/kountry/ - Outer Heaven

Well, here it is for now as a picture

>>854
Since we are starting relatively small what are you thinking for a military structure of say 200 people and also any idea's for our basic kit. We could probably use some militia structure.

>>854

you're still missing the point on the corps names.

take a serious look at the zouaves. now, the primary distiction was the uniform, other than they they acted exactly like any other light infantry or skirmish unit. and there were at least seventy regiments that operated like this one the union side alone.

they chose to emulate the dress of the zouaves, with was largely irrelivant, and over time they switched to the normal uniforms by war's end.

same as with the beret, it only started being worn because British commandos wore them, and soon elite forces wanted to wear it to show they were elite, then line units wanted it because they wanted to feel like the badass OPERATORS. and then even the POGs had them and everyone realized how stupid berets are.

i'm saying that that naming formations after dead militaries is something done by either dumbass brass who never grew out of their cadet uniforms, or training brigades.

emulate what matters; tactics, training and procedures.

i'm still maintaining that it's counter intuitive to have a largely bottom-up nation like we're trying to create have its military identify with the largest martial formations.

throughout history whenever you asked a soldier his unit; he'd tell you something along the lines of "17th regiment of foot" or "36th Brigade Combat Team." because he trains with the regiment-sized force, he deployes with the regiment-sized force, and everyone he knows in the military may very well be inside that one regiment-sized force. you ask any one in the US military to name their Corps, and the only two types who will be able to belong to either the puking dragon or the marines.

the best way to build a military quickly is by raising regiments for specific roles; always has been. this goes into another point that i'm touching on in the next post.

>>870

>We do not need to use the entire structure all at once.
>>856
>Since we are starting relatively small what are you thinking for a military structure of say 200 people

historically a regiment was never actually a full 1000 men for long. in the civil war, for example, you had regiments consisting of only a few hundred due to many factors; chief among them was the cost of raising a regiment, which was often soley the responsibility of the regimental commander.

as i said before: you build your army from the bottom-up, and train it from the top-down.

you build the army on paper first, it helps you visualize the formations and such. when putting bodies together in real life you don't actually NEED to have every slot filled to have a fighting force; you just need all the ones who are knowledgable and experienced in their jobs. some good examples of this are the german army circa the 1920s before they tripled in size almost overnight, and in the Green Berets whose primary role is to build and train indigenous militias.

you do this by getting all your leaders and logistics in place, and then getting your entry-level d00ds when you need them.

pic related is some examples i've been playing around with for some time. once i get sketchup working on this shitty toshiba i'm going to fire it up and show you some visual examples of one of the three big ass regiments on the bottom.

>>871

before I go any farther, i want to make it clear i'm not presenting any of this as how we should go regarding military structure. i'm merely using these example units as just that; examples to show how you can get a feel for building forces and all the shit that goes into it organizationally.

looking at my previous pic, you see the three regiment-sized units at the bottom:

they're structured in rather similar way, with three line battalions and one regimental fires battalion which would normally be attached to the not pictured headquarters battalion, known in british military as the Depot.

each line battalion has four line companies, one engineer company, and the headquarters company.

the three regiments are, from left to right, a mechinized infantry regiment, an airborne regiment, and an armored regiment. We'll be looking at the Ariborne regiment for now. let's call it the Outer Heaven Light rifles(OHLR).

I'm not going to try to put together individual soldiers, but instead we're going to look at vehicles for now, because i can find shitloads of those on the sketchup warehouse and they're easy to modify. but hopefully it can give a good idea of scale.

shown here is a visualization of the basic line company. if you look around on the chart i previously posted you can find the body count of the following components, from left to right:

Headquarters Platoon
three line platoons
one mortar platoon
one Assault platoon

why does airborn duds need jeeps? because nobody gets far with their boots alone, and even with foot mobiles you still need prime movers to cart around the huge amount of supplies a company needs to live.

>>874
>>875

I'm about to, but while i get the visual aids ready, here's the cheat-sheet.

>>873

let's look at the headquarters company. shown here broken up into the different sections.

the CO(A), XO(B), and Master Sergeant/First sergeant(C) all have their own jeep, for obvious reason of not wanting them in the same vehicle, but also so the cerical personnal have a vic to ride/drive. typically the commo tech rides with the company chief NCO, with clerks driving for the officers.

the cooks(D) have a truck for food, a field kitchen trailer to cook it with, and typically the truck pulls a water trailer.

the company Scout/Sniper section(E) has their own vehicles to get to where they need quickly, along with dedicated drivers so they don't have to worry about camoflauging a jeep.

the HQ is also home to the medic section(F), although in an infantry company the medics get divided up across the platoons, so each medic gets a jeep and a driver, with the HQ getting the Medic section leader.

the Supply section(G) has two trucks for the various non-food related supplies the company needs, and the company supply sergeant leads a team of six to meet the logistical demands of the company.

