Tags:
  1. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0

    The Military Thread

    Discussion in 'Research' started by Remoah, Feb 15, 2007.


    EDIT: THIS IS AN OPEN SOURCE AND REQUEST BASED THREAD, IF YOU HAVE INFO YOU WISH TO ADD OR HAVE A QUESTION, JUST POST AND I'LL TRY TO RESPOND ASAP.

    Hey, i'm new here, as you can see, but anyhow, i have decided to open my mind full of warfare and military knowlidge to you forumpeople, if you want to write a military or war story, look no further, if it isnt covered, ask me and hopefully i'll reply.

    Anyhow, i believe i am quite knowlidged on military and warfare, as my friend put it:
    "This area (around our school) is on a hill, a nice one, the enemy don't need to worry about the army, they gotta worry about the little resistance we'll be mounting against them."

    I have been doing cadets for 2 years now, and even though the only military rifle i've fired is a Steyr AUG, i believe i know LOTS about firearms and general tactics, i have been part of 3 assaults on a hill, and been on 20 or so combat patrols with cadets (no guns, but still the same stuff.)

    So yeah, got a question, ask it! I'll post general stuff for you to use, but hopefully i can answer most questions, if i cannot, then i'll try to think of what i'd do in that situation. This is basically using doctrines from the Australian Army, though most of this stuff isnt secret anymore.

    SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADEIU, i shall give you the first section of this guide.


    RADIO TRANSMISSIONS
    Radios are a major part of every military in the world, it is the No1 line of communication, radios range from simple backpack items like the aged ANPRC-77 set ('the prick' to the USMC, in cadets we call it 'portable cover' due to it's heavy weight, the 77 set has been used since the vietnam war, since the 60's.)
    There are new, sattelite versions available, with long range and multiple channel options, and coded transmissions, however, until a full sattelite grid is available, they won't be in full scale service.

    Anyhow, the No1 thing i see is improper radio transmissions, especially those between base/command and the squad/section using the radio, going by australia cadet doctrine, this is how it goes.
    RECIPIENT-SENDER-MESSAGE-OVER
    so for example
    ALPHA- THIS IS BRAVO- HAVE REACHED RALLY POINT- OVER
    Get my drift?

    Radios also have range issues, the PRC-77 has a range of 3km in open terrain with the 3ft whip arial. Mounting a 10ft arial increases it to 8km, and a 30ft arial to 20km, an ultralight arial has around 15km range at the most. However, this is for OPEN terrain, if you had urban or jungle, range can be less that 500m, vietnam war patrols often left thier radios behind because of this, unless they direly needed them

    Radios are heavy, the PRC weighs 10kg on an ALICE pack, that is ALOT to carry, and some patrols even drop thier radios because i jeopardise the mission.

    Some squads may have inter-soldier radios with a small range, these are unrestricted but generally the same doctrines are followed but it's more like 'Davis this is O'Donald, did you see something by that tree?'

    Radios can also be listened in on, the new digital ones can be hard to crack, but if the enemy has a captured radio, things can go south. the PRC-77 however, can be decoded by any one with the right FM reciever, so the squad's every move can be anticipated.

    So remember this when you next include radios, don't think you have to religiously stick to them, but include them in general, remember these dot points:
    - Radios Are HEAVY
    - They have a limited range and battery life.
    - They can be hacked
    - Remember the 'to, from, message, over' rule.
     
  2. Gannon
    Offline

    Gannon Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,977
    Likes Received:
    55
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    Informative and useful, thanks.
     
  3. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obliged, now for topic two

    RELOADING
    Aha, the fabled reload, reloading is probably one of the most ill-executed pieces of military writing other than the million other things, and it is because of one thing:
    Mag Dropping.
    You do not do this, never ever does a soldier drop their magazine except for a few circumstances, at which point they’ll mentally note WHERE they dropped it and will collect it at the next possible moment.
    If you shoot commercially, you’ll know a an AK-47, M16, Steyr or M9 magazine will cost you $40 or more, a 10 shot magazine for a bolt action .22 can cost easily this much, as such, you do not drop magazines.
    Secondly, you do not ALWAYS have to cock the weapon, sometimes you do, sometimes you don’t, if you have 1 or 2 rounds left in the magazine, you can reload and the round chambered does not need to be extracted, because it’s already locked, cocked and loaded, however, most military doctrines will have you clear the weapon and lock the bolt back (so the action is open) until you insert a magazine.

