Who CAN the Federation Ground Troops beat?

[Howedar]

the simple fact an AK-47 is a much supiror weapon in ROF, Accurasy, Range and Durability than the avarage Phaser

Rate of fire,yes.However if the US Army has replaced the full automatic mode of the M 16 with the three shots burst I think that they probably have a good reason to do so.

Yes, for longer range combat and to prevent ammo waste. However, the close combat version of the M-16, the M-4 carbine, has full auto capability IIRC.

Accuracy?Range? Well the AK-47 is not designed for long range combat,it is an assault rifle,like the federation phaser assault rifle is(i am referring to the federation phaser assault rifle seen in first contact,with shoulder stock and optical sight).

An AK would be good out to at least a couple hundred yards, far better than one could manage with a phaser.

Durability?We do not really know.However the AK-47 uses moving parts to function,while an energy weapon should not use them,thus making probably the federation phaser rifle more reliable.In theory.

Jesus holy Christ are you kidding me? The AK-47 is probably the most reliable automatic firearm ever built, one reason that it is still in service the world over after 50 years of service. As for the Federation weapons, they are considered tempermental and unreliable by Kira in (IIRC) "Return to Grace".

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

The Federation troops seen might be able to beat many pre-WWI armies, but not today's modern armies, let alone Stormtroopers.

Many Trekkies say that the Stormtroopers have lousy accuracy, they never mention that the Federation has neglected their ground forces, and Imperial weapons have used the ergonomically correct gun design that's been around for a long time on earth, with trigger guards, automatically discharging clips, and such. Because the Federation Hand Phasers lookj like an electric shaver and not the "primitive" deisgn of Imperial weaponry, some Trekkies say they must be superior.

[Admiral Piett]

Jesus holy Christ are you kidding me? The AK-47 is probably the most reliable automatic firearm ever built, one reason that it is still in service the world over after 50 years of service. As for the Federation weapons, they are considered tempermental and unreliable by Kira in (IIRC) "Return to Grace".[/quote]

Generally,it is a common fact the less moving parts there are in a thing,the more reliable it becomes.The AK-47 is more reliable than the other modern rifles and the bajorian phasers may be more reliable than the federal ones.This does not tell us much about federation phaser vs Ak-47.It may well be that the feds as usual have put their best efforts to make things worse (the infamous exploding control panels for example),thus their weapons may be less reliable than modern rifles.

[CmdrWilkens]

2) Those grenade launchers while perhaps having greater range than the phasers (most likely the case) show no signs of causing more damage than a tiny explosive charge and their sighting device in not conducive to actions against targets more than 330 yds/300 m distant, in other words they are outranged by the French 12 lbs guns.

From a theoretical point of view the Napoleonic cannon outranges the grenade launcher.But doing so it loses its effectiviness:the effects of long range fire against people are minimal,especially with such a small number of cannons.
Remeber also that the phaser assault rifle has a substantially greater rate of fire than the musket(the standard weapon for ALL the non èlite units of the time).
In an episode of the TNG they beamed down the majority of the starship's crew(they left the medical officer in command of the ship,so I think they had beamed down at least 700 people) on a planet, occupied by a few individualized borgs,for a search and rescue mission.They appeared to have a sort of small field headquarters,with some of the officers, computers,tables.
Thus they have at least a vague idea about how to cohordinate a few hundreds of men on the ground.The problem is that cohordinating them for a true battle is a different history.
The rest of you points are valid.They know Napoleonic tactics but probably the soldiers do not have the skills required for that type of warfare.However their weapons have a much greater rate of fire.Thus the french commander would need all his tactical skills to overcome the technological inferiority of his troops.

Rate iof fire is advantageous but again range becomes a factor. Yes the Feds can probably engage the ground troops of a Napoleonic army with great effectiveness but that Army is also going to be closing quickly. With the first volley fire at around 100 yds or so the Feds will most likely be just about as disoriented as might be expected and a good commander will have his lines staggered so that he can fire one, have them reload while a second and third line fire all for a continuous effect. Additionally those French troops of yours are skilled, in a way, at crossing the last distance to close combat range with the Feds and once inside the close combat range they are by far the superioir force with bayonets fixed teh Feds don't stand a chance.

