The Geriatric Air Force - Slightly Used

[blue520]

Had there been any re-engining proposal for the C-119?

Just in case there simply isn't enough life left for the engines (as the ROCAF, who had affectionately called the type "the Old Hen", experienced after depending on the aircraft for decades).

Have a look at http://www.ruudleeuw.com/c119-info.htm in the Variants section. There were a number of re-enginings mainly all around the Wright R-3350 to replace the Pratt & Whitney R-4360, doesn't look that promising. The best of the pick looks to be the YC-119K/C-119K. 

[dy031101]

Tank-wise, when was the last Swiss Pz.68 built? I remember seeing that RUAG were trying to sell off a load of them a few years back, with very low mileage since a major upgrade.....

According to the Wikipedia, 1983.

There are proposed AA tank, bridgelayer, as well as self-propelled howitzer derivatives, and other than bringing them up to the 68/88 standard, there's also a compact 120mm gun originally designed for re-arming the tank......

Speaking of derivatives, how do the rules concern derivatives?  If, say, I take a Sabra or a 120S, would I be free to make an AA tank out of the upgraded hull to go with the tank?  Would I be limited in what to take as a core system for that specific derivative, or must I find another vehicle type serving alongside the tank that is known to have an existing or proposed desired derivative (for this example, a hull that is known to have been used to contruct at least a prototype SPAAG)?

[Bryan H.]

I'm going to go on the notion that Geriatria is broadly analogous to Turkey in geography, climate, resources, economy, population, education, etc...  Although, just to be a little different it'll be a constutional monarchy, Christian and a few minor things.

For armor:
Does anyone know when regular "serial" production of the Panhard M3, VCR and Buffalo armored cars/APC's ended.  I'm pretty sure the Panhard AML-90 & AML-60 are safe; although they have had some sporatic production.  Also what about the BTR-60 - is it within the time guidelines?  Have there been any upgrade proposals for the BTR-60; Westernized engines and armament...?

I think the M60 upgrades sound good.  

For ships:
I think some of the early build Spruance class destroyers were laid down & launched by 1980.  Maybe Knox or Garcia class frigates?  Maybe early Type 22 frigates?

Can anyone think of some more naval ship classes that would be useful, particularly Western types - destroyers, frigates, cruisers, fast attack, support types...?

I like the Clemenseau with upgraded A-4's.

Bryan

[Logan Hartke]

There seem to be some really good ideas in here.  It sounds like the A-6 is out.  The Mirage IV is a great idea.  From my understanding, it was a very capable and reliable plane.  It could easily serve as both a bomber/strike aircraft and the recon aircraft, maybe supplemented by a U-2 or Canberra.

I'm glad to see this is getting as much interest as it is.  The armor ideas are really starting to take hold.  Once upgraded, the Pz. 68 is a good idea, and the AMX-13-based family is also great.

Cheers,

Logan

[dy031101]

Also what about the BTR-60 - is it within the time guidelines?

BTR-60 evolved into BTR-70 and then BTR-80, so yeah, it might be vulnerable to the 40/20 rule as well......

Although things most likely wouldn't ever have come to this, but in the very-worst case scenario, maybe the numbers of transports and weapon carriers can be filled by donated M3/M5/M9 halftracks upgraded like those that served in Argentina......

[Bryan H.]

Also what about the BTR-60 - is it within the time guidelines?

BTR-60 evolved into BTR-70 and then BTR-80, so yeah, it might be vulnerable to the 40/20 rule as well......

Although things most likely wouldn't ever have come to this, but in the very-worst case scenario, maybe the numbers of transports and weapon carriers can be filled by donated M3/M5/M9 halftracks upgraded like those that served in Argentina......

I think I'll vigorously argue this one.

BTR-60 production from 1960-1976 about 25,000 produced.  Primary differences between BTR-60, BTR-70 and BTR-80 (as originally produced). 
BTR-60: 3 crew + 14 passengers,  BTR-70 & BTR-80: 3 crew but only 7 passengers
BTR-60: about 1 ton lighter than BTR-70 and 2 tons lighter than BTR-80
BTR-60: 2 90 hp V6 gasoline (petrol) engines, BTR-70: 2 120 hp V8 gasoline engines, BTR-80: 1 diesel engine
Side crew doors above wheels on BTR-60, even with the wheels on BTR-70 and on the BTR-80 split above and even with the wheels. 

Although, the three BTR's look similar on the outside there are major internal differences - so much so that 7 fewer fully-equipped infantry could ride in the BTR-70 & 80 vs. the BTR-60.

