R&D OOC

<Insert witty comment here>

So, can I make 2 threads in R&D? one for military projects and the other for space and civilian project.

I know I plan to do it, because Roscosmos requires a separate thread. So go ahead. If it becomes a problem we'll just merge them.

They wouldn't be the organs harvested from Haiti would they OnceNDone?!

TheMan, it will take you a lot longer to get a functioning SRBM.

Alright, I was debating back and forth about what timeline to use. I figured I could cut it a little shorter since it's essentially the same thing as my old missile, but I'll throw some extra time up there.

Thanks for the heads up.

Hows that look?

This post has been edited by Argentina (TheMan) on 10 Mar 2012 00.13.25

It's much more realistic. I'll leave the final decision to the milmods. It's their sandbox.

But I will say that missiles are your best bet in a renewed Falklands conflict. You're definitely doing the smart thing by procuring them. You may want to consider the acquisition of some naval batteries in the short-term, though. Russia has a few particularly nasty missile platforms you might be able to use.

And if you wanted to reinvade the Falkland Islands...you COULD also take my offer for FA-50s

Well, I don't intend to invade the Falklands, so...

Yeah, unless you get approval from the players you're borrowing from, that doesn't cut it. We actually put it down in the rules for the first time, that you need permission to use other people's R&D projects. Hence why I have yet to steal Schwer's projects this time around.

I am sure you can secure blanket approval from some of them at least, if not you're just going to have to ask per project.

I can't speak on behalf of all of those projects, because some are Schwer's (in a manner of speaking), some are mine (obviously), and some are from the plethora of other players who were appointed to military affairs on my tenure (Surfinbird, Skye, and X).
The vast majority of projects are RL planned things without specifics anyhow (LRASM, OH-58, Humvee replacement, GBU-53 and others). The more questionable items (ETC, railguns, lasers) should be independently researched and implemented.

Wouldn't New Zealands ANZAC Class MidLife Update be done in Australia, where the ships were built?

It would probably have to be that is more advanced than the basic drydock their Navy has and since the closure of Tenix's small yard there is nowhere else that can take them.

I read somewhere that Russia wants to crack down on illegal AK variant producers... I think the FSB needs a new unit. I shall call it RIAA. Or MPAA

At some stage or another a license probably was purchased, from what I can read up on Suriname's military - which is all over the place, the AKM was produced somewhat locally and was bought of Russia, China have since provided some small arms including the Type 56.

It would probably have to be that is more advanced than the basic drydock their Navy has and since the closure of Tenix's small yard there is nowhere else that can take them.

I wasn't aware of the lack of facilities at the New Zealand drydock. I shall alter my post accordingly, assuming Australia has no problem with upgrading my vessels.

It would probably have to be that is more advanced than the basic drydock their Navy has and since the closure of Tenix's small yard there is nowhere else that can take them.

I wasn't aware of the lack of facilities at the New Zealand drydock. I shall alter my post accordingly, assuming Australia has no problem with upgrading my vessels.

Give up sovereignty to Australia and your ships will be be armed with death rays

OnceNDone, I think you'll be waiting alot longer to deploy operational lasers and paying way more for them and for the Arrow which is allegedly under threat from funding cuts on America's part.

I was actually thinking about doing a laser based air defence weapon.
But thought a missile based system would be easier..

Actually, Northrop Grumman has claimed that with an investment of $180 million they could have it ready in 18 months, though being an American I doubt they would be able to meet that. However Israeli military officials have rejected it in favor of the Iron Dome, which has become a prestige project which is really completely useless for anything but throwing money at the rockets.

He will however have to get American approval IC (FMS request would probably suffice) and potentially American funding (same).

I'll also rule it wouldn't be ready for production until late 2014 due to American inferior... Eh, I mean American projects like this loving to go over-budget and over-time. As for its cost, I won't make a statement and defer that to CSJ's superiority.

All his other military projects are RL projects and have fairly realistic dates, except the Merkava Mk. V, which has no details. Depending on what features he wants on it, its IOC shouldn't present a problem.

Continuing on my rant on the Iron Dome, it is a perfect example of why missiles are horribly uneconomical for point defense systems unless you're protecting something expensive (Like a ship, and even then, there is a reason we have gun-based CIWS).

Cost of an Iron Dome battery: $40 million or more
Cost of a single Tamir interceptor: $50,000 or more
Cost of a Quassam Rocket: $800 or less

As you can see, Israel is paying 60 times more for every intercept. And that is assuming they hit every time, which may be a given against a simple Quassam Rocket, but not against an ICBM. This is the same as things scale up to ICBM levels (Hence why ABM really doesn't work against large attacks). On ICBMs it is significantly cheaper to just stuff it with countermeasures, decoys and other PenAids and it will be impossible to resist it. The R-36 missile carries 10 800kt warheads and 40 decoys that each appear to be a single warhead. This in addition to other countermeasures. This essentially means that it would be as hard to intercept as more than 50 warheads.

Lasers make this far more economical. A single firing of the Skyguard system is expected to cost around $1000, which is only $200 more than the rockets it is going to intercept.

tl;dr: Missiles may be easy, but are horrible and will murder your economy (not really, but they do cost more to use)

Probably one of the major problems of copying R&D posts verbatim, is said copier essentially does not own the project, and subsequently has zero idea of what it is his project does, meaning said copier could be selling himself short without added research into projects, and more importantly, should pay attention as to when his projects come on line.

Is that a specific hint that we have missed something or just a note, we have been trying to seive through all programs carefully to make sure we don't get caught out and are only really doing those that are essential.

A few hundred pounds of steel hurtling through the air at high subsonic speeds is still going to cause all manner of damage.

Is that a specific hint that we have missed something or just a note, we have been trying to seive through all programs carefully to make sure we don't get caught out and are only really doing those that are essential.

If you want to wait at least four to six years to get IOC of new air to ground missiles, go for it, but they should definitely be superior to what Russia offers for something Russia is doing in half the time. Otherwise, you'd be wasting your time to try and compete for international orders. I'd also suspect earlier integration with the F-35 would be an interest for having the JAGM and JDRADM developed faster. Plus, I don't want to have to wait that long for them either

So bring the AGM-180 to 2014ish timeframe and the AGIM to 2015 so it is ready for F-35 service before the F-35s come online.