finally, we have the five mechanics(H). they operate one mobile workshop and a contact truck. for those unfamiliar the contact truck is basically a self-propelled toolbox; equipped with everything a mechanic needs to make quick repairs in the field. for big jobs like overhauls and complete rebuilds you have the shop truck, which can do everything the contact truck can't.

pictured is the infantry platoon.

fairly straightforward with its three squads of infantry(A), each put on two jeeps, mounting their organic GPMGs on the ring turrets.

next is the Mortar squad(B). Led by the Platoon Sergeant it's made up of three 60mm mortar teams, each with its own jeep, with the fourth given to the PSG and his driver.

next we see the Platoon Leader's team(C) consisting of the PL, the Fire Support Officer(FSO), the Radio operator(RATELO), and the driver.

finally we see the Platoon's Medic(F)

the PL's team and the medical truck are the same across all the platoons, the difference comes with the Mortar and assault platoons.

>>879

Now we have the Assault platoon.

already you can see a major difference in the size compared to the infantry platoon.

the assault platoon's responsibilities are very specific: breaching, demolitions, and Close quarters Battle. the four assault teams are called upon to take or destroy fortifications and other structures using their range of heavy weapons and explosives. their role also makes them well-suited to the anti-tank role and as such can often be equipped with ATGMs.

Lastly we come to the Mortar Platoon.

It's made up of three mortar sections(A), each with two large mortars with ammo trailers.


the 120mm mortar is a valuable compation to the 60mm mortars each platoon carries, while the line platoons can provide their own indirect fire, the mortar platoon provides an umbrella of fire support to the whole company. this layered fire support concept is further expanded on with the regimental fires battalion, but that's for another time.

okay, so now i'm able to put this shit together.

>>871
>>873
>>878
>>879
>>880
>>881

in the prievious posts I hopefully gave a n idea of how a company sized force can be built on paper, now let's talk about how to translate this from MTOW chart to flesh-and-blood.

as said previously, you build the army from the bottom-up, and train it from the top-down; we'll be explaining this now.

shown here is the simplified Table of organization and equipment(TOE) for this Infantry company. we'll be looking at the troop numbers and talking about what I mean when I say "core Cadre"

on the "line plt" section you can see the symbolic representation of what I showed in >>879

we see the PL's team with everyone under his direct lead listed underneath, including the medic. then we see three line squads of 11 soldiers, and then the mortar squad, listing the PLSG as the leader. we can see that the total number of soldiers authorized for this platoon is 50. we'll be looking at this element specifically for now.

>>979

shown here is the OLHR infantry squad as represented by cute anime girls.

you can see the 11 soldiers divided up into two fire teams, one sharpshooter team, and the squad leader just chilling by his lonesome. this is by no means the only way to structure a squad, but this is what we'll be looking at for now.

at the top we see leadership of the squad represented by the cernterpiece weapons of each team.
below are the "entry-level" positions.

the four soldiers at the top are the ones expected to train the entry level soldiers; this is the "core cadre;" the bare minimum positions that HAVE to be filled to ensure the unit has the leadership necessary to fill up and train the vacancies.

>>980

now looking back to the platoon's TOE, we see that it's authorized 50 soldiers across the four squads and PL's team. but the core cadre of this 50-strong unit is roughly only 4 per element, for a total of 20. this is the bare minimum you need to stand up a new platoon-sized element.

so let's say we want to stand up a company of this sort from scratch. we already have the TOE, so the building phase is done. now we have to put together the core cadre of this company.

we'll need 60 skilled people for the three line platoons

16 for the mortar platoon

8 for the assault platoon

we'll need the CO, XO, Company Sergeant, supply sergeant, company chef, company medic, company scout team leader, and the commo tech for a total of 9 from the HQ element.


so all together the core cadre needed to stand up this 250-strong line company is 93.

this is a very manageable number to start with, and this force is perfectly capable of functioning at this strength, albeit in a less direct-combat capacity. the real benefit to structuring your company with this in mind is that it can rapidly expand to full strength, meaning you only need to recruit the lower enlisted/entry-level troops when you need them, and simply have the core cadre the rest of the time.

>This is probably how wars will be fought in the future.

they've been saying that since the '50s. ten years ago when I was doing basic at Ft sill they were saying to all us 13Bs that we better not get too comfy in our MOS because cannon artillery was on the way out and missile artillery was the wave of the future.

a decade later we're getting brand new 155mm howitzer and the MLRS and HIMARS units are little more than placeholders, last time missile artillery was used was before my dad retired from the service.

they say drones and robots are the new big thing, but you're never going to outgrow the need for flesh-and-bone soldiers on the front lines.

nor should we.

it's the same thing that happened with smart bombs: we used them once and found out how awesome and useful they were, and political leaders suddenly got their humane boners up. no longer did they need to worry about collateral damage or leveling cities to destroy one factory to keep the enemy from getting a hold of 7mm ball bearings.

soon they used smart bombs for everything. even going so far as to forego ground observers altogether and even having the strikes directed from the oval office.

years later we discovered that smart bombs are only as accurate as the intel. this was after we dropped them on shitloads of politically sensitive targets like clinics and nonbelligerants' houses.

robots are useful. DRONES are useful. but they are a supplement, not a replacement for human soldiers. once the human cost of war is removed, once a country can fight a war without worrying about making shitloads of widows and orphans out of their own citizens, you'll see a truly disgusting war.

soldiers NEED to die on both sides of a war. this keeps the leaders from throwing bodies into the fire on a whim.

a war without consequences is a pointless war.


