weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
Hypothetical Forces : Transformation
- Thread starter kato
- Start date
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #203
To take into account:
Green 1 would have a considerable ECM capability and ECCM training capability in the 7 HFB-320. These are radar jamming aircraft originally used as a training measure for German radar crews.
Trying to find out when the AGM-88 HARM was delivered to the Bundeswehr. Depending on depot structure, it's likely there would be a few dozen bunkered in Blue and Green 1.
Green 1 would have a considerable ECM capability and ECCM training capability in the 7 HFB-320. These are radar jamming aircraft originally used as a training measure for German radar crews.
Trying to find out when the AGM-88 HARM was delivered to the Bundeswehr. Depending on depot structure, it's likely there would be a few dozen bunkered in Blue and Green 1.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #205
No. The ECR procurement was completely separate from that, and was to establish an offensive dedicated SEAD capability - pre-ECR, there were no such aircraft on the "front line", SEAD was handled by a USAF F-16 wing. The ECRs EW functionality doesn't have any active systems; it's equipped with infrared imaging and a radar locator for the SEAD role.
The ECR didn't replace the HFB-320 anyway; the 320 was operated by a EW squadron that was attached to a strike wing. It was phased out in 1994 in light of the overall reductions that also killed the Alpha Jet, with a (UAV) replacement sought just a few years later (but cancelled). The ECR was introduced in 1990 already, pre-reunification, and had been in the books since about 1988/89.
It would be no problem to upgrade some of Green 1's Tornados to ECR configuration, even to an identical one to the original German ECR. Blue inherited the primary Luftwaffe spare parts depot and Luftwaffe electronics maintenance plant, Green 1 has a full Tornado production line.
It's actually Orange that will have some spare parts problems; good business for BAe, i guess.
And yeah, of course Roland and Gepard still present a credible threat. That's what they were designed for originally of course, to fulfill their function in a total Cold War ECM environment.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #207
Alright, let's try to pick this back up.
A summary of the previous 17 pages: We have so far hammered out a rough structure for our military.
I have been thinking a bit about the costs. If we want to approach a working structure within the first 5-year-plan, we'll have to compromise. A lot, in fact.
So, here's a cost-driven approach:
We will have 5.5 billion dollar available for spending. I'm arbitrarily splitting this into the following sections:
The above sounds like a whole lot - but if we look at what we'll have to buy, it's actually pretty low.
---
Army Spending:
We decided on a structure which gives us 3 tank battalions and 6 mechanized/motorized infantry battalions. This means we need approximately 140 MBTs and around 450 armoured vehicles for various tasks, plus another 50 of the latter category for our gendarmerie.
We currently have 100 MBTs (Leo 2A4), meaning we'll need to buy another 40 off the international market. In addition, i'd propose a medium armour and capabilities upgrade to the Leopard 2A4. I'm proposing budgeting 350 million for that purpose.
For the 450 AFVs, i'm budgeting 990 million - simply because we don't have more available. This includes a potential temporary lease of vehicles to bridge the gap.
We currently have a wide mix of light to heavy artillery in small numbers. For the proposed structure, we need 50 SPH, 50 field howitzers and 30 MLRS. I'm budgeting 125 million to bring our numbers in line with that.
375 million are budgeted for heavy weapons - ATGM, mortars etc - as well as an incremental upgrade of unarmored vehicles, spare parts for new equipment and an expansion of engineering and bridging equipment.
Air Force Spending
I'm aligning the number of helicopters slightly: We're for now going with 20 medium and 10 light helicopters, in three squadrons (8/2,8/2,4/6, with the last one supporting the gendarmerie and for SAR). We're also buying 2 ATR-42, 2 CN-235 and 8 M-28 Skytruck for now. Budgeted for these aircraft and helos are 500 million, with average 60 million per year budgeted for spare parts and maintenance (300 million total in 5-year-plan).
Another 60 million are budgeted for weapon systems, primarily for the helos; 60 million are budgeted for joint pilot and staff training in cooperation with allied countries.
260 million are budgeted for an upgrade of radar systems and air defense missiles. This is somewhat short, but it'll probably be enough for around 10 medium- and 30 short-range SAM systems of some kind.
For now, 280 million are budgeted towards upgrading airports in order to actually support our airforce; before upgrades, we have one airport capable of supporting heavy aircraft up to the A320 family, and three small airports capable of supporting the M-28 and helicopters physically. Another 30 million are budgeted for ground vehicles and ground support equipment.
Territorial Forces Spending
With the territorial forces, we're primarily holding back and equipping them with old stuff laying around. Nevertheless, we're budgeting some 60 million for heavy weapons and 120 million for vehicles - which of course won't be enough for the whole forces, but will present a core of military vehicles to these regiments. Some 60 million is going towards developing a workable mobilization structure, including local mobilization points, depots and the like.
Gendarmerie Spending
The Gendarmerie is budgeting 150 million towards procuring some 50 to 60 armoured vehicles of an identical type to the Army. Another 150 million are budgeted for lighter patrol vehicles, and 10 million are planned for heavy weapons for their wartime combatant role.
SKB Spending
The SKB takes care of non-combatant tasks, and is equipped appropriately: some 70 million in their case go towards procuring modern trucks and other vehicles; some 150 million are budgeted for developing a modern EW, surveillance and radar capacity, both in fixed sites and mobile; 100 million go towards a realignment of demolition preparation from Cold-War times.
