Military FAQ thread

Finn McCool

Finn McCool

Captain
Registered Member
Fingolfin said:
Thank you very much for your information, Spartan95. You are aright, i also asked about the effects of the two types of warhead.

Now i come with another question, this time related with aircraft. Ive been reading a lot lately about tactics, maneouvering, capabilities...etc Everywhere they give utter importance to radar detection range in BVR combat to achieve 'first shot-first kill'.

1. What difference could make a E-2C Hawkeye in a BVR combat between two fighters?
2. Would the radar range of each aircraft be unimportant since they get the information from the hawkeye?
3. Would it allow a fighter with crappy radar and long range missiles to attack before it gets attacked by a superior aircraft with no hawkeye?

Don´t know if its a problem for you guys that i ask too often, but im really interested in warships and aircraft and this is the only place i know where people can really give proper answers to the stuff i cant find in the literature.
Click to expand...

I think I can help answer your questions:

1. Support from an Early Warning aircraft can make all the difference in air combat. In almost every historical instance in which aircraft with early warning support have gone up against aircraft that didn't, Early warning has been a really big advantage.
2. I'm not sure about this. I honestly don't know enough about data-linking and the capabilites of a big dish radar like that on a Hawkeye vs. the radar on a regular fighter. Mainly I'm wondering about linking up with missiles; I don't know if a fighter pilot could use info provided by an AEW aircraft to get a lock for a missile. But there's another important fact regarding radar ranges. Aircraft that have AEW support can leave their radars off and get info from the AEW plane, which makes them much harder to detect. Radar homing missiles and any sort of passive detection equipment will have a much harder time finding them, which is very significant.
3. Again, I'm not sure, but the answer is probably, mostly yes.
 
S

Scratch

Captain
With AEW radar arrays being bigger and having more power at their dispossal, ranges are generally (considerably) greater than those of a fighter radar. But AEW aircraft have to stay further from the fight, though, to avoid being easy prey for an enemy fighter sweep.
I'd say the big advantage of AEW is not so much in the radar range versus a signle fighter, but in the battle management capability. Being able to track hundreds of friendly and hostile fighters at any one time and then organizing the fight is really a great help.

No. 2 & 3 are really "it depends" answers.
The fighters can keep their radars in standby (no radiating of power that can be detected by an opponent) and be vectored to the target.
Then for the BVR shot there's some possibilities:
1.1: The fighter finds and tracks the target with it's own radar, then illuminating it for a SARH missile until impact; or feeding coordinates to an active missile that flies to the vicinity via INS, then turns on it's own radar
1.2: feed the active missile with data, fire it, continue to track the target with your radar, send updates to the missile until it gets active
2: rather new stuff. AEW tracks a target, sends data to the fighter vie e.g. Link 16, fighter uses that data to feed missile & fire like described above.

To my knowledge, there's no capability yet to fire a missile from a fighter that is then directly controlled by an AEW aircraft
 
O

Obcession

Junior Member
Two questions:

In the late 1700s and late-mid 1800s, if one side captured the other side's field artillery battery during battle, how did they disable the guns to make sure it couldn't be used again?

In the age of sail - how many cannoneers did ships carry? Say that a ship of the line has 100 guns, it can potentially fire only 50 on a broadside. So did the ship carry enough cannoneers for 50 guns or the whole 100 guns?

Thanks guys.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Obcession said:
Two questions:

In the late 1700s and late-mid 1800s, if one side captured the other side's field artillery battery during battle, how did they disable the guns to make sure it couldn't be used again?

In the age of sail - how many cannoneers did ships carry? Say that a ship of the line has 100 guns, it can potentially fire only 50 on a broadside. So did the ship carry enough cannoneers for 50 guns or the whole 100 guns?

Thanks guys.
Click to expand...

I don't think it was possible disabling field artillery short of stuffing so much gun powder down the barrel that they rupture the cannon firing it. Don't think they would have time disabling them during the heat of battle.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Mostly they would want to take the field guns home of course. Otherwise I have read that they blew of one of the trunnions, the cylindrical lugs that support the gun in the gun carriage. They might also have destroyed the gun carriages. But during the Charge of the Light Brigade, during the Crimean War, a Russian battery was overrun but little could be done but to go back, the brigade losing about halve of its men.

In the age of sail the gun crews consisted of about six men, depending on the size of the gun, for loading, running up, laying, firing and cleaning the gun. Most times only one side of the ship was fought, but a skeleton crew could prepare the guns on the other side, three or four men per gun. The missing men could at need come from the other side.
But I read about an incident in the late 18th century near the entrance to the Mediterranean when, according to an English book I read, a RN 74 passed between two Spanish 112's, firing to both sides. While the 74 left the 112's, in the smoke of the firing, continued to fire into each other and one or both ( I read it long ago ) got on fire and blew up.
 
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
The Idea of disabling guns is more a recent one, The Ability too mass produce cannons was limited before the industrial revolution and the creation of the assembly line as such in the most armies upon getting close too a enemy cannon they did not aim for it's breaking but rather it's use. Captured artillery was widely used by many armies. In the Cases of a Rout a retreating army tended too be the one aiming at the destruction of lost cannon.
As for the number of cannon men on a man of war before the advent of the gun Turret, First on the HMS Trusty (1855) first Deployed on the American USS Monitor. The Concept of ships engagements was the broad side. having the ship place it's hull length wise too the other ship and cutting loose with all it's guns. One crew for two guns. with the advent of the turret guns no longer needed too be doubled was removed although some still were "broadside Ironclads" eventually the turret proved more economical and logical. The Tactic of the Broadside remained though as it was the best way too place the most fire power on target. with the end of the dreadnaught and the rise of missiles now it's more or less a archaic concept.
 
K

kalel17

New Member
Good ebook on chinese military aircrafts?

Hi, does any one know of a good ebook on chinese military aircraft? Have been able to find a few including 1000 military aircraft in color but none of these contain any chinese aircraft. I am also looking for a good text book on aircraft design, lift calculation etc.
 
K

kalel17

New Member
Thanks for the lesson in grammar :)

Was also able to get my hands on an ebook magazine published monthly, think its called combat aircraft monthly.. none seem to contain chinese aircraft.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top