The Geriatric Air Force - Slightly Used

[gral_rj]

(aside: what exactly does "zero time" mean in aerospace speak?)

Rebuild/refit(don't know which would be appropriate here - probably the latter) the structure so that it's just as when it was brand new.

[elmayerle]

I think the trick would be to gather up as many OV-10's, upgrade them, and have them in regular use before Boeing resumes production with the "OV-10X."    One Geriatria has bought and is using the type, I think they'd be "grandfathered" in.

I think the ideal OV-10 in this situation would be basically an upgraded OV-10D+ with PT6 engines and 4 or 5 bladed props, two .50 cal GAU-19A's in place of the 4 M60's, updated FLIR/EO/laser - maybe some sort of modified LANTIRN or SNIPER integral to the aircraft, and the ability to use Hellfire missiles, LGB/PGM's and Stinger missiles in addition to unguided rockets, dumb bombs and gun pods. 

Well, I can see using the same PT6 variant as the T-6A/B/C with its four-bladed prop (ISTR that it's one of the more powerful variants and, more importantly, the electronic engine controls allow faster response to throttle movements, one place where the T76/TPE331 out-performed the PT6); mind you, you could match it using a late-model TPE331-15.  I'm prejudiced, I've worked with the TPE331 and like it as a straight-forward design, but I know that the PT6A variant in the T-6 is just as good.  Incorporating the guts and windows of SNIPER in place of what's currently installed on the OV-10D would be a good move and, I think, justifiable within the rules.  'Twould also give on the option of using the recently qualified guided versions of various unguided rockets.

[Weaver]

Logan - re MICVs, I knew somebody would....

I don't want to sidetrack this thread into a re-hash of this never-ending debate (we'll be doing wheels vs tracks next... ), so I'll just make a few points to clarify my thinking.

I'm NOT saying that the infantry Platoon shouldn't have ATGWs, I'm saying that the individual section vehicles shouldn't. I see a Platoon having three Section vehicles with proper 8-man dismount teams, lots of armour to protect them, and a one-man turret or RWS with MG/AGL type weapons to provide suppressive fire. Now that sections are starting to carry small guided missiles rather than unguided ATRLs, I'll reluctantly concede that the Section vehicle could have a launcher for these as well at little penalty, since they are now "infantry fires".

The fourth vehicle in the Platoon would be a fire support vehicle with a two-man turret and a large ATGW launcher. My ideal concept would be a bit like the BMP-3: a co-axial autocannon and low-velocity gun or gun/mortar in the front of the turret, but rather than gun-launched ATGWs, I'd prefer a muzzle-loaded box launcher in the bustle. There would be a couple of dismounts in the back who could use a mortar tube and/or tripod ATGW launcher to fire the same ammo from situations where the vehicle couldn't go. Freed from the need to drop off and recover troops, this vehicle could position itself for optimal fire-support/anti-tank cover as needed.

My problem with applying the armour/gun race argument to IFVs is that it pushes the infantry out of their own vehicle. An 8-man section forming two 4-man fire teams is considered optimal, yet many modern MICVs only seat as few as 6 dismounts. This is almost entirely due to the space consumption of two-man turrets and large ATGWs. To my mind, the factors which allow an IFV to be in the right place at the right time are mobility and armour: firepower, particularly firepower which is not related to the infantry mission, comes a poor third. This isn't a unique "armchair general's" view either: look at the Israeli army. You won't find anything bigger than a .50 cal on even the heaviest of their IFVs, but you will find all the armour they can bolt on.

[dy031101]

I was thinking about just wiring the OV-10s for use with Litening pods...... but then of course, having internal sensors doesn't sacrifice a hardpoint like you would carrying an external pod.