Modernization
Primarily, we're upgrading communications equipment, and are slowly working our way to a modern C4I structure. To that end, we're budgeting 500 million, with another 50 million going into physical upgrades of pre-existing sites. Some 50 million are budgeted for a realignment of depots spread throughout the country, and 350 million are intended for the modernization and partial rebuilding of bases, most of which haven't seen upgrades in 30 years.
---
Procurement Notes:
---
Random Questions:
A summary of the previous 17 pages: We have so far hammered out a rough structure for our military.
I have been thinking a bit about the costs. If we want to approach a working structure within the first 5-year-plan, we'll have to compromise. A lot, in fact.
So, here's a cost-driven approach:
We will have 5.5 billion dollar available for spending. I'm arbitrarily splitting this into the following sections:
- 1870 million : Army
- 1540 million : Air Force
- 240 million : Territorial Forces
- 310 million : Gendarmerie
- 390 million : SKB forces (logistics/auxiliary tasks)
- 950 million : general modernization (bases, C4I)
The above sounds like a whole lot - but if we look at what we'll have to buy, it's actually pretty low.
---
Army Spending:
We decided on a structure which gives us 3 tank battalions and 6 mechanized/motorized infantry battalions. This means we need approximately 140 MBTs and around 450 armoured vehicles for various tasks, plus another 50 of the latter category for our gendarmerie.
We currently have 100 MBTs (Leo 2A4), meaning we'll need to buy another 40 off the international market. In addition, i'd propose a medium armour and capabilities upgrade to the Leopard 2A4. I'm proposing budgeting 350 million for that purpose.
For the 450 AFVs, i'm budgeting 990 million - simply because we don't have more available. This includes a potential temporary lease of vehicles to bridge the gap.
We currently have a wide mix of light to heavy artillery in small numbers. For the proposed structure, we need 50 SPH, 50 field howitzers and 30 MLRS. I'm budgeting 125 million to bring our numbers in line with that.
375 million are budgeted for heavy weapons - ATGM, mortars etc - as well as an incremental upgrade of unarmored vehicles, spare parts for new equipment and an expansion of engineering and bridging equipment.
Air Force Spending
I'm aligning the number of helicopters slightly: We're for now going with 20 medium and 10 light helicopters, in three squadrons (8/2,8/2,4/6, with the last one supporting the gendarmerie and for SAR). We're also buying 2 ATR-42, 2 CN-235 and 8 M-28 Skytruck for now. Budgeted for these aircraft and helos are 500 million, with average 60 million per year budgeted for spare parts and maintenance (300 million total in 5-year-plan).
Another 60 million are budgeted for weapon systems, primarily for the helos; 60 million are budgeted for joint pilot and staff training in cooperation with allied countries.
260 million are budgeted for an upgrade of radar systems and air defense missiles. This is somewhat short, but it'll probably be enough for around 10 medium- and 30 short-range SAM systems of some kind.
For now, 280 million are budgeted towards upgrading airports in order to actually support our airforce; before upgrades, we have one airport capable of supporting heavy aircraft up to the A320 family, and three small airports capable of supporting the M-28 and helicopters physically. Another 30 million are budgeted for ground vehicles and ground support equipment.
Territorial Forces Spending
With the territorial forces, we're primarily holding back and equipping them with old stuff laying around. Nevertheless, we're budgeting some 60 million for heavy weapons and 120 million for vehicles - which of course won't be enough for the whole forces, but will present a core of military vehicles to these regiments. Some 60 million is going towards developing a workable mobilization structure, including local mobilization points, depots and the like.
Gendarmerie Spending
The Gendarmerie is budgeting 150 million towards procuring some 50 to 60 armoured vehicles of an identical type to the Army. Another 150 million are budgeted for lighter patrol vehicles, and 10 million are planned for heavy weapons for their wartime combatant role.
SKB Spending
The SKB takes care of non-combatant tasks, and is equipped appropriately: some 70 million in their case go towards procuring modern trucks and other vehicles; some 150 million are budgeted for developing a modern EW, surveillance and radar capacity, both in fixed sites and mobile; 100 million go towards a realignment of demolition preparation from Cold-War times.
Modernization
Primarily, we're upgrading communications equipment, and are slowly working our way to a modern C4I structure. To that end, we're budgeting 500 million, with another 50 million going into physical upgrades of pre-existing sites. Some 50 million are budgeted for a realignment of depots spread throughout the country, and 350 million are intended for the modernization and partial rebuilding of bases, most of which haven't seen upgrades in 30 years.
---
Procurement Notes:
- I realize that in some regards, even with the above budgeting, money will be tight.
- Unarmored vehicles can and will be completely locally sourced
- Any and all electronics equipment can be sourced locally
- Local startup weapons development currently runs towards: guided missiles, light armored vehicles, upgrades to existing equipment.
- Our primary source in armored vehicles should be relatively regional, allowing for train transport without touching "hostile" ground
---
Random Questions:
- AFV - which? Remember the above cost calculation. We can not buy 500 CV90 or something like that. A single hull is preferable.
- wrt AFV - split between mechanized (IFV) and motorised (APC) forces? Or just buy the same vehicle across the board for simplification?
- Helicopters - which? See above; budget is around 250-300 million for 30 units.
