|
I was thinking about a SAM battery as well. We probably won't be able to buy a Patriot or S-300 battery. And stuff like Buk, the later Hawk variants etc are probably not super suited to what we need, in addition to no doubt being insanely expensive. I think we'll have to postpone the idea for the time being.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
I'm still against sinking so much of our spare cash into meteor missiles: We have 24 for now, and I don't think we need a 44 deep reserve, not as much as we need more good planes, which the 20 million would be better spent on. And I'm going to wait till Jack sobers up and gives us the full detail on what planes options we have before overly committing to one choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
The F-4 has a lot of commonality with what we have in inventory for the Gripens, they both use Paveways, Mjolnirs and the F-4s use a better version of the Maverick than what the Grips already have, the AGM-65G. I agree with power crystals, if we're already looking to replace the Sk60s, we should also try to offload them, perhaps to the American warbird market as I doubt we're going to find anyone else to operate them other than doctors who want to take a highway to the danger zone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to how future missions play out when we start going up against more capable assets. Put me in too Yooper, callsign Windmill. Any pilot spot (no WSO/ECMO/Nav etc  )Regarding sea operations, if we're absolutely dead-set on putting goons afloat once we're a little bigger, things like a used coastal patrol craft or 3 will be much more in our price range. Frigates have exorbitant costs, and we really don't need most of their functionality (i.e. missile sponge for a carrier group / torpedo sponge for more important ships) Dong Quixote fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Also about buying the Frigate. On top of crew costs, replacement parts and ammo we also don't have a fixed base of any kind as far as I know. Without a port to put our Frigate in we run the risk of losing it to enemy action, weather and just bad maintenance. I suggest passing on the Frigate for now but maybe we want to consider finding somewhere low-key to set up a permanent HQ for stuff like this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
low key, like an island with an active volcano
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:The problem with the FA-50 is that it's just a duplication of what we already have. I mean, we already have a light fighter in the form of the Gripen, what is the point of adding another one? More light fighters. If we're looking to add capability, more of the high end do most things planes does just that. It doesn't fill specialist roles, but if it's what we've got available, it's what we've got.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
It seems wasteful to me to spend a lot of money on an aircraft that doesn't add anything new to the fleet beyond raising the number of aircraft we have. At least with the Phantoms we'd be getting the ability to haul a lot of ordinance and still have respectable self-defence capability.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
I'm strongly against mixing NATO and Pact airframes, unless we can get a 100% bulletproof deal to guarantee munitions from both sides. If we can somehow get that, then frogfoots make a lot of sense. We need to stick to aircraft that are cheap to operate and that can be turned around quickly, we don't have a deep reserve here. On that note, if we get a chance to buy more gripens, we should jump on it. That first mission showed off how spectacularly great the S100B is. We got a free one from the Chinese this time, but in the future they're likely to target it. So from here on out, I recommend we always assign at least a 2-ship CAP directly to it, and that CAP should have meteors. I know it's expensive, but I doubt we'll get many chances to buy AWAC of any kind, so we need to keep this one. As long as we're fighting old poo poo like the J-8, we can stick to IRSTs, but as soon as anything like a peer shows up, we gotta switch to meteors. That will obviously cost a lot of money, but once the threat level goes up, we can demand more pay, so it should work out. I'm also slightly worried about being able to procure them in the long run. If we piss of the wong people (very likely) then the supply might dry up. The meteor has a decent claim on being the best bvr missile in the world, we want to be able to use them when the going gets tough. As for the SK60s, I say we set up a subsidiary in the US that lets rich people fly them around for way too much money. Finally, we should think about splashing around some cash for better intel assets, sat time, uavs, humint, etc. If we know where the bad guys have their manpads, we can use the SK60s risk free, for example. Yooper, does the gripen-ew/growler exist in this timeline, and if it does, who's dick does Jack have to suck to get us some. Also, this LP is great and you're great for running it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
  That is the inside of the Atlanta county jail. What, you ask, does that have to do with Hired Goons? Jack, Our Man in Washington, picked a fight with a stripper at one of Atlantas, erm, gentlemans clubs. Unfortunately for Jack this fine young woman was actually a man. By the time Jasmine finished kicking his rear end the Defense execs had left in the limo and Jack got a ride with the Atlanta Sheriff's Department. So I posted bail on his sorry rear end once he sobered up. On one condition. He finally tell us what the hell the air frames are. So, without further ado, here it is. Georgian Yak-130 Mitten 2010 http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/3952/ $7,000,000.00 / plane Qty 4 Indonesia Hawk 209 http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/4087/ $14,000,000.00 Qty 2 Indonesia SU-27SKM Flanker B http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/1700/ $21,000,000.00 1 (Not flight worthy. 