The BTR-60 evolved into the BTR-70 and then the BTR-80. However, one could also say the MiG-15 evolved into the MiG-17, the MOWAG Piranha evolved into the Stryker or that the F3H Demon evolved into the F-4 Phantom.  The Soviets considered them different and gave them different model numbers.

All that said, their are some interesting variants of the BTR-60.  Israel has a good looking upgrade program for the BTR-60 and it appears that at least one has been fitted with a spare AML-90 Lynx turret!  The BTR-60 appears to have lots of potential.

Bryan

[Weaver]

For armor:
Does anyone know when regular "serial" production of the Panhard M3, VCR and Buffalo armored cars/APC's ended.  I'm pretty sure the Panhard AML-90 & AML-60 are safe; although they have had some sporatic production.  

Panhard M3/Buffalo and AMLs are out because they were produced well into the '90s. VCR was first built in the 1970s so that's out too.

British FV432 APC should be in: prototype: 1961, production end: 1972, 3000 built. New engine and applique armour (Bulldog) now available.

Swedish Pbv 302 is in too: prototype: 1962, production end: 1971. Applique armour kit available.

British Saracen APC is in: prototype: 1952, production end: 1972, 1838 built. Diesel engine available.

British Saladin armoured car is in: prototype: mid '50s, production end: 1972. Diesel engine available.

Vickers MBT is out: Nigerian order in 1991.

M41 Walker Bulldog light tank is in: prototype: pre '51, production end: late '50s, 5,500 built. Engine, armour, electronics and gun (90mm) upgrades available.

Russian PT-76 light tank is in: prototype pre '50, production end: late '60s. Engine and gun upgrades currently offered, including French 90mm and Russian 57mm (adapted high velocity AA gun).

Austrian Saurer 4K 4FA APC is in: prototype mid '50s, production end: 1968, 450 built. Question: does the later 4K 7FA (prototype: 1976) count as the same type or not? Anyone know when production of the latter ended - Greece licence produced them IIRC?

For ships:
I think some of the early build Spruance class destroyers were laid down & launched by 1980.  Maybe Knox or Garcia class frigates?  Maybe early Type 22 frigates?

Can anyone think of some more naval ship classes that would be useful, particularly Western types - destroyers, frigates, cruisers, fast attack, support types...?

I like the Clemenseau with upgraded A-4's.

Bryan

Leanders are in, and earlier Vosper frigates (Mk.5, possibly Mk.7?) should be in too.

[Weaver]

BTR-60: 3 crew + 14 passengers,  BTR-70 & BTR-80: 3 crew but only 7 passengers

That 14 passenger figure was only true for the early open-topped version with no turret. The vast majority of BTR-60s had a roof, a turret and similar capacity to the BTR-70.

I'd argue that the BTR-60 and BTR-70 are the same type (the latter is really just a re-engined and lightly modded -60), but that the BTR-80 is a new type, since it has a fundamentally different engine configuration and hull, with changed wheel spacing and full height side doors.

[Bryan H.]

BTR-60: 3 crew + 14 passengers,  BTR-70 & BTR-80: 3 crew but only 7 passengers

That 14 passenger figure was only true for the early open-topped version with no turret. The vast majority of BTR-60s had a roof, a turret and similar capacity to the BTR-70.

I'd argue that the BTR-60 and BTR-70 are the same type (the latter is really just a re-engined and lightly modded -60), but that the BTR-80 is a new type, since it has a fundamentally different engine configuration and hull, with changed wheel spacing and full height side doors.

Per wikipedia...
Early (open-topped), BTR-60P carried 16 passengers + 3 crew.  Later production (with the added roof) BTR-60PA & BTR-60PB carried 14 passengers + 3 crew.  The added roof dropped the total passenger load down 2.  There seems to be some extra stuff in the BTR-70 that keeps 7 passengers from riding and adds 1 ton in weight.  I've not been inside either vehicle but halving your cargo (ie. passenger load) seems like a significant internal redesign.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60  

On the AML & M3, what does rule #4 mean?  "No armored vehicle types that were still in serial production anytime after January 1st, 1990*"
And the corrollary, "* - We'll be lenient here.  No aircraft or vehicles with major production after January 1st, 1990.  Limited production (S-64 Skycrane, for example) or aircraft assembled from existing parts after 1990 won't disqualify the type, but don't assume you'll get the ones built after that date--you won't."  Wikipedia has production starting in 1960 but no end date.  Wikipedia says that "manufacture continues for the export market" but the Panhard company website does not list the AML or M3 in their product line. Wikipedia AMLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panhard_AML  Panhard website http://www.panhard.fr/anglais/gamme.php  