- Upgrades for Leo? Can't go for A6EX of course - perhaps a Pz87WE-style upgrade? Or just A5?
- Do we want a anti-tank coy in the brigades btw? Hull would be above AFV hull in any case.
Last edited:
BMP3s would do as IFVs and APCs. It's got good armament for it's class and can also be deployed from troop transports in a sea invasion. Fording rivers shouldn't be a problem and the relatively low hull is good. The only problem would be to get it to your country. Russia is far to the East. Maybe you can cut a deal with the Ruskies and manufacture them locally?
Marders would be good but I still prefer the BMP series over it. For helicopters, I think the PAH with the Germans should be good.
LeoA5 should be good enough.
Before I continue, may I ask where this hypothetical army is?
Marders would be good but I still prefer the BMP series over it. For helicopters, I think the PAH with the Germans should be good.
LeoA5 should be good enough.
Before I continue, may I ask where this hypothetical army is?
Well then. My suggestion remains unchanged. Cut a deal with the Ruskies for BMP3 specs and manufacture them locally. Give it a German name if you want. Oh, we could also a few BTR-90s to the deal.
Maybe for Border Guard, you could use BMD3s or BMD4s. They are light and good for the job. If you want, you could also get BRDM2s instead from Poland. So it will be a bit split up. There used to 170 AFVs/IFVs prior to the reforms. So here is the new content :
100 BMP3s, 30 BMD3/4s or BRDM2s (For border guard as opposed to 16 TM170s) and 40 BTR-90s.
Leo 2A5s sound good. Though I suggest acquiring some APS for them. You have a hundred to equip so I don't really think it's gonna cost that much.
I do realize that my suggestions are mainly from the recently (At least in the case of this thread) broken-up USSR. But, I can't help it.
Hinds make good attack helos. They are excellent for border patrol because of their heavy armor. Mi-24V or Ps could do the job. Mi-28s on the other hand make good tank killers so that would be it for Helos from me.
Any plans for GBADs? I can think of a few....
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #213
Look at the big post on the last page. We'd need around 450 AFVs in total - and that with a unit cost in the range of 2-2.2 million dollar maximum.
We're also upping from 100 to 140 units, and we can't get support from the original producer (KMW).
We had a discussion on Hinds somewhere before, on the last two or three pages. Mi-28 only enters serial production in 2005, which would be a tad late. We're looking at something like a mix of 20 Mi-8T/17 (or a comparable Western system) as primary transport helos and 10 lighter western helos, with both types to be equipped with weapons to support ground troops.
We don't really need a helo for border patrol - the country is simply small enough that that can reasonably be done on the ground.
Gotta be cheap. Can't buy S-300 for example, simply for cost reason.
Alright then, the more the merrier. 450 AFVs? wow.
BMP3s would be a tad too expensive in that case. (Though it is cheap in relative terms to certain other AFVs for it's performance) BMP-1Ps or BMP-2s then would do the job if you can't get BMP3s.
The new numbers :
200 BMP1P/2/3s, 100 BMD3/4, 100 BTR-90s and 50 BRDM2s.
The BMPs would be the main IFV and AFV during a conventional war. BMDs in this case would be airdropped into battle instead of being regulated to border patrol. The BRDMs can do that. BTR-90s for Interior Defense (County region secessions, rebellions etc).
LEO2A5 are a good choice, but maintenance is a problem since the producer won't support you. Replacing them could be one of the options.
If you wish to replace the LEO2, it's definitely not going to be with a T72 from Poland. I'd go with the Challenger 2 or Abrams if you're looking for Western luxuries. Merkavas are not too bad but they are way down in the Middle East. In the case of Eastern luxuries, anything AFTER the T80U model. Anything like the T80BV is just simply outdated in comparison to your neighbors. T90s are quite cheap for it's price range, approximately 1.3 million as opposed to the Abrams' 2 million base price.
GBADs........ The Three Gs : Gecko, Gaskin and Gainful. These are okay in my opinion but I am unsure of their cost. ZU-23-4s are good AA gun systems but the 2S6M Tunguska way outperform them. Though Tunguskas are a bit expensive.
As for helos, well that's not my area of expertise though the Hinds really do a good job for CAS.
Wow, it has been quite a while since I've been thinking the last time about this.
I think I would make some modifications to the force structure.
The 3 tank battalions stay, with one in each of the two front-line mechanised brigades. The third would form a Feldersatzbataillon in the Heeresausbildungszentrum. That establishment would form a third mechanised brigade under the front-line mechanised division in case of war. So it will have to be as much identical as the other two as possible. In peacetime it will form soldiers in the combat branches like armoured troops, panzergrenadiers, jaegers, artillery etc. MBTs will be of only one type, naturally.
Combined with that we will be needing one type of AIFV and one type of APC.
My considerations about this would be:
- tracked AIFV (as it would undoubtedly cost more I prefer a brand new order)
- wheeled APC (I suggest a second-hand APC)
- It would be excellent if there is a possibility for a number of the wheeled APCs to share the turret of the AIFV, but I am probably asking too much.