5 million to repair, only 50% chance of success) Russian SU-25 Frogfoot A http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/2513/ $8,500,000.00 Qty 12 South Korean FA-50 http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/3183/ $13,500,000.00 Qty 3 Pakistan JF-17 http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/365/ $19,000,000.00 Qty 2 Greece RF-4E http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/1528/ $5,500,000.00 Qty 2 20% chance at each mission that plane will not be flight worthy Greece F-4E http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/2068/ $8,500,000.00 Qty 8 20% chance at each mission that plane will not be flight worthy Greece Sperwer UAV http://cmano-db.com/aircraft/2520/ $1,500,000.00 Qty 6 Jack is on his way back to Washington to check into some swanky hangover spa. I have all of the contacts to place the order. I don't think we can take delivery in time to make the next mission. So. What'll it be? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Halve the Meteor and IRIS buys on Barracuda's plan, that is a shitload of money and maybe keeping a bit of a low profile, doing some diplomacy stuff, or packing up and leaving for greener pastures are better bets than planning to fight off an entire fighter wing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Oooo we should TOTALLY grab some UAV's. Also, if we buy the Greek Phantoms, can we fix them up to remove the failure chance?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Oooo we should TOTALLY grab some UAV's. Also, if we buy the Greek Phantoms, can we fix them up to remove the failure chance? gently caress yeah. At that price we'd be good to go. Readiness issues aside, those F-4E's look good too. Shame those Flankers are beat to poo poo. Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Buy six F-4Es from the Greeks, that way we should be able to keep a consistent flight of at least four F-4s operating at any one time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
CMANODB apparently doesn't list maximum altitude? If the UAV can get above MANPADS altitude it'd be worth it, maybe. Otherwise at 100kt max they may be the only aircraft less likely to return than the SK60s. Given the high rate of failure on the F4s I'm not sure any of these aircraft (other than the UAVs) are worth our time. They're either mostly redundant or would necessitate two entirely separate sets of munitions. If we do go F4s, I vote at least one of the recons. It's a capability we don't have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
Not the Phantoms. The only thing unique to them is the AMRAAM and Sidewinders, and as we're looking to use these primarily as bombers, they're what we're after. We do have the reconnaissance pods on the Gripen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Agree, grab a UAV. Perhaps even two. Had we had a UAV for this last mission we could have scoped out the bridge beforehand and gotten some good intel on its defenses. The F-4s would be ideal for us. That 80% starting reliability is scary, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
The UAV should be able to stay out of Manpads range still just due to its sensors. We'd be using them to spot structure and moving targets I imagine. They'd be a valuable asset I think. Just saw the FA 50 can drop JDAMs. That's a possibly big deal. Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
The recon Phantoms seem like a kind of trash option considering we've got the Saab AEW&C plane and the potential to grab UAVs. Unless we're looking to build some redundancy. I'm no good with numbers, so could someone run the probability of all (or even just half) our Phantoms being out of action per-mission if we bought all 8 F-4Es? I specify all 8 since basically that'd be the best case scenario in terms of availability. If we want to be pessimistic/conservative then we may also want to evaluate the probabilities for a 4-ship of F-4Es? I dunno, I could just be retarded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
What's wrong with the FA-50's?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
According to the Baloogan wiki, the Sperwer has a worst case detection range of about 8.25 NM in the infrared spectrum. It's pretty much invisible to radar. Considering its sensors have a 30nm range, I think our cushion is reasonably safe. Edit: Plus a steal at 1.5m. sparkmaster fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
I call UAV operator 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:I'm no good with numbers, so could someone run the probability of all (or even just half) our Phantoms being out of action per-mission if we bought all 8 F-4Es? I specify all 8 since basically that'd be the best case scenario in terms of availability. If we want to be pessimistic/conservative then we may also want to evaluate the probabilities for a 4-ship of F-4Es? I dunno, I could just be retarded. Assuming I didn't gently caress this up, Wolfram Alpha claims 1/625 for 4 of them being down (all 8 is incredibly unlucky at 1 in 390,625 which means it should happen on the first mission we use them on). And ok I'm sold on the UAVs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Get the FA 50s and the UAVs. Also lets get a boat. I want to be in charge of the boat if we get a boat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
You could have called me, I'm in Atlanta, could have spared you the trouble. (also it's the Fulton county sheriff my immersion is ruined)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
power crystals posted:Assuming I didn't gently caress this up, Wolfram Alpha claims 1/625 for 4 of them being down (all 8 is incredibly unlucky at 1 in 390,625 which means it should happen on the first mission we use them on). Thanks. That's... better than I was expecting. Could you also check the probability of half of 4 F-4Es being down (since I doubt we're going to shell out for all 8)? As I said, I'd do it myself but I don't trust myself not to botch the calculation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
The UAVs are insanely short range if I'm reading that wiki page right.CirclMastr posted:What's wrong with the FA-50's? Kinda expensive while being kinda meh generally