"Serial" sounds like regular mass production, reliable big contracts, large numbers (hundreds to thousands), year after year; not a dozen or even a score for a small, Third World military one year and then none the next or a handful of special order attrition replacements ordered on an irregular basis.  The AML and M3 do not appear to be in "serial" production since the 1980's perhaps even the 1970's.  If the corrollary is meaningless, I couldn't have an "Oscar", Me 262 or Grumman F3F biplane - new examples of these types have been manufactured in the 1990's & 2000's despite the obvious age of the designs.  http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/articles/oscar/index.html http://longislandearlyfliers.org/news_archive/04november_f2f-2.html http://www.stormbirds.com/project/index.html

Bryan

[blue520]

Armor:
The main problem with Panhard vehicles as has been stated is there in some cases seems to be no serial production (that is a low first run and lot of low number production as necessary) and additionally a lot of the models seem to merge into each other with parts and hull commonality. Which is not a bad thing for the manufacture or the end user, just make it difficult for us.

This is where the lawyers start to make the money. The wrong interpretation could be taken as braking the terms, forcing penalties against you country or worse justification for invasion (which may or may not be on the cards already). The spirit of the rule seems to be armoured vehicles with major production before January 1st, 1990 and very limited production after are allowed. But how does this translate into production ratios of produced before and after? 2:1, 10:1, 50:1, 100:1, 1000:1 & so on, of course there would be a grey range on the border between permissible or not. But when would it be clear that the line has been crossed?
If it was a case with a real nation it mainly would come down to politics, international goodwill and how much is your nation willing to stir the neighbours. As we don't have this Logan Hartke may want to set a approximate cut off or put it to the mob to decide the grey areas/ selections, or work some other decider.  

It seems there was a limited production of the BTR-60 (100 according to wikipedia) during the BTR-80 production run. This should fit in limited production clause of rule 7. That is if it is seen there is a enough of a gap between the BTR-60 & BTR-80 (serial production of the BTR-70 seems to stop with the production by the BTR-80 in '86).

There are bound to be a number of modernisations for the BTR-60. One is listed in the Israeli section of the BTR-60 page on wikipedia.

Is the T-54/T-55 tank in or out?

Ships:
All the Spruance class destroyers excluding the last one USS Hayler (DD-997) were launched before 1980 (30 ships).
Of the Type 22 frigate only the type one ships HMS Broadsword, HMS Battleaxe & HMS Brilliant were launched before 1980 (3 Ships).
All the Garcia class & Knox class frigates are fine (10 and 46 ships).

There is the Royal Netherlands Navy Kortenaer class frigate, 7 were were launched before 1980. A number were sold on to the Hellenic Navy as part of the Elli class which gives a modernisation path.

One that interests me is the Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate, 14 were launched before 1980. The interest is mainly in the upgrades made to the Royal Australian Navy Adelaide class frigate (Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates  modified for Australian requirements), lengthening short hull ships to accommodate Seahawk sized helicopters + the FFG Upgrade Project.    

What year were the French D'Estienne d'Orves class launched?

I am looking for suggestions on offshore patrol vessels, was looking at the Australian Fremantle class patrol boat but it misses the cut off date. Any thing out there, hopefully with a modernisation pathway.

Also for inshore patrol/ fast attack vessels I was thinking the German Albatros class, thoughts or alternate suggestions?



   

[gral_rj]

Leanders are in, and earlier Vosper frigates (Mk.5, possibly Mk.7?) should be in too.

All Vosper frigates would qualify, I think. Last type 21 was comissioned in 1978, while the last Vosper Mk.10 for the Brazilian Navy was comissioned in 1980.

[Weaver]

Leanders are in, and earlier Vosper frigates (Mk.5, possibly Mk.7?) should be in too.

All Vosper frigates would qualify, I think. Last type 21 was comissioned in 1978, while the last Vosper Mk.10 for the Brazilian Navy was comissioned in 1980.

Yep  - my bad: didn't read the rules properly. I thought ships had the same 1970 cut-off as the rest.

[Weaver]

Per wikipedia...
Early (open-topped), BTR-60P carried 16 passengers + 3 crew.  Later production (with the added roof) BTR-60PA & BTR-60PB carried 14 passengers + 3 crew.  The added roof dropped the total passenger load down 2.  There seems to be some extra stuff in the BTR-70 that keeps 7 passengers from riding and adds 1 ton in weight.  I've not been inside either vehicle but halving your cargo (ie. passenger load) seems like a significant internal redesign.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-60  

I suspect that the author of that Wiki article has got a bit confused. In one paragraph near the start, he says:

BTR-60P had an open roofed crew and troop compartments which was deemed to be a serious disadvantage because of that a new version, designated BTR-60PA, entered production in 1963. It had an armoured roof, though the capacity was reduced from 16 troopers to 14 troopers.