So I would couple each front-line tank battalion with a tracked AIFV battalion and 2 wheeled APC battalions (one of them could/ would be a reserve unit)
In the Heeresausbildungszentrum next to the third tank battalion we could have
- 1 tracked AIFV battalion and 2 wheeled APC battalions
- 2 tracked AIFV battalions and 1 wheeled APC battalion
- 2 tracked AIFV battalions and 2 wheeled APC battalions
I leave the choice up to you. Anyway that leads us to a structure of:
- 3 tank battalions
- 3-4 tracked AIFV battalions
- 5-6 wheeld APC battalions
For cost reduction some of the wheeled APC battalions could be left as motorised infantry battalions with a more heavily militarised version of the main logistical truck type of the Blue army (armour plates, MG/ ATGM mounts etc.). The specialised army units will use a derivate of that customised vehicle. Converted into numbers I see this as:
- 130-150 MBTs
- 135-160 tracked AIFVs
- up to 350 wheeled APCs or
- some 160 wheeled APCs plus up to 350-400 customised "combat" trucks
- I don't see a need for an AT company at brigade level
The Gendarmeie would use the latter two types (or one of )
You have tempted me with mentioning the Pz.87. What is the possibility for a major arms deal with Switzerland around 1995? That would clear many of the problems we have, but I doubt that the Swiss would want to put their neutrality, especially concerning arms exports and especially for a customer at their border.
I am against the proposition of Tavarisch as he lists too much types and that contradicts my understanding that we should have one platform of a type.
Though I am in favour of him putting the BMP-3 on the table and that would be my choice for the tracked AIFV.
As for the wheeled APC i said it would be very good if we could mount some numbers of it with the turret of the AIFV (in our plans the BMP-3) and that leads us to the BTR-90 as the natural choice as it has been done already. But one the other hand I would go for second-hand swiss Piranhas to be refurbished domestically. I think that MTU is in Blue territory, correct? If so we could buy the Piranhas form Switzerland and produce new engines for them domestically, plus new electronics suite. That would save us some costs and employ our industry.
If a swiss deal is possible that would be the jackpot as we could strike a contract for:
- 40 second-hand Pz.87s and 140-150 upgrade packages for them
- the Piranha project I mentioned
- the additional M109 SPHs we need
- some MOWAG Eagle for the border guard (that would turn into scout units in wartime) and recon units
- helicopter pilot training
- possibly Oerlikon-Contraves AAA batteries
From Belgium we should be looking for any Gepards we coud get our hands on
From the Netherlands we should also be looking for Gepards and possibly for Leopard 2s if the swiss deal is not possible.
In case the swiss deal for second-hand Piranhas also doesn't go through and we settle for cheap second-hand tracked AIFVs a deal for finnish Patria SISU XA-200s is also possible, but I really don't know about such an option.
Another possible, (too) exotic source of artillery is South Africa.
Another possibility for APCs is second-hand french VABs.
Concerning air defence I would propose Italian ground-based ASPIDE batteries.
A possible deal could probably be signed with Russia:
- BMP-3s
- Uragan MLRS immediately or/ and
- Smerch MLRS a little bit later or
- Buk instead/ combined with the Aspide. If we go for S-300 (as I see we have written that off) we could dump the Aspide option and order Buks immediately.
- somewhat unclear are we gonna phase out the Leopard 2s? If yes we have two very tempting options for use a unified chassis for MBTs and SPHs:
-- T-80 and 2S19 MSTA 152mm if we don't stick to NATO 155mm standart (I don't understand why you consider the T-80 inferior.:unknown)
-- Challenger 2 and AS-90 if we insist on 155mm
Air Force
What was the reason for us to have both the ATR-42s and CN.235s, because I forgot that one and I would really stick to one type. Actually the Cn.235 is a military aircraft, has better rough airstrip performance and already has an ECM variant.
For the fixed-wing inventory I would:
- order 6 Bryzas immediately, the sooner they arrive the better. Then my pilots could gain experience on them. After they have flown them many, many flight hours for 18-24 months a selected group would proceed to the bigger transport aircraft. Any additional aircraft types will be ordered outside that 5 year period. 2 more Bryzas will be on option, to arrive with the CN.235/ ATR-42s if needed.
If we put the GBAD on hold then as soon as possible we should proceed with the plan for MiG-29.
In the helicopter inventory we buy 10 Bo.105s immediately and order 6+4 Mi-17s, first units to arrive in 2 years. Later on we order additional Mi-17s to fill the numbers you propose and add 4-6 more Bo.105s for spares. If possible we use a credit form the banks in Blue for the helicopters and start paying it off after 5 years.
Gendarmerie Spending
The Gendarmerie is budgeting 150 million towards procuring some 50 to 60 armoured vehicles of an identical type to the Army. Another 150 million are budgeted for lighter patrol vehicles, and 10 million are planned for heavy weapons for their wartime combatant role.
I agree on that.