    However, the mag dump is probably the most used, magazines are easily refilled from loose or belted rounds, in fact, almost all rounds given to soldiers after a patrol are in belt form, and they slide the round out and fill the magazine, it’s tedious work.

    Also, you kill an enemy, and he has ammo, say you’re both using AK-47’s, so he has the same mag as you, think, it takes time to steal those, you have to open his pouches, slide them out and put them in yours, taking his 6 or so magazines can take almost a minute, because you have to dump your empty ones (you have his now) and refill the pouches.

    This brings me to the next point, reloading a weapon takes 7-10 seconds, the armourer that showed me how to work an AK-47 can do it in 3 if the magazine is on a table in front of him, but think:
    You must first pull the bolt back fully, leaving it in position if possible.
    You must then eject the spent magazine, and place it in your pouch.
    Then you must remove a fresh magazine, and place it in the weapon.
    Finally, you close the bolt or slide, and turn the safety off.
    You must do all of this under fire, probably lying in the mud trying to use a log barely big enough to cover you, it can be very difficult, and the rifle could jam, you could accidentally remove another empty mag by accident.

    And finally, I’ll cover ammunition capacity on this, let us get things straight.
    Soldiers cannot carry more than 10 or so magazines.
    Think about it, they weigh almost 1kg each, I’ve seen aussie soldiers with 12, but that’s with 3 mag Steyr pouches, they are carrying 12kg of ammunition, plus all the other crap, and it does get tiring.
    If your soldier is a special forces operative behind enemy lines, he’ll probably have 6 or so in pouches and another 6 in his backpack, but generally soldiers don’t carry more than 8-10 magazines, remember, they need space for.
    Grenades
    Field Dressings
    Field Tent (hutchie)
    Raincoat
    Rations (think around the size of 2 and a half house bricks).

    So, as a final statement, do not think you must strictly adhere to this like superglue to paper, but remember, reloading is not instant, soldiers rarely if ever drop magazines, and ammo weighs a lot.
     
  4. Domoviye
    Offline

    Domoviye Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    Hallelujah someone who knows about the military. :D
    I've read too many stories (mostly amateur but some published) where they know every little detail about guns, but don't know a thing about reloading.
    I only know bits and pieces about this subject so I'll find this is really useful.
    Thank you very much.
     
  5. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome, i'm pleasured, i'll see if i can add something else soonish, in fact, here's a small one.

    BODY ARMOUR
    The fabled bullet-proof vest, well, sorry to shatter your dreams, these things aint bullet-proof, in fact, a guy runs a website (www.theboxotruth.com) and he tested a PASGT Level IIIA vest, the standard chest armour worn by the military, and he discovered this, which I shall put to you.

    We’ll be working on a PASGT IIIA vest, it is designed to defeat a general number of pistol rounds at close and medium range, and rifle rounds at long range, shotgun rounds at any range, and of course, shrapnel past 10 metres.
    Well, it does what it’s designed to do.
    The IIIA vest can stop a .45 calibre round, one of the big guys of the handgun world, you’re hit with one of these without armour, you stand a good chance of not retaining proper functions ever again.
    HOWEVER, they also found this.
    The impact from a 9mm round is around 2-3 inches deep, this is strapped to your chest, so guess what, you got hit, you would likely break a rib, the force has to go somewhere, and that somewhere is you, if you don’t break ribs, you will seriously be hurt and probably find it hard to even walk for 10-15 seconds, even the humble .22 LR round can inflict a severe and painful bruise which can last for days.

    Now, enter the rifle.
    The Soviet AK-47 fires a 7.62x39mm round, not all that powerful, but guess what, under 50m, it will penetrate the vest.
    A 5.56x45mm round from the M16 will penetrate this vest out to 100m, and will seriously fuck you up inside, remember, the pistol round usually goes under the speed of sound, rifles however, go twice the speed of sound, easily.
    Don’t even try me if you’re hit with a 7.62x51mm NATO, you are dead, that is the answer, no question, so this stuff aint no use against snipers.

    As a final note, these things weigh 2-3kg, offer no protection from stabbing injuries, but there is an upside: Ceramic or Titanium plates can be added, these protect a smaller section but can often defeat rifle rounds from a closer range, but weigh extra.
    And finally, they restrict movement, bending and flexing is taken into account, but the shoulder pads and vest itself do restrict movement, a little, but it can make a difference, it can also be seen under a disguise.

