep our merchants away from them. We can probably deal with the subs by just spamming Popular Devotion A.S.W.s and maintaining regular patrols, so long as we can keep the enemy surface ships at bay. Maybe we can find a way to mount a pair of righteous boats on the side of a popular devotion and drop them for combat. That would turn 3 popular devotions into 3 Popular Devotions and 6 Righteouses which should be plenty to take down a single capital ship without being at too much risk from bad weather wrecking the boats. Of course, ideally we can get some solid bombardment guns and form a nice little fleet. But for now, maybe a S.O.N.A.R. variant of the Righteous to maintain frequent patrols so we can keep our harbours clear...

Fighter uses them to gain altitude more quickly immediately after taking off to intercept enemy planes.

That ( and ability to launch from shorter runway ) is a viable use, but with our radars our fighters shouldn't be caught on surprise

Fighter climbs to maximum altitude then uses rockets to climb higher.

And has it's engine dead...  Maximum attitude it's mostly ability of engine to work in low oxygen environment.

Fighter notices that they have lost a lot of altitude and speed chasing another plane and uses the pods to recover potential energy.

You see, sane fighter pilot will drop those pods as soon as they see enemy fighter. Why? Because 1) getting one bullet in that rocket is an instakill  2) due to increased weight and increased drag it will lose too much speed and maneuverability

Also, that pods will take place of several machineguns. Isn't that bad trade-off?

It take a long time to get to interception altitude, and our R.A.D.A.R. is not yet that good.

Altitude is also a matter of applying force against and gaining lift from lower-density air. And you can turn altitude into speed, it could well be worth having to restart the engines if it means getting an altitude advantage at the beginning of an encounter.

There are lots of instant kills in combat, and the example was of chasing an opponent, presumably in a situation where the opponent is already fleeing, either due to being at a perceived disadvantage or perhaps due to an ongoing engagement that the fighter in question arrived late to...

The machine guns are rather heavy, "several" sounds like an over-estimate. Having more than 4 GVS-14s is probably excessive in terms of fire=power. And these would be optional kit, you could just as easily have a gun pod. The current model has cargo capacity. I would guess that starting above your opponents rather than below them would be worth having 6 guns instead of 8, but it is all relative... Oh, I see, two 14 and eight 8, I would definitely consider it a fair trade for 4 of those 8mm guns, and that really isn't the situation. It will produce a reduction in performance while it is loaded, if the plane can't actually fly at all with an extra 100 kilograms of weight then you have probably already weighed it down too much to be an effective fighter anyway...

[Brood]

You'll need a fighter as well, long range bombers alone are a horrible idea they will suffer catastrophic casulties when enemy interceptors engage them.
You need a fighter screen to intercept the enemy fighters and draw them off to allow the bombers to pass through without being attacked from all sides by aircraft they can not defend against effectively.

[Alexandria]

Agreed, but it will take time to design a long range plane so until then my suggestion will allow us to provide effective air cover to long range bombing runs without needing an entirely new plane.

[tryrar]

I know where 5 of my votes are going: Completing the tank modernization, completing the Courageous(it's already half-done, might as well get it and have a couple of them be our flagships), completing the 120mm gun, getting the T-2 Ratel, and completing the Jackhammer

[Taricus]

We only need a two-engine layout for naval bombing. Just load it up with torpedoes and such, and enough armour to withstand AA fire from smaller caliber guns (like our GVS-14).