Note that the -PA type only has an armoured roof, NOT a turret. The turreted version is the -PB, initially called -PAI.

Then a bit further down, he states:

In BTR-60P it can transport up to sixteen fully equipped soldiers. This number changed to fourteen in BTR-60PB.

I think this is a typo: I think he meant it went down to 14 in the -PA.

Looking at internet references, several of them come up with different figures, some of which arn't mentioned anywhere in the Wiki. This site lists it as 8 for the -PB, for instance: http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1119.html

Thinking about it logically, if the -PA held 14, then adding a turret (and it's ammo) MUST reduce the troop capacity significantly. The -P seems to have had four rows of seats with four seats in each row. The -PA's roof hatch with pintle gun would probably occupy most of one row, resulting in a reduction of two troops in order to give one of the others room to stand up and operate the gun. The -PB's turret seems to occupy the space formerly used for the front two rows of seats, so that would imply a reduction to 8. Note also that crew figures are quoted as variously 2 or 3 depending on whether the gunner is rated as one of the crew or one of the passengers.

[Bryan H.]

On the ships, it appears that rule #5 allows ships on a hull-by-hull basis, not a class basis.  For example, the USS Nimitz (if decommissioned by the USN) would be valid even though the Nimitz class is still in production.  

This is where the lawyers start to make the money.  

You're right about the lawyers.   Upon reading the scenario initially presented, I wondered how such a draconian treaty, signed by a "puppet" government, under conditions of occupation and ethnic cleansing no less, could be legal, moral or ethical.  A treaty signed under such extreme duress seems like it's just waiting to be declared invalid by any reasonable or fair international court.  But those are the Logan Hartke's rules, I'm trying to use it as an exercise to see how much militarily effective use can be got out of older types.  I'm sure the current freely elected government is already in the Hague arguing their case!  

I'll be sticking with the AML & M3 and the BTR-60.

Bryan

[Bryan H.]

Kingdom of Geriatria
Capitol: Auldfahrt
Population: (2000) 51,257,828
Religion: 91% Catholic, 6% Orthodox
Resources: (top 10) Agriculture, Forests, Coal, Copper, Chromium, Oil, Gas, Gold, Titanium, Phosphates
Industry: Auto manufacturing, Banking & Financial, Steel, Shipbuilding, Textiles, Electronics, Aerospace, Food production, Fishing, Bio-medical research
Climate: Temperate with moderate wet winters and drier summers, snow & extreme cold in mountainous areas
Current issues: Economic development, environmental preservation, reintegration with the international community, external political disputes  
Organizations: UN, Interpol, International Court, NATO/Partnership for Peace; bilateral economic and defense agreements with US, UK, France and Italy

Current issues: Monarchy reestablished by popular vote in 1990; King Michael VI returned after 52 years in exile due an attempted regicide, an attack that killed his brother Prince Joseph, by the former military junta.  The Catholic Church and other religions are regaining their previous position in society after being oppressed by the junta.  The Junta imprisoned over 7000 clergy of all denominations as opposition.  Rebuilding civil society and the national economy after 30 years of the fascist despotism and failed economic policies of the military junta is the primary goal of HM government and the people.  Maintaining political and diplomatic stability are priorities.  

Rebuilding the military with democratic principles within the constraints of the "peace treaty" is also a priority.  With the agreement of the people, as indicated by a freely held, 73% majority vote in 1993; universal military training and conscription are a part of military policy along the lines of the Swiss or Israeli militaries.  Every adult male, upon reaching 18½, serve in active duty for 3 years.  This active duty service is followed by 9 years of National Guard Reserve service and then 9 years of local National Militia service.  As with the Swiss, marksmanship is a source of pride for every citizen and is encouraged by government policy.  As they are not prohibited by treaty, Geriatria produces most of its own small arms, towed artillery and ammunition.  Geriatria produces as much of its armament as is economically practical and is allowed by treaty.  Geriatria is currently in negotiation with the US to allow the US to build a combined Naval base, military airfield and training and logistics base.  Geriatria has been sending some of its officers to various academies and schools, including West Point, Sandhurst and Annapolis, in the US, UK and France for advanced training and education.  Geriatria hopes to gain full NATO and EC membership by 2020.

Bryan