Procurement Notes:
* Unarmored vehicles can and will be completely locally sourced - agree
* Any and all electronics equipment can be sourced locally -agree
* Local startup weapons development currently runs towards: guided missiles, light armored vehicles, upgrades to existing equipment - I would add recon UAVs of the 30-80kg take-off-weight class
* Our primary source in armored vehicles should be relatively regional, allowing for train transport without touching "hostile" ground - another point of political concern we should discuss
Political thoughts:
Absolutely necessary is to mend our relations with Orange as soon as possible. What we have is a country that has been a leading exporter of high-tech machinery. It's industry has been shed into 4 countries and tensions have led to loosing positions on the global market. That undoubtedly has led to a lower standart of living in all 4 countries but essentially in Orange. So we could win the hearts and minds (plus making considerable profits) of orange population if we provide orange heavy industry with components that were previously produced in our factories. That's one. Two is we could return weaponry to Orange. Of cource not to an extend that would considerably improve their military and would pose problems to ours, but take for example the Alouettes, Jagdkanonenpanzer, etc. We don't need them, are introducing modern systems at their place. Same goes for the M110s in a year or two. If we are buying Smerch MLRS then we don't really need M110s and retaining them would be very costly. Of course we will provide the extended media coverage that would lead to some nice PR for us.
So we are going the Irish way: pro-EU and completely neutral towards NATO, which I totally agree. In that case we should have and enforce excellent relations with other neutral countries like Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Finland etc. and also to countries like France, the Netherlands, Belgium. That would improve very much our international standings. By the way how does our international recognition as a country stand?
So another political speculation is that of the split. Doesn't matter if violent or non-violent. We could assume that Great Britain and France were trying to avoid another possible yugoslav scenario in the heart of Europe by constraining Orange which would most likely mean that the current relations between the three countries are tense with Orange demanding immediate withdrawal of the foreign forces from its soil. In that case what would be the picture and are we wanting to house some of them?
I think I would make some modifications to the force structure.
The 3 tank battalions stay, with one in each of the two front-line mechanised brigades. The third would form a Feldersatzbataillon in the Heeresausbildungszentrum. That establishment would form a third mechanised brigade under the front-line mechanised division in case of war. So it will have to be as much identical as the other two as possible. In peacetime it will form soldiers in the combat branches like armoured troops, panzergrenadiers, jaegers, artillery etc. MBTs will be of only one type, naturally.
Combined with that we will be needing one type of AIFV and one type of APC.
My considerations about this would be:
- tracked AIFV (as it would undoubtedly cost more I prefer a brand new order)
- wheeled APC (I suggest a second-hand APC)
- It would be excellent if there is a possibility for a number of the wheeled APCs to share the turret of the AIFV, but I am probably asking too much.
So I would couple each front-line tank battalion with a tracked AIFV battalion and 2 wheeled APC battalions (one of them could/ would be a reserve unit)
In the Heeresausbildungszentrum next to the third tank battalion we could have
- 1 tracked AIFV battalion and 2 wheeled APC battalions
- 2 tracked AIFV battalions and 1 wheeled APC battalion
- 2 tracked AIFV battalions and 2 wheeled APC battalions
I leave the choice up to you. Anyway that leads us to a structure of:
- 3 tank battalions
- 3-4 tracked AIFV battalions
- 5-6 wheeld APC battalions
For cost reduction some of the wheeled APC battalions could be left as motorised infantry battalions with a more heavily militarised version of the main logistical truck type of the Blue army (armour plates, MG/ ATGM mounts etc.). The specialised army units will use a derivate of that customised vehicle. Converted into numbers I see this as:
- 130-150 MBTs
- 135-160 tracked AIFVs
- up to 350 wheeled APCs or
- some 160 wheeled APCs plus up to 350-400 customised "combat" trucks
- I don't see a need for an AT company at brigade level
The Gendarmeie would use the latter two types (or one of )
You have tempted me with mentioning the Pz.87. What is the possibility for a major arms deal with Switzerland around 1995? That would clear many of the problems we have, but I doubt that the Swiss would want to put their neutrality, especially concerning arms exports and especially for a customer at their border.
I am against the proposition of Tavarisch as he lists too much types and that contradicts my understanding that we should have one platform of a type.
Though I am in favour of him putting the BMP-3 on the table and that would be my choice for the tracked AIFV.
As for the wheeled APC i said it would be very good if we could mount some numbers of it with the turret of the AIFV (in our plans the BMP-3) and that leads us to the BTR-90 as the natural choice as it has been done already. But one the other hand I would go for second-hand swiss Piranhas to be refurbished domestically. I think that MTU is in Blue territory, correct? If so we could buy the Piranhas form Switzerland and produce new engines for them domestically, plus new electronics suite. That would save us some costs and employ our industry.
If a swiss deal is possible that would be the jackpot as we could strike a contract for:
- 40 second-hand Pz.87s and 140-150 upgrade packages for them
- the Piranha project I mentioned
- the additional M109 SPHs we need
- some MOWAG Eagle for the border guard (that would turn into scout units in wartime) and recon units
- helicopter pilot training
- possibly Oerlikon-Contraves AAA batteries
From Belgium we should be looking for any Gepards we coud get our hands on
From the Netherlands we should also be looking for Gepards and possibly for Leopard 2s if the swiss deal is not possible.
In case the swiss deal for second-hand Piranhas also doesn't go through and we settle for cheap second-hand tracked AIFVs a deal for finnish Patria SISU XA-200s is also possible, but I really don't know about such an option.
Another possible, (too) exotic source of artillery is South Africa.
Another possibility for APCs is second-hand french VABs.
Concerning air defence I would propose Italian ground-based ASPIDE batteries.
A possible deal could probably be signed with Russia:
- BMP-3s
- Uragan MLRS immediately or/ and
- Smerch MLRS a little bit later or
- Buk instead/ combined with the Aspide. If we go for S-300 (as I see we have written that off) we could dump the Aspide option and order Buks immediately.