>>989

you don't need armor for a force to be mechanized. in alot of circumstances armor only slows you down. like when you have an expeditionary force whose job is to be rapidly deployed to flashpoints around the world. you can only carry so much on a cargo plane, and the first wave is almost entirely warm bodies.

as a tanker i have experience with this; the tanks we use in the states are likely never to get sent overseas. because they're to big for airlift and require several weeks to ship over on cargo ships. so the army gets around this by pre-staging heavy assets around the world basically you have most of our equipment used for training, and a small ammount for everyone to use in combat.

that's not something anyone but the US can afford to do.

starting off what we'll need are mobile infantry that get move around a theater of operations quickly and be able to handle most shit that comes their way.

this can be accomplished with giving them light, cheap thinskinned prime movers like jeeps and ATVs, with possibly some helicopter assets and airborne training. the money you save on transport gives you more to spend on things like ATGMs and MANPADs.

>>1002

like i said, no reverse engineering is necessary. AR500 steel plate + low hydrogen 7018 welding rods.

spring steel torsion bars, AR500 steel for the swing arms and just about everything else.

lab grown sapphire and metal foil + mild steel for vision blocks.

1000 hp+ engine

shitloads of wiring and hydraulic lines. and all the related gubbins for those systems.

get some guns to bold onto it somewhere

and that gives you the tank.

APCs are similar, only they're built like minivans.



one think We learned from rhodesia is that black africans HATE white people. if we set something up in africa you better believe it'll be the target of every single african government, most of whom are bankrolled by china at this point, and all have the UN's ear.

it'll be like the birth of israel all over again, only we won't have the pity support for being jews that survived the holocaust.

not saying we SHOULDN'T go ahead with the african plan, just saying that winning friends in the black africans would be an uphill battle. we'd be better off appealing to the white africans, giving them someplace they can live without fear of being dragged from their homes in the middle of the night and murdered by roving bands of niggers with machetes.

and if you're rolling in africa, you WANT a bunch of boers and Rhodies on your side.

>>1004

>PMC
>nation built by and for honest-to-goodness mercenaries.
>not having a currency, or using money.
>mfw

>>1048

>hinds
>apaches

Why not create our own versions of helis, like the Shithooks in pic related? Also, how will we be sure that /kountry/ as a whole won't turn out like pic related?

Also, 105mm howitzer on a chinook is fucking badass. Imagine artillery being *that* mobile.

>>1056

I'd like to introduce you to pic related.

by no means a trump card but it illustrates that there are methods to countering AAA from the air.

there are also methods of simply avoiding the AAA.

anyway, you're still going to need aircraft, even though AAA exists. especially CAS and transport.

for example…

Pic related.


>Like the German MGFF and MG151 20mm [automatic, high-explosive shell-shooting] cannons mounted in the Messerschmidt 109 and Focke-Wulf 190 fighters, the Matra MG 151 cannon fired a shell with a short cartridge, which contained less than normal propellant. This reduced the recoil of the gun, making it suitable for the Alouette. The muzzle velocity was low and the rate of fire was slow. To allow deflection shooting the gun was equipped with a Collimateur reflector gun sight which was calibrated for the cannon to be fired at 90 degrees to the fore and aft axis at an altitude 800 feet from an Alouette travelling at 65 knots. The guns were initially obtained from the Portuguese and for a long time so was the high explosive incendiary (HEI) rounds used in Rhodesia. The rounds were expensive - 35 Rhodesian dollars each - and difficult to obtain. Ammunition also added weight to the helicopter, affecting its range. Thus, the cyclic rate was adjusted downwards to 350 rounds per minute. The gunners fired bursts of three rounds or less and would regard themselves as off form if more than five rounds were expended per enemy killed. A good gunner would be able to fire accurately at lower heights and indeed some preferred 600 feet. The cannons were equipped with trays, which took 200 or 400 rounds. The HEI rounds were highly effective except when fired on soft ground, which negated their explosive effect because the shells had to decelerate sharply for their inertial fuses to be activated. Gunners would look for rocks or hard ground to fire at to maximise the effect of the shrapnel. In Fire Force contacts a high proportion of the enemy were killed and wounded as a result of 20mm fire. As the 20mm HEI was prone to explode harmlessly on contact with trees, the technician/gunners took to loading ball rounds on a ratio of one ball: five HEI shells.

>>1059

and an example of them in action.