JP: Missiles Toki vs. Riponia
please note that i have 550 different anti-air platforms. I also have missile racks that are very capable of destroying incoming missiles, bombs, etc.
Err... no. If Tokidoki had produced the kind of document that Alexandria had, then that would be valid, but there is no evidence to say that they have.Then there are the defenses in Hamuji (you guys get them, so do we).
Stinger missiles are effective up to a maximum altitude of about 14,500 feet (IIRC). Smedleyhead's planes were flying higher. Much higher. When you're dropping 60 tons of bombs, it hardly makes a jot of difference whether it's cloudy or not.and how accurate is said bombing, if it is over 8 miles up? thats well above many clouds, which would hamper bombing accuracy severely, and if there are no clouds, my troops can see the planes clearly, and destroy them.
Given the quantity of bombs dropped, that's totally unrealistic, there is no anti-missile/bomb/whatever system in the world as effective as that.but i will say that a few bombs do get through- so my casualties: 10 M1097 Avenger destroyed, 1 longbow destroyed, 5 longbows damaged and under repairs, 5 RAM launchers damaged and under repairs. Hamuji takes minor structural damage to several buildings
Oh, and regarding your RAM launchers, here's something you might want to take into account:
From the RAM's wikipedia page, and from the Raytheon website itself:The weapon cannot employ its own sensors prior to firing so it must be integrated with a ship's combat system, which directs the launcher at targets. On US ships it is integrated with the AN/SWY-2 and Ship Self Defense System combat systems.
So, yeah, there's a reason RAM systems are only ever used on ships, they can't be used without them. You're welcome to have them on land if you want, but they'll not do anything more than sit there and look pretty . I suggest you alter your casualties in the upwards direction.The Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Guided Missile Weapon System is the world's most modern ship self-defense weapon.
[...]
The weapon system has been designed for flexibility in ships' integration, with no “dedicated†sensors required.
- Lord_Montague
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:39 pm
-
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 6:42 pm
- Location: Wouldn't [b]you[/b] like to know.
Just like to add my input here:
[quote="Longbow Of Tokidoki]thats well above many clouds, which would hamper bombing accuracy severely[/quote]
When was the last time a pilot had to look out of a window to drop bombs? If clouds foiled the dropping of bombs then the UK would be immune. My planes know exactly where they are using GPS, so they don't need to see the target to bomb it, just know where it is, easily provided by other means, radar, infrared, intelligence to name a few. Now, unless clouds have some mystical bomb-stopping quality your argument carries no weight.
Well, I would like to bring your attention to the laws of physics. Now, in battle these laws are very useful because funnily enough they actually let you predict motion of objects, like bombs, and these laws of motion are used for low-altitude accurate bombing, and you might not believe it but these laws still apply even as high as 50,000ft. Now, say I want to drop some bombs on a target as large as an army, I would need to know where my plane is in relation to the target, how fast it is moving with relation to the target and how high it is; and probably the speed and direction of wind at the target. All this information is easily and accurately obtainable. Now, using calculations like vectors and SUVAT, I can calculate exactly when to drop my bombs. With computers capable of performing these calculations and timing the dropping of the bombs to the millisecond. All in all, high-altitude bombing is pretty accurate.Longbow of Tokidoki wrote: and how accurate is said bombing, if it is over 8 miles up?
[quote="Longbow Of Tokidoki]thats well above many clouds, which would hamper bombing accuracy severely[/quote]
When was the last time a pilot had to look out of a window to drop bombs? If clouds foiled the dropping of bombs then the UK would be immune. My planes know exactly where they are using GPS, so they don't need to see the target to bomb it, just know where it is, easily provided by other means, radar, infrared, intelligence to name a few. Now, unless clouds have some mystical bomb-stopping quality your argument carries no weight.
Well, bombs are designed to be aerodynamic, this means that when dropped they produce little air resistance, so due to gravity they accelerate all the way down (until they reach terminal velocity) which means they will be travelling shit fast when they enter range of your weapons, taking into account the time taken to see, target and fire against the bombs, destroying them would be very difficult, especially if you didn;t know they were coming, and bearing in mind the sheer number I dropped.Longbow of Tokidoki wrote:I also have missile racks that are very capable of destroying incoming missiles, bombs, etc.
Of course, Admiral DeMontford, just like Dugobert Wurmser could have modified his Sparrow air to air missiles when he fired them at your destroyers in the circum-raynor war. Could have.Lord_Montague wrote:He could have them modified so they use the radar pictures of other units?
http://www.riponia.org/smf/index.php?to ... 8#msg26748
Could have.
I am, of course, not being at all serious (although that was a highlight of circum-raynor, no doubt...). No, the Tokidokians said nothing of the sort. Those RAM systems cannot function when not integrated with a ship.
-
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:35 pm
um since there are two demons please reffer to us as North and East.
sorry if this is off topic but it needs to be said.
also im sorry if im being dense or somesuch but what is the ceiling altitude of the aircraft used in the bombing? and could they actually carry the number of weapons mentioned at such a highaltitude? the lack of air makes it harder to carry heavy loads without a plane designed specifically for the purpose.
sorry if this is off topic but it needs to be said.
also im sorry if im being dense or somesuch but what is the ceiling altitude of the aircraft used in the bombing? and could they actually carry the number of weapons mentioned at such a highaltitude? the lack of air makes it harder to carry heavy loads without a plane designed specifically for the purpose.
just my 2 pennies:
the bobcat MkIII is loosely based on the F-35 multi-role fighter/bomber.
if you check the wiki article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Light ... al_history you will see it is perfectly capable of carrying the amount of weaponry we use on it (if not more). in addition if you check http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35join ... ighter.cfm
you will see that it has an operational cieling of 50000 foot. so yes it is capable of what we have used it for.
Amos
DISCLAIMER: If wrong information is included here please ignore the ramblings of a confused noob.
the bobcat MkIII is loosely based on the F-35 multi-role fighter/bomber.
if you check the wiki article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Light ... al_history you will see it is perfectly capable of carrying the amount of weaponry we use on it (if not more). in addition if you check http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35join ... ighter.cfm
you will see that it has an operational cieling of 50000 foot. so yes it is capable of what we have used it for.
Amos
DISCLAIMER: If wrong information is included here please ignore the ramblings of a confused noob.
Oh, so you can destroy "all military and political targets'" in one fell swoop, but we have to painstakingly repeat the same attack manouveres over and over while some chump claims that the defences move around the city to dodge missiles, while simultaneously firing missiles back without restraint.
Well fiddle-dee-dee. I love that. Reminds me of the Irish. And clovers. And guiness. Ah, the Irish...
Well fiddle-dee-dee. I love that. Reminds me of the Irish. And clovers. And guiness. Ah, the Irish...
"I fought the law, and the law won..."Why is it me who always has to tell them to stop whining like kids?
There never were any city-wide defences though, so that's all right then, and if you're talking about the Alexandrians still, take it up with the Jugde who's already said that provision for these defences has to be made in orbats for this war, IIRC - ie. using a nation's participatory manpower.Sorongath wrote:Oh, so you can destroy "all military and political targets'" in one fell swoop, but we have to painstakingly repeat the same attack manouveres over and over while some chump claims that the defences move around the city to dodge missiles, while simultaneously firing missiles back without restraint.
Well fiddle-dee-dee. I love that. Reminds me of the Irish. And clovers. And guiness. Ah, the Irish...