- somewhat unclear are we gonna phase out the Leopard 2s? If yes we have two very tempting options for use a unified chassis for MBTs and SPHs:
-- T-80 and 2S19 MSTA 152mm if we don't stick to NATO 155mm standart (I don't understand why you consider the T-80 inferior.:unknown)
-- Challenger 2 and AS-90 if we insist on 155mm
Air Force
What was the reason for us to have both the ATR-42s and CN.235s, because I forgot that one and I would really stick to one type. Actually the Cn.235 is a military aircraft, has better rough airstrip performance and already has an ECM variant.
For the fixed-wing inventory I would:
- order 6 Bryzas immediately, the sooner they arrive the better. Then my pilots could gain experience on them. After they have flown them many, many flight hours for 18-24 months a selected group would proceed to the bigger transport aircraft. Any additional aircraft types will be ordered outside that 5 year period. 2 more Bryzas will be on option, to arrive with the CN.235/ ATR-42s if needed.
If we put the GBAD on hold then as soon as possible we should proceed with the plan for MiG-29.
In the helicopter inventory we buy 10 Bo.105s immediately and order 6+4 Mi-17s, first units to arrive in 2 years. Later on we order additional Mi-17s to fill the numbers you propose and add 4-6 more Bo.105s for spares. If possible we use a credit form the banks in Blue for the helicopters and start paying it off after 5 years.
Gendarmerie Spending
The Gendarmerie is budgeting 150 million towards procuring some 50 to 60 armoured vehicles of an identical type to the Army. Another 150 million are budgeted for lighter patrol vehicles, and 10 million are planned for heavy weapons for their wartime combatant role.
I agree on that.
Procurement Notes:
* Unarmored vehicles can and will be completely locally sourced - agree
* Any and all electronics equipment can be sourced locally -agree
* Local startup weapons development currently runs towards: guided missiles, light armored vehicles, upgrades to existing equipment - I would add recon UAVs of the 30-80kg take-off-weight class
* Our primary source in armored vehicles should be relatively regional, allowing for train transport without touching "hostile" ground - another point of political concern we should discuss
Political thoughts:
Absolutely necessary is to mend our relations with Orange as soon as possible. What we have is a country that has been a leading exporter of high-tech machinery. It's industry has been shed into 4 countries and tensions have led to loosing positions on the global market. That undoubtedly has led to a lower standart of living in all 4 countries but essentially in Orange. So we could win the hearts and minds (plus making considerable profits) of orange population if we provide orange heavy industry with components that were previously produced in our factories. That's one. Two is we could return weaponry to Orange. Of cource not to an extend that would considerably improve their military and would pose problems to ours, but take for example the Alouettes, Jagdkanonenpanzer, etc. We don't need them, are introducing modern systems at their place. Same goes for the M110s in a year or two. If we are buying Smerch MLRS then we don't really need M110s and retaining them would be very costly. Of course we will provide the extended media coverage that would lead to some nice PR for us.
So we are going the Irish way: pro-EU and completely neutral towards NATO, which I totally agree. In that case we should have and enforce excellent relations with other neutral countries like Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Finland etc. and also to countries like France, the Netherlands, Belgium. That would improve very much our international standings. By the way how does our international recognition as a country stand?
So another political speculation is that of the split. Doesn't matter if violent or non-violent. We could assume that Great Britain and France were trying to avoid another possible yugoslav scenario in the heart of Europe by constraining Orange which would most likely mean that the current relations between the three countries are tense with Orange demanding immediate withdrawal of the foreign forces from its soil. In that case what would be the picture and are we wanting to house some of them?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #216
A few notes that i've collected. Things that we can not influence, but that will give some background.
Regarding Heavy industry, we have in major, possibly defence-related players:
Regarding power production, as i said we're an energy exporter:
- total production: 11,000 MW
- local usage: 3,250 MW
- energy mix: 61% nuclear, 36% coal, 3% water power
- typical export to Green 1: 2,300 MW
- typical export to Green 2: 5,450 MW
- nuclear fuel supply: from France.
Higher education situation:
- we currently have 3 universities, 6 colleges and 3 specialized tertiary schools.
- current capacity is to low to satisfy demand (by about 15%)
- focus in education is engineering, business.
Regarding Heavy industry, we have in major, possibly defence-related players:
- National Branch of Daimler-Benz; 6 major plants with 32,000 employees; production capacity 200,000 cars, 40,000 trucks per year; full truck line, sole Unimog production facilities, diesel engines, engine parts.
- BASF: main chemical production facility; 35,000 employees out of a worldwide 100,000, with an annual turnover of some 60 billion dollar
- MiRO: large refinery; production: 5 million tons gasoline, 7 million tons diesel/oil, 2 million tons other oil products per year; largest oil and liquid product storage facility in Germany (5 million tons)
- KS: machinery parts, aluminium and steel mills (4 plants)
- ABB: electronics, machinery parts; powerplant production (3 plants)
- IKWA: defence company with extensive know-how for land mine technology
- AIM: defence company specializing in infrared sensors for missiles and drones
Regarding power production, as i said we're an energy exporter:
- total production: 11,000 MW
- local usage: 3,250 MW
- energy mix: 61% nuclear, 36% coal, 3% water power
- typical export to Green 1: 2,300 MW
- typical export to Green 2: 5,450 MW
- nuclear fuel supply: from France.