    So what have we learnt:
    Pistols are pistols, rifles are rifles.
    These things do offer good protection, but at a range.
    They weight a lot and restrict movement.
     
  6. The Reaper
    Offline

    The Reaper Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    In a house
    Ravens army you could have always asked him for help and advice.
     
  7. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe he didnt know? Anyhow, this is an open source, if you or this Raven person wishes to add an article or tip, go for it, i'm probably gonna find out stuff first.
     
  8. Domoviye
    Offline

    Domoviye Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    Yeah I didn't know Raven was army. And like I said I already knew bits and pieces. So I usually just spend a few hours searching for the things I need to know when I write. Its usually quicker than asking a question on a forum.
    This is now another source I can use to quickly look up information.
    I also may post one or two things I do know on this thread just to help out.
    Cheers.
     
  9. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Knock yourself out, if we all contribute then we'll have pretty good database up.
     
  10. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    RADIO OVERVIEW

    Radios have been one of the most important peices of military equipment since they were invented. No longer did a soldier have to run or the artillery be in line of sight. Artillery before then was designed for direct fire, now it could be placed safely behind a hill miles away.
    Radios did not need wires like morse code, all you needed was a radio and you were set, the infantry platoon no longer needed to carry as many light mortars, it could call them in from a predesignated position.

    The radio is a simple peice of equipment, i'm not sure about the inner workings, but simply it converts voice into radio signals and sends them to a reciever tuned to the right frequency, this is decoded and becomes voice.

    Radios in the army are large, bulky things, often backpack size and weighing many kilograms, but they are generally immune to fire and won't break, unless it's a PRC-77 set, then it WILL break (trust me, the 77 set will ALWAYS break).

    However, there is a downside to radios.
    As i have said, they are large, bulky and weight alot, thier range is not phenominal, 3km with a 3ft aerial, 6-8km with a 10ft aerial and up to 15 with a 30ft or lightweight aerial.
    They can also be decoded, the enemy may have a radio tuned into your frequency, this isnt much a case with the new digitally coded radios, but old analog ones are suceptible to this.

    However, enough of this, for now, we shall enter the radio myths, truths and misconceptoins, anyone who has been in the military will know this, but still, read on, this is based mainly on what i have learnt in the AAC, some things i know are considered 'classified', seriously, no joke, thus, i will not list them, but without further adeiu, we shall begin.

    MYTHS.
    Radios can be destroyed by gunfire: Yes, and no, it depends on the radio, if you have used a PRC-77 it is very solid metal, and thus, a SMG/pistol or light assault rifle round may only dint it, but a good 7.62x51mm NATO (referred to hereon as the .308) will go right through.

    Radios can frequency hop: Yes and No again, new ones made mainly after 1990 can, but old ones cannot, frequencies are generally kept and not changed.

    Over and Out: This does not exist, Over means end of your transmission, Out means you have left the conversation and the radio net is open.

    The net is always open: Hell no, you must be using a sanctioned net, which is opened by HQ and closed by HQ, you will be assigned a radio net and a backup, once you're in, you're in, that's it, you can change, but nobody will know who you are. Also, in battle, radio nets are often filled with many people wishing to have a chat as to where 2nd platoon is and why Sgt Dukeman (not his real name) is nowhere to be found, thus, you must push in, yes, the second you hear out, start barking into that handset, especially if you need a Casevac.

    TRUTHS.
    Radios are pricks: True, lo and behold, like every useful item, it will not work when you need it, if you are 5km from base and wanting to know where the hell the rest of the patrol is, it will not work, when you're sitting on picquet at 4am and nobody is on, then it will work perfectly.

    Radios are heavy: Hell yeah, the 77 set weights 10.35kg, more if you add all the bells and whistles like handsets and aerials, it weighs more, it is uncomfortable and unergonomic, and thus, a bitch to carry.

    MISCONCEPTIONS.
    Repeat: You do not say repeat, repeat to an artilleryman means 'fire again'. The artilleryman will thus either reload or dig out the last radio log, find the firing coordinates and begin shooting, at this point either the area is abandoned or you're where they're shooting, instead, you say 'i say again'. If you want artillery fire again, you say 'repeat last firing co-ordinates'.