[gunfighter]

I have considered many options for my geriatric orbat, but there is still a big concern I hold for this scenario: who would be geriatria´s enemies?. I have played a wargame of my invention for the last 20 years or so, it started with 80s vintage technology: just the sort of weapon systems you could find in a nato vs warpac wargame. Through the years, the game evolved to some kind of cold war, and by now most of the "western" countries are flying F22s, super hornets and late model F15s, while the "bad ones" fly late model flankers, fulcrums and rafales as their primary aircraft. So, I decided to test a geriatria-like emerging country, maybe a province who gained independence and couldn´t afford new aircraft. BUT, and this is what´s all about: it´s not the same placing this country against K who flyes F18C/Ds and F111s ( modeled with the RAAF in mind), that sharing frontiers with F, who has up to 1000 Flankers, fulcrums, F14Ds, F16E/Fs, floggers, frogfoots, J-10s, and a regiment of backfires (it´s a country modeled after China, who have bought every second hand aircraft they could in the past 10 years to replace its hugue inventory of fishbeds and floggers). So, who are supposed to be the bad guys in this case??

[elmayerle]

Hmm, for an opponent, how about the Peoples' Democratic Socialist Republic of Trashkhanistan, a generally mountainous country that, by virtue of its oil deposits and/or its commanding position astride a major oil pipeline or other major artery of worldwide commerce, has the revenues to acquire reasonable numbers of first-line combat equipment.  Alternatively, you could adapt one of the"third-world" countries from Tom Kratman's A Desert Called Peace and Carnifex, two novels i highly recommended and which can be viewd as veiled commentary on certain conflicts.  Col. Kratman is an excapee from the Peoples' Democratic Republic of Massachusetts and is both a good lawyer and a colonel in the US Army Reserve who's served two deployments to Iraq with the Judge Advocate General.

[dy031101]

I was thinking of a "democratic" country whose political system sounds likable enough on paper and in foreign ears but, on the flip side, allows its rulers to paint their revenge campaign as the will of the people whether it really is or not. 

[gunfighter]

One option I have in mind (I have already used it with another country), is to let a province get independence from the main state, but keeping good relations with it, or at least having ties with a powerful ally. This way, they may field relatively small air forces under the umbrella, or counting with the reinforcement from a bigger country. This way, for example, they get AWACS, EW and tanker support for their air combat component. They are also the first in the list when the main country retire their front line jets and are offered in the second hand market.

[Logan Hartke]

I was envisioning enemies equipped like the current Arab states, but with a political climate more like that of 1967.  All with similar intentions, but not necessarily a close military alliance.  So, your enemies may have anything from top of the line F-15s and F-16s to MiG-29s and MiG-31s.  Also, Rafales, Typhoons, and Flankers are all possibilities.  Enemies equipped with Challenger 2s, M1 Abrams, T-72s, and T-90s are all likely.  Obviously, the higher-end equipment will be fielded in smaller numbers.

For instance, for every upgraded M60T that you field, your enemies are statistically likely to have 1x T-55, 1x T-62, 2x M60A3s, 1x Chieftain, 3x T-72s, 1x T-90, & 1x M1 Abrams.

Same with aircraft.  For every F-4 Kurnass 2000 that you have, you may have to face 2x MiG-21 variants, 1x MiG-23, 1x MiG-29, 1x Mirage 2000, 2x F-16s, 1x Rafale, 1x Typhoon, & 1x Su-27.

Figure a 10:1 numbers advantage with about a quarter of your enemies' equipment being top-of-the-line, half of it being 80s-vintage, and another quarter being nearly as old as your equipment.  Also assume that about half of your enemies' equipment will be of Soviet/Russian/Chinese origin.

Basically, you're in a situation similar to that which Israel was facing prior to the 1967 war.  You've got a lot of old, second-hand equipment and a lot of enemies that want you dead right on your doorstep.  They can buy the latest, greatest equipment and you can't.  Can you upgrade your equipment and employ your military well enough to allow it to hold its own against an enemy with superior numbers and equipment?