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
The problem with that UAV is that it's slow as Christmas. It will need to be flying to target long before any other assets we use.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:Thanks. That's... better than I was expecting. Could you also check the probability of half of 4 F-4Es being down (since I doubt we're going to shell out for all 8)? It's just 1/25 (1/5*1/5) for two disabled Phantoms no matter how many you start with. Number of possible tests doesn't matter because the results don't depend on each other. I think. I hated statistics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
 Lets get 2 F-4 Phantoms for SEAD duty, 2 UAVs and 2 SU-25 Frogfoots. I know it's mixing munitions but a dedicated CAS platform could really come in handy and save us in fuel costs over using multi-roles fighters that have to head back and re-arm. First chance to buy ammo we stock pile munitions for the Frogfoots to assure we get decent usage out of them. Popete fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:The recon Phantoms seem like a kind of trash option considering we've got the Saab AEW&C plane and the potential to grab UAVs. Unless we're looking to build some redundancy. # of phantoms of 8 down: % chance 0: 16.777216 1: 33.554432 2: 29.360128 3: 14.680064 4: 4.58752 5: 0.917504 6: 0.114688 7: 0.008192 8: 0.000256 # of phantoms of 4 down: % chance 0: 40.96 1: 40.96 2: 15.36 3: 2.56 For reference I went to anydice, and input ( output [count 5 in 4d5] ) for the recce birds and ( output [count 5 in 8d5] ) for the baseline ones. 4,0.16 Now for the numbers where it's the odds of having at least that many planes: # of 4 phantoms needed: % chance 0: 100 1: 99.999744 2: 99.99155200000001 3: 99.87686400000001 4: 98.95936000000002 5: 94.37184000000002 6: 79.69177600000002 7: 50.331648000000015 8: 16.777216000000017 # of 4 phantoms needed: % chance 0: 100 1: 99.84 2: 97.28 3: 81.92 4: 40.96 This was just ( output [count {1..4} in 8d5] ) and clicking the at least button. Executive Summary: If we buy all 8 phantoms, we have a 98% of being able to put 4 in the air and 80% of being able to put 6 in the air If our question is how many to buy to be able to get a four ship in the air reliably, 4 planes gives a 40% chance, 5 a 73% chance, 6 a 90% chance, 7 a 96% chance, and 8 a 98% chance power crystals posted:It's just 1/25 (1/5*1/5) for two disabled Phantoms no matter how many you start with. Number of possible tests doesn't matter because the results don't depend on each other. I'm pretty sure it's #C2 * 1/5 * 1/5, but I don't remember stats and I cheat off anydice whenever possible because it's a much more robust tool than my knowledge. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
CBJamo posted:Yooper, does the gripen-ew/growler exist in this timeline, and if it does, who's dick does Jack have to suck to get us some. Also, this LP is great and you're great for running it. Not yet! As of now there is no Growler EW platform. I can't dig up any specs on what to expect, so I can't make a DB request. HannibalBarca posted:You could have called me, I'm in Atlanta, could have spared you the trouble. You know I saw that earlier and totally forgot. Attention to detail, right? I've seen a proposal to cut the IRIS and METEOR order in half along with various proposals for aircraft. Please help me and the others decide about your awesome proposal. Either bold your proposal, or stick the above proposal image on it. That way for more complex options people can just call out a vote for Proposal Goon-Fu or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Yeah, I'd have to vote against buying the Sperwer UAVs. They seem very limited in range just because they carry a tiny amount of fuel. Can someone do the math for me to find the range if I provide figures? 65kg of fuel carried. Fuel burn: 0.12kg at 65 knots 0.17kg at 95 knots 0.32kg at 100 knots
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Purchase all eight F-4Es Buy 10 Meteors and 10 IRIS-Ts
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:# of phantoms of 8 down: % chance Huh. I think you're right because yeah, the more of them you have the more likely it should be that any one fails. This is why I hated stats  e: I think mine is for two specific Phantoms to be down rather than any two anywhere in the fleet. Which is useless. Go with the fine goon above me who knows enough more about math than I do to be correct ^ My vote for weapons is the existing proposal with halved AA missiles because what on earth are we going to be facing that requires 44 Meteors onhand? Can't we only even get half of that in the air simultaneously? power crystals fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
I see a 270NM combat radius for the UAV. E: 2 UAV and 2 Frogfoot Splitting munitions sucks. It is going to complicate our logistics situation. But the Su-25 can carry an insane amount and variety of ordinance for the price. We are unlikely to face an all out war with the Chinese. We are going to get a reasonably permissive environment for our air ops, guarded by our advanced fighters and their fantastic missiles. We need a cheap, reliable bomb truck.The Su-25 fits that. Plus eastern block munitions are probably going to be cheap. sparkmaster fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
Sparkmaster, is that with any patrol time or is that a there and back trip with no loitering?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Are the Greeks willing to part with any ordnance for the Phantoms?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
Just piping in to say there may be another way to look at mixing NATO and Other planes: if you're not sure of who you might be pissing off in the future, it can be viewed as diversification.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
Purchase four F-4Es. This mostly guarantees we will be getting a flight of three up whenever we want to use them. Barracuda's ammo buy with halved Meteor and Iris purchases and deleted rockets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 02:13
|
|