    Roger: Roger means you have understood that command, not necicerially that you're going to comply, if you've been givin an order, you say 'Roger that, Wilco." Wilco means Will Comply.

    ~~~~~

    I shall add more, but this is just basics for now, finally, just an overview:
    Never say Repeat
    Radios are heavy.
    Old radios suck.
    They never work when you want to.
     
  11. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    three radio issues that people write/say that piss me
    off:
    -"roger wilco": repetitive and not used at all, two different responses.
    -"over and out": once again repetitive and two different commands, which in this case are contradictary. over means you expect a reply, out
    means that you dont expect a reply because the transmission (conversation) is over.
    -"repeat": people in hollywood say repeat in place of "I say again" or "Say again?" Unfortunately, "repeat" means to an artillery radioman to signal the battery to fire for effect again on the same coordinates as the last shot. This might be bad if your squad/platoon/company/battalion has moved down range to mop up the enemy remnants of the last barrage.

    Other things:

    -grenades: Hollywood and thus the public generally overestimates the blast and fuse length of grenades. They are (mostly) anti-personnel weapons, designed to fragment and cause over-pressure rather than explode things and burst into massive flames.

    Also, although production methods have improved, grenade fuses are many times still irregular and sometimes unpredicatable. This is not an official concern, though, as the "cooking" of grenades is not recommened in any dash-tens (field/user manuals). Officially, a grenade fuse is ~5 seconds long, in reality, it ranges betwee 3 and 6 seconds, depending on nation of manufacture. Some grenades are purspose built to have very short fuses (flashbangs) for surprise, while some have purposely longer fuses (thermite or incendiary) because it is recommended that one get the hell away from items that burn up to 3000 degrees.

    Another note of interest pertaining to grenade quality control: for anyone who hasn't read Don Shepperd's memoir, the late LCDR. wrote that because his area of operations in vietnam was ranked as lower-priority by both sides' commands, the Viet Cong there (the Mekong Delta>Bassic River) tended to get lower-grade or passed down equipment. He continued to say grenades were not a worrisome problem on the Bassic as an astoundingly high number of Russian- or Chinese- made grenades that appeared there were fizzles or duds.
     
  12. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    Finally, outside of the above rant, a point of contention. Many people over the last ninety-plus years during which tanks have existed have more than once claimed that tanks were obsolete and would disappear from the battlefield within the decade.

    They were always wrong.

    After WWI, tanks were claimed dead because they were slow and artillery could easily target and destroy them. Twenty years later, Hitler conquered Poland in record time thanks (in part) to the mobility and strength of tanks.

    After WWII, tanks were claimed dead because tactical nuclear weapons could easily destroy them. A few years later, they played a pivotal role in the Korean War.

    In the early 60s, they were claimed dead because of the advent of cheap, portable, and very potent rocket launchers that could penetrate astoundingly thick steel armor and go anywhere the typical infantryman could. Yet, Anti-Tank Guided Missiles were combatted by ceramic-laminate, reactive, and active armor systems. Indeed, the main cause of disabled American tanks in Vietnam was landmines, technology that had been around for decades.

    In the 70s, they were claimed dead because they were slower and less protected against helicopters carrying more potent ATGMs. Yet, helicopters can be easily combatted by divisional anti-air batteries, effective "fast-mover" air cover, or even the roof mounted machine guns that had been integrated into tank design far decades for that exact purpose.

    By the 80s, the tank was claimed dead in America simply because the front line tank at the time was the most-outdated frontliner in the world at the time.

    In the late 80s, the appearance of late-model M1 tanks allowed NATO strategists to depend more upon US armor should the USSR funnel its forces thru the Fulda Gap.

    In the 90s, the Abrams SUPERB performance against ex-Soviet T-72s and T-55s reaffirmed the tank.

    Now, post-Iraqi invasion, some claim the tank is dead on the modern urban battlefield, which has traditionally been the worst environment for a tank. However, many US commanders found the Abrams quite useful in Iraq, as it can move into enemy areas virtually unthreatend.

    Not only does it pack a punch, but the Abrams has proved for the most part impervious to the weapons of the insurgency. While humvees are destroyed by Improvised Explosive Devices on an almost daily basis, the worst an IED can do to an Abrams it cause it to break a track, which is easily fixable and a small price to pay for zero casualties. Indeed, the M1 is often used as a minesweeper of sorts "over there" whenever a convoy stumbles upon a suspiscious object. Although it is still a tragedy, the worst destruction of an Abrams that Ive heard of occurred when the IED consisted of a 55-gallon drum packed to the brim with plastic explosive. Even then, one of the four crewmembers survived.