Cheers,

Logan

[gunfighter]

Well, indeed the rules I imposed in my wargame were based on numbers: avery country is allowed a limited number of combat aircraft, so they have to retire the older ones if they want to introduce new jets into service. Most of them have taken the opportunity of modernizing their equipment when the main countries put theirs into storage. The country I modeled after geriatria is just allowed to buy 72 fighters. So, they must be multirole aircraft. In a common scenario, I would have given them F15s with silent eagle kits, 24 Cs and 48 Es. The neighbour country has 56 raptors (18 more on order), 133 typhoons tranche C and 100 F15 Es, so air superiority is not a big concern. As their ground equipment is only 1 division (3 stryker brigades, but I´m considering replacing one of them with a standard armor brigade- a test against a T-80 regiment convinced meof this), CAS and maybe deep strike is far more important. Now, under geriatria rules, I´ll change the eagles with Kurnass, and replace the strykers with marders. I don´t like M60s, maybe I´ll use centurions 
By now, I think they would face in their area of responsability an armor division (t-80 or chinese equivalent), 40 or so su-30mkf, and 40 Mig-33s.

[dy031101]

Did anyone ask if the North Korean Ch'ŏnma-ho is considered a continuation of T-62 production?

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

Mk.1:

AAMs include Magic-II (Mirages and G.91), R-73 (Mirages), MICA (Mirage F.1 and Nammer)

ASMs include AS.30 (all fighter types including G.91), ARMAT (Mirages), and Kh-35 (Il-38)

Aircraft powerplant so far include Atar 9K-50 (Mirages), Orpheus (G.91, Gnat, C/AC-119), NK-12 (An-22, Tu-114/126), AI-20 (Il-38), Dart (Argosy), R-4360 (C/AC-119), Artouste (Alouette III)

Air Force

Mirage F.1

Nammer (made system-equal with the Mirage F1; tactical recce capability provided through either aquisition of pods or conversions of a number of airframes into a specialized version)

Finger (these strike fighters, visually the same as the Argentine machines but with a more up-to-date avionics suite and Atar 9K-50 engine, are hopefully the first supersonic fighters to be inducted into the reconstituted air force)

G.91R/4 (strike fighter with a secondary air defense role using Magic II missiles)

Mirage IV (bomber, although the crew is heavily trained with the use of ARMAT missiles)

Strategic recce platform centred upon an extreme-range camera (either in place of fire control radar onboard a Nammer or in under fuselage pod of a Mirage IV)

Gnat (advanced trainer, upgraded to Gnat II a.k.a. Ajeet standard)

Some turboprop kitplane for basic training

Tu-126 (upgraded with Phalcon system)

Tu-114 (some Probe-and-Drogue tankers, others ELINT/ECM)

An-22 (strategic airlifter, if Allied assets cannot fulfil the need of shipping mechanized peacekeepers overseas)

AW.660 Argosy

C-119/AC-119 with Orpheus Booster Turbojet (AC-119 upgunned with 3 BK-27 cannons also used by tactical fighters in a podded form)

Navy

Il-38 (brought to SD standard)

Army

Alouette III Utility

Alouette III Gunship based on Alpha XH-1

Leopard 1 and M48 Main Battle tanks, upgraded with T-72M1 Moderna turret and applique hull armour

MBT-based AA tanks with Pantsir-S1 system (if combination technically impossible or non-compliant to rules then Gepard AA tank with Stinger SAM add-on)

MBT-based 155mm SPHs GCT AU-F2 turret

MBT-based 220mm Artillery Rocket Systems with TOS-1 launcher

M41 Walker Bulldog and PT-76 light tanks, upgraded with CT-CV turret

Marder 1A5, MT-LB, and BTR-50M IFVs, upgraded with KMDB GROM RCWS (all will have Konkurs launchers, but only designated fire support vehicles will carry reloads)

BRDM-2 scout cars and Konkurs-armed tank destroyer

=========================================

Mk.2 (air combat fleet dominated by delta-winged aircraft......):