Higher education situation:
- we currently have 3 universities, 6 colleges and 3 specialized tertiary schools.
- current capacity is to low to satisfy demand (by about 15%)
- focus in education is engineering, business.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #217
Let's walk through the ideas...
[Mechanized Brigades]
Well, we have three brigades. We'll just designate one a training brigade, and attach some schooling facilities.
[APC/AIFV]
I of course did some thinking about the number stated. For that money we basically have the choice between a unitary outfit with souped-up new Piranha (III), or a mix of wheeled/tracked vehicles which would need to be bought used.
Some prices for consideration: Then-current tracked IFV run around a unit cost of 4-5 million; new wheeled APC/IFV run at around 1.5-2 million. Refurbished and reasonably adapted BTR-80 could be had for half a million, BTR-90 would run around 1-1.5 million. The above 4 million number is also valid for BMP-3M btw; older standard BMP-3 would run around 3 million.
[Number of infantry btl]
One problem we're facing there is the cap on overall soldiers for active forces. With six infantry battalions (two per brigade), we're at about our maximum. Perhaps 1-2 additional battalions would be sustainable within the cap.
I've done a rough calculation regarding vehicles for that - with 6 btls that would be around 320 for the infantry, but don't forget we have to outfit other forces as well with an APC; recon, AT, command, support and medical vehicles. Sans the Gendarmerie forces, we're looking at around 500 armored transport/fighting vehicles there for the Army.
[Suppliers/Systems]
Switzerland wouldn't have any problems delivering to Blue and Green 2. Green 2 will likely procure around 40-50 F-5E/F from Swiss stocks, replacing their RF-4E and building up a pilot training capability that we might also use now or in the medium-term future.
MTU is in Green 1 territory, but we have Daimler (which has e.g. refurbished M113 before with new engines produced in Blue).
A Swiss deal would indeed look rather sweet. France is indeed another big option, and perhaps a good source to turn to for developing our gendarmerie.
As for SAMs... not that there's really any options on the table for long-range missiles (yet) - we can't buy Patriots, and, like S-300, they'd be far too pricy anyway. A single S-300PMU-1 battery would be around 100 million. Buk would look good i'd say, and that's really a case where we should go with some quantity for our money if possible.
Leopard 2s are there to stay. We can't really replace 100 units at the moment - even with Russian technology that would be half a billion at least.
We should keep "NATO ammunition" due to possible collaboration in peace- and wartime with Allied Green 1 and Green 2 in my opinion. Would support Uragan MLRS
[Aircraft]
Iirc: CN.235 as our "military" heavy aircraft (with ramp etc), the ATR-42 e.g. for VIP and passenger flights, as well as logistics transport and similar. Plus the ATR-42 are cheaper, and could even be picked from the market as leases.
Agree with the M-28, as an order of 6 with 2 options, as well as the Bo-105/Mi-17 mix.
[Politics]
We should try to bind primarily the bordering region (Hessen-Rheinland) within Orange somewhat to us. Could be done through such things as some export benefits.
At the same time, we shouldn't forget to woo our Allies in Green 1 and Green 2. Green 2 in particular can easily be made fully dependant on our energy exports. Weaponry could go that way too.
Agree with attempting something like the "Irish Way". Our international standing is relatively good: through Green 1, we have managed to maintain good relations with Russia; France also supports us, whereas the USA would have bailed out of Germany and "local politics" quickly "in light of post-Cold-War changes". We'd be on track to becoming a full UN member within the first 6 months of this 5-year-plan, and like all other "former German" countries hold some sort of observer status with the EU for the moment.
As for the split... let's see... happened peacefully. Say similar to the 1993 Czechoslovakia split, but somewhat higher tensions - perhaps some small outbreaks of localized violence here and there? Orange would definitely have been curtailed quite a bit in its reactions by the former occupation powers.
Possibly, the original 2+4 treaties could have been delayed somewhat and tied into the split; instead of transferring occupation forces into NATO allied forces, these international forces could have played some security function in a transition period, with withdrawal by 1994/1995, and all four "ex-German" countries involved in sovereignty deals with the Allies.
[Mechanized Brigades]
Well, we have three brigades. We'll just designate one a training brigade, and attach some schooling facilities.
[APC/AIFV]
I of course did some thinking about the number stated. For that money we basically have the choice between a unitary outfit with souped-up new Piranha (III), or a mix of wheeled/tracked vehicles which would need to be bought used.
Some prices for consideration: Then-current tracked IFV run around a unit cost of 4-5 million; new wheeled APC/IFV run at around 1.5-2 million. Refurbished and reasonably adapted BTR-80 could be had for half a million, BTR-90 would run around 1-1.5 million. The above 4 million number is also valid for BMP-3M btw; older standard BMP-3 would run around 3 million.
[Number of infantry btl]
One problem we're facing there is the cap on overall soldiers for active forces. With six infantry battalions (two per brigade), we're at about our maximum. Perhaps 1-2 additional battalions would be sustainable within the cap.
I've done a rough calculation regarding vehicles for that - with 6 btls that would be around 320 for the infantry, but don't forget we have to outfit other forces as well with an APC; recon, AT, command, support and medical vehicles. Sans the Gendarmerie forces, we're looking at around 500 armored transport/fighting vehicles there for the Army.