    It also has the added bonus of the psychological effects of a big-ass tank driving thru one's neighborhood, especially on members of a society in which the previous ruler (Saddam) used his tanks as a sign of authority.

    In short, I have never heard of an infantryman that was too shy to call in even one tank for support.

    P.S.: the M1 is still considered the best tank in the world, with its only close rival being the German Leopard 2A6. However, the latter lacks the speed and mobility that the M1's turbine provides.
     
  13. Domoviye
    Offline

    Domoviye Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    I have to agree whole heartedly about the tanks not being obsolete.
    Canada has sent tanks into Afghanistan, and everyone was saying how they'd be useless due to horrible, mountainous terrain. They didn't realize that the tanks were meant to protect convoys from attack. Like Iraq they can run over the IED's clearing the road for the weaker trucks. Also the few times the Taliban have gone against them, the Taliban has lost hard.

    And when faced with a modern army, tanks will usually work infantry and aircraft. Which will help protect tanks from the worst anti-tank weapons, while allowing them to act effectively.
     
  14. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    too true!

    The few faults of modern, NATO main battle tanks is that they are heavy, and thus use a LOT of feul (measured in gallons per mile instead of vice-versa).

    Also, there were complaints recently when armored vehicles needed to manuver through farmland to evade enemy fire, but the militaries in Afghanistan reimburse citizens for damages like that.

    Finally, the Abrams was so fast when it was phased in that it out-ran its supply train during both forays into Iraq. And a supply train is important when you're getting 3 to 4 gallons per mile. Also, the mechanical complexity of a 70-ton tracked vehicle requires a constant flow of replacement parts even despite the Abrams' reputation for reliability. But both of these problems are currently negated by the fact that armor in both Iraq and Afgh. operate from permanent bases that have their own mech depot.
     
  15. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    well, enough lecturing from me. Wow, looking back on that, i was kinda long winded.

    anyway, any navy vets on here? I want to write a short story that takes place on the resommissioned USS Iowa in the near-future and I am looking for some real-world guidance on navy commands and slang (that is appropriate).
     
  16. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Watch NCIS for a bit and you'll pick up alot of common naval terminology your readers will understand.

    Also, thanks very much for all the info, as i said, it's open source, i may refine it into a whole Radio article, unless you want to do so, either way you shall be credited.

    Also, a 55 gallon drum chock-a-block with Plastic Explosive will basically take out anything it comes into contact with, so not much to say there.
     
  17. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    I watch NCIS every Tuesday. Only missed a few episodes in early season two when I was busy with school. Thanks for the comment.

    I'm looking more for someone who was actually on a warship or transport vessel that can tell me about the shipboard chain of command and orders that are given to acheive a certain action.


    A brief plot introduction for my new story:

    They year is between 2009 and 2012. Fidel Castro has died, and his brother, who is (actually!) presently in power wants to hand the country over to the US to heal its economic wounds. However, Socialist Venezuela lead by Hugo Chavez "claims" Cuba for Venezuela, saying that he will free the Cubans from the grip of the Americans. A conventional land war follows, and power is balanced because the US does not have superior numbers and Venezuela has relatively cutting edge equipment. This plot line, which is actually more detailed on paper than here, was developed for a series of short stories about a tank commander.

    However, my current project utilizes the same "universe" and time period. It follows the voyage of the newely-recommisioned USS Iowa and her Captain, XO, and senior NCO. The battleship deploys from the west coast to the gulf because her sister ship, the Wisconsin, isn't completely overhauled yet for service.

    Thrown together with short notice, the crew consists mostly of retrained seamen from domestic land-based jobs.
    -Captain Covey, the ship's commander, was recently promoted after he pressured his boss for better working conditions. His previous job as head of the History Department at Annapolis is something he doesn't miss.
    -Master Chief Petty Officer Isuke is a salty ex-sailor turned merchant marine turned re-commisioned sailor. He is nicknamed the Old Man of the Sea by the Iowa's crew, clocking in at roughly under 70 years old, slightly older than the Iowa herself. He and Covey have a hidden rivalry that they must progress past before they can function as a team.
    -Commander (John Doe) is the ship's XO, who harbors resentment towards both his CO and his senior NCO as they infight while he attempts to hold the crew and the weathered ship together.
    -Lieutenant (John Doe) is the typical maverick special forces type. His Navy SEAL team rendezvous's with the Iowa (without Covey's knowledge) as they pass the peninsula of Baja California. Covey does not know why his team was assigned to a fire support ship, but he knows that he doesn't care for bureaucrats meddling in his duties.