AAMs include R-60M/KM (F-106), Magic-II/Sidewinder (Viggen, Kfir, Draken), IRIS-T (Viggen, Kfir), MICA (all BVR-capable fighter types except for JA-37), AIM-120 (JA-37)

ASMs include AS.30, AGM-65, RBS-15, BK-90

Aircraft powerplant so far include JT8D (SAAB 37, Mercure), J79 (Kfir), J75 (F/TF-106), Olympus (Vulcan), Avon (SAAB 35), J34 (SP-2H), Tyne (Belfast, C-160), T64 (SP-2H), Artouste (Alouette III)

Air Force

Ordnance-carrying under-wing supersonic tanks used by the Kfir fleet will be tested for use with the F-106 as well

JA-37 Viggen (upgraded to the most up-to-date standard)

Kfir (C.2/C.7 upgraded by French firms to become system equal to Mirage IIIEX, thus featuring F.1-style radome and refuelling probe)

Saab 35 Draken (both the air defense Johan and the strike fighter F.25 models)

F-106 Delta Dart (weapons bay modified to carry R-60 missiles)

AVRO Vulcan

Some turboprop kitplane for basic training

Dassault Mercure Head-of-State transport and AEW variants (equipped with Northrop Grumman "Top Hat" MESA radar)

Short Belfast (to be used in conjunction with Allied assets to ship mechanized peacekeepers overseas due to scarcity of airframes)

Transall C-160

Navy

AJS-37 Viggen (maritime/anti-ship strike type with radar modified with ability to cue WVRAAMs; IRIS-T will be allocated to them first)

SP-2H Neptune (upgraded with T64 turboprops and up-to-date avionics)

Army

Alouette III Utility

Alouette III Airfox Gunship

Pz.68/88 MBT (with proposed upgrade that includes the 120mm gun)

Flakpanzer 68/88 AA tank (with Stinger SAM add-on)

Centurion MBT with Olifant 2 turret and 120mm gun

Centurion AA tank with Gepard turret (with Stinger SAM add-on)

Bandkanon 1 and Mk F3 155mm SPHs (modernised with new ordnances)

Ikv-91 and AMX-13 light tanks upgraded with CT-CV turret

Pbv 302 and AMX-VCI APC with Rafael Samson RCWS (all will have SPIKE-ER launchers, but only designated fire support vehicles will carry reloads)

=========================================

I'm thinking about putting a few EC-121 Super Constellations rebuilt to the L configuration and upgraded with T34 turboprops and APS-145 radar into the List Mk.3...... except that I haven't decided what else to put into that list for sure.  Maybe a hi-lo mix with DC-8 AWACS?   

Mk.3:

AAMs include Sidewinder (F-4 and F-5), Python 5 (F-4 and F-5E/F), AIM-120 (F-4 and F-5)

ASMs include AGM-65 (F-4 and F-5), AGM-142 (F-4), AGM-119 (F-5A with targetting data acquired off-platform)

Aircraft powerplant so far include PW-1120 (F-4), J85 (F-5, C/AC-119K), J47 (KC-97J), T34 (EC-121L, KC-97J), T56 (C-123T), R-4360 (C/AC-119K), Artouste (Alouette III)

Air Force

F-4E Super Phantom (with conformal tanks on the intersection joints of the fuselage spine and the engine nacelles instead of underfuselage centreline; DASH helmet-mounted display integrated with APG-73 radar)

F-5E/F Tiger III (avionics to F-20 standard; DASH helmet-mounted display integrated with APG-67 radar)

F-5A/B Freedom Fighter (aside from lack of radar, systems are mostly the same as the Tiger III; strike fighters with a secondary air defense duty using Sidewinders)

EC-121L Warning Star (with T34 turboprops and APS-145 radar)

KC-97J Stratofreighter with underwing J47 turbojet engines

C-123T Provider

C/AC-119K (AC-119 upgunned with 3 BK-27 cannons also used by tactical fighters in a podded form)

[Sauragnmon]

Hmmm, it begs a few interesting thoughts definately with regards to building your own military.  I have a couple of ideas for aircraft that could be used in theory:

MiG-19 - give it the moving cone nose that was included in the SM-12 update to allow it better supersonic performance.  Modify the nosecone and engine bay and such, you could potentially fit it with an RD-33 engine or similar, and upgrade it much like a swept-wing MiG-21 to attain similar perspective.