Moreso the inclusion of mounted troops gives yet another advantage to the French in that they have a heavy formation specifically built to close distance quickly against an enemy capable of sustained fire from a defensive position. The calvary of that ea were almost purpose built for breaking the ends of lines and turning organized defenses into chaos...if they could turn the flank. In the case of operations against the Feds turning their flank shouldn't be hard at all.

Now getting back to the field HQ from Descent, that was a search and rescue operaiton, a far cry from a true military HQ. Any Police force worth squat knows how to set up such a search center but staffing it with officers who can take fragmentary data from a battelefield and apply it to the manuever of troops is an entirely different beast, it is a beast which we have never seen the Feds tackle before, they are used to operating with an overabundance of information and having time on their hands (enough to prepare cute simulations to show superior officers), in battle they have none of the luxuries they will be used to and that above all else will hamper the ability of the Fed commander to effectively manage his troops.

[Typhonis 1]

French Napoleonic troops are good for the 1812 period British troops are better,specially the ones Wellington commanded and trainded,the next group the Feds would hate to meet would have to be the US and CS armies from 1861 to185 these men had some advances tghat the Napoleonics didnt have .and imagine the look on a Feddys faces seeing what a mine ball can do

[User099]

The Empire would whoop the Fed's ass. The largest ground force I've seen featured in any Star Trek show was when the Defient's command crew was stranded on a planet with a squad of Jem'Hadar. Tactics included sitting on a hill and waiting for the enemy to walk up to them. They honestly wouldn't know what to do if they were staring down the barrel of an AT-AT. If they even HAD the command structure to plan such a tactic, they could theoritcally do very well in ground combat, however, given some advantages they'd have, such as transporter technology (since as far as I know, no Imperial ground jamming equipment exists) and their accuracy MIGHT be better than a Stormtroopers. In ST:I they were all shooting fast airborne targets with those pulse rifle things. And Stormtroopers missed Like while he was stationary, no more than 50 yards away, for like 10 seconds, with a bunch of stormtroopers firing at him.
Besides, its a negatable thing. Feds dont have any way to stop the empire from simply turbolasing whatever garrison they have into dust, plus I dont even think the Federation has any sort of mentionable ground-based military organization. The only time they even step foot on a planet is in "away missions"
But there is evidence of such, when the Feds and their allies visited Cardassia they were landing soldiers on planet, and in STI there was a 'transporter ship' which I dont see any other purpouse for other than doing just that, transporting stuff, although it may be mainly for cargo so who knows.

In summarization: I could beat the Feds in a ground battle, simply by asking them to leave because they're all pussies that'll wait until I'm kicking them in the ribs before they do anything, at which time it'll be too late.

[Doomriser]

Have any of you ever been on the receiving end on an artillery barrage? No, I don't think so, since you'd either be dead or traumatized. The Feds are accustomed to whining little phasers and silly disruptors. They are not accustomed to the flash, smoke, and huge roaring bang of artillery. The sound alone will produce a concussion and/or brain damage at a close enough range. Instead of their typical "laser tag" environment, the Fed ground force will be in a real battle situation with screaming cries of advancing enemies and the huge, morale and bone-shattering roar of artillery. We know how Bashir and Jake fared against the tiny, tiny Klingon mortars (less than the destructive effect of a 51mm mortar or a practise, non-lethal artillery simulator) and how Starfleet troops in general fare against screaming Klingons. How do you think they would react against huge cannons firing 75mm 12lb explosive shells, or worse, the really nasty anti-personnel shot that would shred their bodies apart like tissue paper instead of clean disruptor/phaser wounds or disentigrations. They would be terrified beyond belief.

[CmdrWilkens]

Have any of you ever been on the receiving end on an artillery barrage? No, I don't think so, since you'd either be dead or traumatized.

