[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/k/ - Weapons



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: military.jpg (285 KB, 1204x621)
285 KB
285 KB JPG
What are the most practical performers on the modern theaters of war? Both theoretical conflicts and active.

From firearms to vehicles to platforms to tech to all forms military innovation. Expensive and economic. New and revolutionary, old and trustworthy.

What would most likely deserve the honorable mentions? What is going to impress and do its job exceptionally well?
According to your own personal impression from all the lurking and studying!

BONUS:
Flukes and failures too, if you want to go the extra mile.
>>
Things that I consider well performing elements:
- Mobile and flexible artillery (e.g. self-propelled howitzers and mortar platforms like M109A7)
- Drone spotting and intelligence technology (both large and small, T-Hawk and Global Hawk)
- Air superiority is still huge, so the 5th generation fighters as well as some old but good performers (like F-22 and F-15)
>>
Amphibiosity.

And thus the "nobody plans for opposed landing" meme is dead.

LPDs, LHAs, LHP, LHDs all are major navy meta. A huge number of nations are putting their entire weight behind gaining amphibious capability and by 2030 we're going to see the high point in the number of players who can land forces either in their own region or well beyond it.
>>
>>36086453
Oh yea, and carrier groups by extension. Both being able to make a beachhead AND able to support it nearby from the sea gives a strategic advantage.
>>
The rifleman, he still is very viable
>>
>>36085478
Air force and missiles.
They allow you to drop fuckhuge amounts of ordinance on a target without even needing a permanent presence there.
As long as you have carriers and a navy worth twelve cents you can get a ballistic missile or jet anywhere in the world and there is VERY little that can stop it.
In the event of a third world war, if nukes aren't immediately deployed, the ballistic missile WILL be the dominant weapon of war.
>>
>>36086492

Yeah, carrier groups are the next mental step after amphibious.
>>
If you're not running a Nimitz class carrier as your main you're doing it wrong
don't even bother trying PVP if you're not this badass

>weighs a literal fuckton (100k tons)
>over 1000 feet long (actual size of my cock)
>has goddamn nuclear reactors
>no max travel distance debuff
>tanky as fuck to begin with, but supplemented by a strike group bonus aura (bring your friends to battle)
>didn't spec into heavy fixed weaponry, opting instead for offensive strategy of 90+ deployable aircraft

limitations
>water based class is slow, even with deployables some desert PVP arenas are out of range
>needs massive crew resource
>expensive to build and maintain
>>
>>36086549
It wont be. They're too expensive to be the main damage dealer, even USA and Russia dont have them in large enough numbers to use them for anything but the most highest priority targets. A couple of hundred pounds of ordnance per missile can only do so much.

Flyboys have their role too but it'll be the man with a rifle who will drive or walk in and rise the flag. Only total nuclear war makes infantry nearly obsolescent.
>>
Missiles, drones, electronic warfare, aircraft, cyber weapons. Maybe ships.
Everything else is fodder
>>
>>36085626
>old
>F-22

Are you disabled
>>
>>36087503

The F-22's design is 25 years old.
>>
>>36087524
Damn. Where did the time go
>>
>>36087524
The F-22 literally entered service in 2005 and has consistent updates ever since.

Side note: 25 years is nothing for military equipment and there's not a single operational system that compares to the Raptor.
>>
>>36087558
Old is relative, but it's enough that Penetrating Counter-Air has a reasonable chance of being its replacement development program of note.
>>
>>36087558
Well. The F35 kinda comes to mind.
>>
>>36087588
There were plans to replace the F-22 with a sixth gen before it even entered service. A replacement program that'll fall through like every US program isn't grounds to call something outdated.
>>
>>36087605
The F-35 is hardly in a position to be called operational in any meaningful sense. IOC means training pilots and bouncing rocks out of the engines.

It should also be noted that the F-35 and F-22 fill different roles and complement each other, the F-22 is still the better air superiority craft and/or interceptor in a supported environment.
>>
>>36087621
It's not the fact that a replacement program is planned, it's that they're actually starting the one that should actually be it. They're already late, though.
>>
>>36087663
There are 230. I think that's hardly IOC. Sure there are probably upgrades and bs that still needs to be worked out but that happens with everything.
>>
>>36087678
What do you think IOC means? Because there could be thousands of the fuckers but if there aren't trained pilots for them and new AMRAAM's to put in them and license agreements clicked on to start their GPS's up they aren't ready for primetime.
>>
>>36087665
Who said that this one would be it? Who said it was starting? Even articles published in August admit that requirements haven't even been set yet.
>>
>>36087741
>Who said that this one would be it? Who said it was starting? Even articles published in August admit that requirements haven't even been set yet.

General Holmes did. I guess I jumped the gun by saying it's "started," but they all have begun as an exploration of requirements before they start formally soliciting bids from contractors.
>>
>>36085478
Intellegence is literally everything

Beyond that you want precision munitions and special forces so you can act on your intellegence

Literally everything else is better handled by local allies then your actual military

Next gen fighters are cool but theyre so expensive no one actually wants to use them or get into conflicts that would put them at risk. Armored vehicles are pretty much only for self defense at this point, if your putting significant amounts of your own troops on the ground your doing it completely wrong.

Aircraft carriers are probably the only big worthwhile investment, other than that you just need some sof, helicopers, a few planes and precision munitons. If your intellegence network is good enough there really isnt anything more you could need.

Drones and satelites are great to have but nothing beats on the ground humint
>>
Current meta is to buy everything from China..
>>
>>36087804
I thought it was if you play as china to buy everything from other countries and learn to reverse engineer it thus reducing the amount needed to be spent in domestic services




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.