MiG-23 - I forget if they qualify, namely when the production lines went cold, but there have been a number of viable upgrades tested on the airframe, including AL-31 mountings, newer radar systems and the like in the 23-98, that could make it a viable variable-geometry wing multi-role light combatant in the fields like the F-16.

Su-15 - one can't forget the original "closed nose" conversion of a fighter - give it the upgrades for things like the Smerch radar - I would imagine you could even go for beefier radars in this monster in all honesty.  Give it the proposed ogive delta modifications that had been considered for better wing area.

Su-22 - M5's could be utilized as they're just upgrades, and would be a good fast bomber unit.

Yak-28 - forget when the H-5 stopped being built, but considering the engines in the pods were R-11's, you could use MiG-21 updates as a grounds for new engines, all the way up to RD-33's ostensibly.

Su-11 - the airframe's about the same as the MiG-21, it could ostensibly be bought up and upgraded similar to the MiG-21, in principle.

Tu-4 - turboprop engines similar to the KJ-1 would give it better performance.  Modify it with swept wings, give it radar-operated defensive guns, potentially with a man-in-loop fire safety where the gun mount includes a camera that zooms in on the target the gun's acquired and gives the defensive weapons officer final engagement control.  One could ostensibly upgrade it with systems like radar and fire control to support large ASMs considering the general airframe of the aircraft is similar to the Badger and Bear, so radar systems would be a possibility - could upgrade the payload capacity as well, potentially, by giving the airframes remodelling similar to the Tu-80, which would still keep it under treaty weight for empty weight, but still allow it to carry rather effective payload weights.

MiG-25 - could be used as well as a heavy intercept aircraft, and could be given AL-41 engines - the AL-41's flight testing was done on a 25PD airframe with the left engine replaced with the AL-41, so in principle that could be grounds for further upgrade.  Could also be given full delta wings as the proposed Shenyang J-10, which would improve fuel capacity, wing loading, and a few other factors like area ruling (as if you need MORE speed in a Foxbat?)


Just a few thoughts there.

[dy031101]

Thanks to India's manufacturing MiG-27, the entire MiG-23 family is out of this game.

The rule stipulates that the fuselage modification and re-engining proposals need to be at least seriously considered...... so for example, did any MiG-25 serve as a testbed for the AL-41?  If not, then there's still the D-30 turbofans (it's even been tested).......

Fire control upgrade is another story...... (is giving Yak-28P a radar capable of supporting R-27ER/ET/EM and even R-37 my kind of crazy?  Hell yeah and, IIRC, permissible under the rules of this thread.)

[Sauragnmon]

Hmmm, that sucks - I didn't know India manufactured them - I know their Flankers are assembled but not manufactured.

Yes, the MiG-25 actually tested the AL-41 - a MiG-25PD was fitted with an AL-41 in place of its left engine for the flight-tests of the AL-41, in parallel to the pod tests done on the Tu-16.  It was part of the MFI development process.

[dy031101]

I dunno, but my thoughts during free time over these days seem to be dominated by tanks......

With the advent of big-gun (as in 105mm and in a few cases even 120mm), two-man, autoloader-equipped turrets primarily meant for wheeled armoured vehicles...... how good of a tank destroyer would I have been able to turn an old Pershing or Patton tank (M26/45/46/47) into by combining it with an Italian Hitfact turret and a 120mm LRF gun......