I think this is one of the most underrated parts of the Napoleonic army versus Fed army debates. Ground troop for ground troop the two are roughly even and it would come down to commanders but the Napoleonic artilery had the bad habit of dismembering peopel along with throwing out dust, smoke, noise, and other assorted crap. It would be an experience unlike anything the Feds have experienced before and, as you pointed out, given Bashir's reaction and the general "duck and shoot to keep my own ass alive" tactics of the Feds I think they'd be curled up in a little ball. They certainly would be reduced in effectiveness and unprepared to cross open terrain.

[Akm72]

since as far as I know, no Imperial ground jamming equipment exists

Even tiny Imperial speeder bikes have effective communications jammers, according to ROTJ! Imagine what capabilities the walkers and pre-fab garrisons have.

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

My money is on the knights. Have you ever tried to stop an armored charge? Esp. the English mounted cavalry, who were as feared as their longbowmen.

And about their longbowmen; an account reports an arrow going clean through chainmail, silk leggings, the rider's leg, and into the horse. How's that for power? Even an AK-47 can't match that (although the AK is optimized for use against people who wear bulletproof vests (which are not bulletproof indefinitely even against pistol calibre ammo)).

To be brutally honest, all the Feds have on their side are their transporter tech and their phasers, and we know how crappy their performance is. Of course, Data the superman will come and save the day.

In which case I introduce the helicopter gunship. Bute me, Feddies.

[Sea Skimmer]

The AK-47 predates modern body armor by over a decade. When it came out, infantry had nothing but a helmet, and flak vests where used only by bomber crews. I don't know about the later Ak-74, that might have had body armor in mind.

[Master of Ossus]

The AK-74 was designed with body armor in mind. There has been a move in all armies and special forces recently towards small weapons firing rifle-calibre rounds instead of using pistol caliber weapons in larger weapons (hence, the move to small assault rifles instead of MP's and other submachine guns). The AK-74 was designed to fire a smaller, faster round than the older and heavier 47.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

I don't understand why the Feds would be vulnerable to snipers if they know where everyone is. If they know where the Palestinians are, then they sneak up on them and avoid places where the Palestinians can shoot them. Also, people don't have to have years of experience just to be masters of urban combat. U.S. soldiers in WW2, Korea, Vietnam, (and other locations where soldiers fought for long periods of time) all adapted to their environments in less than a few months and were just as experienced as their enemies. Now you're questioning Palestinians' experience when they lived there and every day of their harsh lives since war broke out again they witness (and probably partake in) horrible acts of terrorism and violence that most of us will never see first-hand in our entire lives?? Of course they are a helluvalot more experienced than the Feds. I don't even consider Palestinians' competence in their own cities. But all of that experience doesn't mean much when they are compared to the tech-toys of the Feds; tricorders. It doesn't mean anything to our soldiers' night-vision goggles, infrared-vision, GPS, and all of our own tech-toys. It has been consistently shown that technology plays a major role in war. I'm not saying that if you take away all of this technology, our soldiers would be gun fodder. I believe we could outfight any enemy today even without our tech-toys on the battlefield with just good training, which we also have. Whatever, I'm veering off-topic. The point is that with these tricorders, the Feds have a major advantage that I haven't realized until I actually THOUGHT about it. Before, I just sorta went with the flow of the general bashing going on against the Feds. But after I THOUGHT about it, I realize these tricorders could save their asses.

[Anarchist Bunny]

I didn't know that tricorders could tell the difference between an armed palastinian and a sniper.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

What I'm trying to say is that it does not matter if the person is a sniper or a soldier. Just that they can tell that it is a Palestinian. They could just sneak up on anyone they want by avoiding clear lines of fire. Say a sniper was on a roof of a building and a bunch of his Palestinian friends were inside the building. The Feds don't have to know that the guy on top is a sniper to avoid his line of fire. All they have to do is look at where everyone is, go in the building, and sneak up on them in vulnerable spots. Like if the guys are hanging out inside a room next to a wall, the Feds go to a room adjacent to them, look at where they are, and then shoot through the walls. When they are dead, they look for the sniper, or other guy in their view, and then they shoot through the ceiling and kill him. What is so difficult about that? And the Palestinians can't see them. The Feds have that major advantage. At night, Palestinians are as good as dead.