[Suppliers/Systems]
Switzerland wouldn't have any problems delivering to Blue and Green 2. Green 2 will likely procure around 40-50 F-5E/F from Swiss stocks, replacing their RF-4E and building up a pilot training capability that we might also use now or in the medium-term future.
MTU is in Green 1 territory, but we have Daimler (which has e.g. refurbished M113 before with new engines produced in Blue).
A Swiss deal would indeed look rather sweet. France is indeed another big option, and perhaps a good source to turn to for developing our gendarmerie.
As for SAMs... not that there's really any options on the table for long-range missiles (yet) - we can't buy Patriots, and, like S-300, they'd be far too pricy anyway. A single S-300PMU-1 battery would be around 100 million. Buk would look good i'd say, and that's really a case where we should go with some quantity for our money if possible.
Leopard 2s are there to stay. We can't really replace 100 units at the moment - even with Russian technology that would be half a billion at least.
We should keep "NATO ammunition" due to possible collaboration in peace- and wartime with Allied Green 1 and Green 2 in my opinion. Would support Uragan MLRS
[Aircraft]
Iirc: CN.235 as our "military" heavy aircraft (with ramp etc), the ATR-42 e.g. for VIP and passenger flights, as well as logistics transport and similar. Plus the ATR-42 are cheaper, and could even be picked from the market as leases.
Agree with the M-28, as an order of 6 with 2 options, as well as the Bo-105/Mi-17 mix.
[Politics]
We should try to bind primarily the bordering region (Hessen-Rheinland) within Orange somewhat to us. Could be done through such things as some export benefits.
At the same time, we shouldn't forget to woo our Allies in Green 1 and Green 2. Green 2 in particular can easily be made fully dependant on our energy exports. Weaponry could go that way too.
Agree with attempting something like the "Irish Way". Our international standing is relatively good: through Green 1, we have managed to maintain good relations with Russia; France also supports us, whereas the USA would have bailed out of Germany and "local politics" quickly "in light of post-Cold-War changes". We'd be on track to becoming a full UN member within the first 6 months of this 5-year-plan, and like all other "former German" countries hold some sort of observer status with the EU for the moment.
As for the split... let's see... happened peacefully. Say similar to the 1993 Czechoslovakia split, but somewhat higher tensions - perhaps some small outbreaks of localized violence here and there? Orange would definitely have been curtailed quite a bit in its reactions by the former occupation powers.
Possibly, the original 2+4 treaties could have been delayed somewhat and tied into the split; instead of transferring occupation forces into NATO allied forces, these international forces could have played some security function in a transition period, with withdrawal by 1994/1995, and all four "ex-German" countries involved in sovereignty deals with the Allies.
What fun. I've been going through this thread and the hypothetical country has a remarkable resemblance to the Midtguardian defence system (actual H0 scale) Especially the armoured brigade has major simularities.
What about AH 1 HueyCobras? Buy as current a version as we can get our hands on, if possible the S, equip it with TOWII or HOT missiles. Cheap, reliable, fast and easy to maintain (it's a Huey, for ** sake) Midtguardia has 13. Nice machine.
Also, the big river in combination with the need for MBT deployment is a challenge. The 7 (or was it 9?) bridges is obviously a problem. Why not consider Alligator bridge layers. Very quick and flexible. 12 vehicles would probably be just the ticket. 2 units make a ferry capable of transporting a Leo, or you can put them all together in one bridge, assembled og disassembled much faster than a traditional pontoon bridge.
I worry about air-defence. I agree with the suggestion about adding additional Gepards, but I also like the Roland system. The Hawk is very cumbersome to deploy.
It would be quite interesting to see how a conflict with Midtguardia would turn out, the countries defence rescources seemingly of much the same size. (For info, see the Midtguardia thread on general defence)
What about AH 1 HueyCobras? Buy as current a version as we can get our hands on, if possible the S, equip it with TOWII or HOT missiles. Cheap, reliable, fast and easy to maintain (it's a Huey, for ** sake) Midtguardia has 13. Nice machine.
Also, the big river in combination with the need for MBT deployment is a challenge. The 7 (or was it 9?) bridges is obviously a problem. Why not consider Alligator bridge layers. Very quick and flexible. 12 vehicles would probably be just the ticket. 2 units make a ferry capable of transporting a Leo, or you can put them all together in one bridge, assembled og disassembled much faster than a traditional pontoon bridge.
I worry about air-defence. I agree with the suggestion about adding additional Gepards, but I also like the Roland system. The Hawk is very cumbersome to deploy.
It would be quite interesting to see how a conflict with Midtguardia would turn out, the countries defence rescources seemingly of much the same size. (For info, see the Midtguardia thread on general defence)
metalkat 77
New Member
About your hypothetical situation
Well you put this situation in a Cold War secuence but what is your point one of this nation or a few one began to take an hostil atitude against their neighboors or became some problems for the control of some resources in the every nation where are you going with that probally another memebers which are probiding their knowledge could help me to understand in what direction is going thank you.
Well you put this situation in a Cold War secuence but what is your point one of this nation or a few one began to take an hostil atitude against their neighboors or became some problems for the control of some resources in the every nation where are you going with that probally another memebers which are probiding their knowledge could help me to understand in what direction is going thank you.