    Still has some stuff to be added and mixed up, but whatever.
     
  18. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    BTW, if any of you guys want to read the first two-page segment, post up!
     
  19. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm, a naval story, okay, post up, i probably won't review but i have a habbit of saying that but then reviewing anyhow, so you might get lucky.

    As for repeat, you only say that if you want artillery again, say you're assaulting the hill, and you've bombed it but the enemy is still shooting, that is a sign to bomb it some more.

    If you are on the coast, then you have the brilliant and terror inspiring naval artillery, the big end of artillery is 150-180mm, naval get like 350mm and up, ever seen the USS Iowa unload a broadside, well this is it.

    [​IMG]

    That is the USS Iowa, firing a FULL broadside of 16inch guns, for those of you whom have (very smartly) joined metric, that is 406mm, or about 1 and 1/3 of a foot, yes, that is one helluva shell, not to mention her payload of missiles.

    Yes, the navy has one thing the army wants, that is big guns, i've stood 2 metres from a 105mm gun barrel, and that shockwave nearly knocked a guy next to me over, this is 4x as much, no wonder you cannot be on deck when they go off.

    Just got the stats for the Iowa, she has:
    9x 16inch/406mm Guns.
    12x 5inch/127mm Guns.
    32x Tomahawk Cruise Missiles
    16x Harpoon Anti-Ship Missiles.
    4x 20mm Phalanx Cannons
     
  20. ariella
    Offline

    ariella Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    in a home full of wonderful and loving people I ca
    I just wanted to say tht this is one of the most informative posts I have ever read in any forum on this particular topic. Was also an enjoyable read too.

    It is great to see as well, I am sure this will help quite a substantial amount of people out with their work.
    Great to see people helping each other out like this.

    Ariella
     
  21. chase42
    Offline

    chase42 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    1
    The Japanese Yamato of WWII had 18 inch guns, but they kept that fact secret and called them 406mm Specials. It took 10 torpedos and 23 bombs to sink that damned fortress!

    Anyway, I heard an interesting story about modern technology and strategy colliding with the sheer force of firepower. Here it is: During (I believe) the Yom Kippur War in '73, Israel faced very advanced anti-aircraft artillery like the SA-6 SAM that was deployed by Egypt. The solution that the found after losing a fifth of their planes was to launch a small, gas-powered UAV into the Egyptian lines, which would occupy the radars. Then, attack aircraft would roll in hot on down on the deck and launch anti-radiation missiles (HARMs) and destroy the eyes of the SAMs. The war was over much sooner.

    During the first Gulf War, we sent at least one Iowa-class ship to support Marine and Army armored formations as they advanced into Kuwait. They carried on of these models of UAV, and launched them from catapults much like floatplanes during WWII. After they loitered over a target for a couple hours, feeding B&W fotage to the fire control personnel that allowed them to adjust their aim and even find new targets, they would return to the ship low on fuel. They would fly the big R/C planes into a net on the aft deck to catch them. However, many times they sustained damage. However, this combination was advanced at the time and produced some very deadly results.

    Anyway, after a time, the Iraqis realized what that lawn-mower sound hovering over meant, and pretty soon they began waving any type of white cloth that they could (incl. underwear) at the small plane in surrender, hoping that the shells wouldn't come. Kind of a precursor of the effectiveness of UAVs in my opinion.

    Thanks for the missile count, couldn't find that anywhere. However, I think the 5-incher count is wrong. From my line drawings, which date to before the '83/'84 overhaul, I see 5x 2-gun turrets per side, for a grand total of 20 5inch. Need to check my info, however.

    Will post up the story tonight under a separate thread so that I don't saturate this one. And if anyone wants to use the same "universe" for their own story (which would be quite cool if someone else did) I can furnish you with details about the scenario.
     
  22. Remoah
    Offline

    Remoah Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ariella: thanks, if you have any questions, queries or doubtful points, just shout up, alot of military stories are out there, i think it's good to bend the truth but sometimes some vital info gets missed.
     

Share This Page