[Admiral Piett]

I am not an expert but I think that what you are suggesting requires a certain amount of training.Would their training,probably focused on repelling
boarding parties on a starship,be useful in a urban combat situation?

[Mr Bean]

Nice thinking Joe EXCEPT for that silly Fact that Palestinean Snipers don't work Alone

OH and How would you get to the building in the first place
And what if the Sniper has friends(IE backup in the floor below him)
Second do Red-shirts even have that kind of Training?
Third what if you have a building by itself?
IE no buildings around it for a few blocks
What then?
Third this is of course Tricorders even work in the Urban area(Everything messes them up)
Heck the Palestieans could buy and mix up some Mg03(Think thats the right thing) Its about as commion as Limestone, Podwer it and rub thier clothes down with it because it kinda blocks Tri-corders

At night, Palestinians are as good as dead.

Palestininans have carried and often do carry IR equpment, Its cheap now-adays I can get Goggles for less than $100 now,

[Lusankya]

The feds'd have no idea where anyone was agains the Palestinians. If they just beamed into a city, half the people there would be noncoms, women and children. All the Palestinians would have to do is walk from building to building with babies hanging off their shoulders, and the Federation wouldn't do a thing to stop them.

Hell, the Palestinians could just about take out the enterprise. Imagine Dr Crusher.. "Oooh, we have to help this poor (child, woman, injured youth, insert your own suitable charity case here)" The moment they beam up, "Bang!" I imagine that Federation ship design would have a vital system passing through the transporter room. They're damned idiots with everything else they do, so why not that as well.

[GreenZXZ]

Well, if a large number of Somalian militia can squeeze off Army Rangers (ref. Black Hawk Down), I see no reason why a standard 1000 of any militia equiped with AK-74s, some sniper rifles, grenades, and rockets cannot take out 1000 of Federation red-shirts, most of whom have not even heard the sound that modern weapons can produce.

If it was a Federation assault into militia-held region of a city, the militia would win hands down because of sniper ability and demoralization. However, if the Federation manages to do something intelligent, splits up their force into fire teams, and beams them down into different buildings, then they can manage to put up a fight. One of the major advantages of the militia, their sniper range, would be greatly decreased. In the end, the Federation must depend on their tricorders being able to locate everyone and disabling all militia members. Because once their troops start coming under fire they lack the discipline to fight on in spite of the blood that they'll probably be stepping in.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Does ANYONE think the Federation can take an army of equal size from WWII on?

[Zoink]

Does ANYONE think the Federation can take an army of equal size from WWII on?

A typical fed team with say: phasor rifles, pistols, and a few of those fed "bazookas"

versus

A typical german unit with say: armed primarily with rifles, machine pistols, grenades; a number of machine guns & mortars; and a few light anti-tank and anti-infantry guns?


I'd give it to the WW2 crew.

[Pablo Sanchez]

A typical german unit with say: armed primarily with rifles, machine pistols, grenades; a number of machine guns & mortars; and a few light anti-tank and anti-infantry guns?

The Germans would beat the Feds down, thanks to their organic heavy weapons. The MG-42s, mortars, and infantry guns would make it all but impossible for the feds to beat them.

The biggest problem the Feds have is their lack of heavy weapons at any level. They have nothing besides their "Isokinetic Disruptor" for a squad-level heavy weapon. A Federation force has nothing but rifles, tac-air, and orbital support. Any reasonably equipped army from WWI forward would beat them, thanks primarily to their machineguns and artillery (However, I also contend that an American rifle company of 1900 vintage, armed with lever-action rifles and Colt-Browning machineguns, could beat a Fed infantry force of equal or greater size).

[Anarchist Bunny]

I don't think the feds couldn't beat any army from the point that the long bow was used effectively.

[Mr Bean]

However, I also contend that an American rifle company of 1900 vintage, armed with lever-action rifles and Colt-Browning machineguns, could beat a Fed infantry force of equal or greater size

And I'd agree with you there but then agian that was the problem when the origonal guy gets of the dope he was taking and goes on to make a better show(Andromida or was that before?)

[Anarchist Bunny]

Oh, and don't forget Rambo. He could take any number of feds.