StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I thought we built an aircraft carrier for San Dorado...

In any case, construction of the command ship for San Dorado housing a large radar for surveillance (remind me the specs again?) should start now and complete by end of the year for a year long trial.

We also ought to get around to start constructing heavily modified Absaloms for the ASW frigate program.

Mang, I think it makes little sense to name the aircraft YAK if both YAK and BAM are working on it. But calling it YAKBAM-241 or BAMYAK would be silly (:P).

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Mang, I think it makes little sense to name the aircraft YAK if both YAK and BAM are working on it. But calling it YAKBAM-241 or BAMYAK would be silly (:P).

I'm glad you see the point...

In any case, we can rename it to something else later...

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Mang, I think it makes little sense to name the aircraft YAK if both YAK and BAM are working on it. But calling it YAKBAM-241 or BAMYAK would be silly (:P).

They're trying to edge you out, man. They don't value you as a full and equal partner. Or they're just too lazy to come up with anything other than Russian designations. But then, we all knew Communists were lazy.

You could go with YAM or BAK though. BAK sounds a bit better, but then I'm sure YAM appeals to your crazy humor nature.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:I thought we built an aircraft carrier for San Dorado...

You did, and Constantinople Shipyards also took our contract for an LPD, did it not?

In any case, construction of the command ship for San Dorado housing a large radar for surveillance (remind me the specs again?) should start now and complete by end of the year for a year long trial.

I'm not sure we agreed on any specs yet... X-band radar, I think, and fleet command facilities aboard. Throw in a few RAM launchers and maybe a SAM or two? Basically a (much) smaller and more modern of the Project 1941 'Ural'.

We also ought to get around to start constructing heavily modified Absaloms for the ASW frigate program.

Right; so the first of those frigates should be ready by the end of the year as well, I gather?

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Ace Combat much, Stas?

I like the look of computer-generated fifth generation fighters. Sleek and sexy.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Mang, I think it makes little sense to name the aircraft YAK if both YAK and BAM are working on it. But calling it YAKBAM-241 or BAMYAK would be silly (:P).

I'm glad you see the point...

In any case, we can rename it to something else later...

We can just call our fighters with the designation 'CF' for CATO fighter. So we won't have to worry which one are the Su(khois) or the MiGs or the YAKs or the Western F's or something.

Seriously, it'd save us the trouble. Start from scratch.

The new Sukhoi-BAM Su-50s would be the first joint CATO-fighter for the next generation. So we call it the CATO Fighter 01, the CF-01. That'd be cool. The Su-53 carrier launched can be the CF-02. The Su-54 which is a bomber-version of the Su-50 can be the CFB-01 - CATO Fighter Bomber 01. The YAKBAMYAK-241 can be the CF-03!

Simple! Easy! DIstinct! Not so confusing anymore!

Then we can come up with further cooler designations. CF-01 "Cutthroat". CF-02 "Cormorant". CFB-01 "Condor". CF-03 "Crow".

Or if you want, we can name the first four aircraft according to the four CATO nations. We can have "Crimson" for the fighter that'll bear the UCSR's name, or "Constantine" for the fighter that'll bear Byzantine. Obviously "Cocktail" will be the Shroomanian CATO Fighter.

CF-01 "Crimson. CF-02 "Constantine". CF-03 "Cocktail"

It's catchy! AND it'll save the MESS the trouble of inventing alphabet-based designations for CATO military stuff.

RogueIce wrote:They're trying to edge you out, man. They don't value you as a full and equal partner. Or they're just too lazy to come up with anything other than Russian designations. But then, we all knew Communists were lazy.

Exactly! Or that's how some might take it in-game.

You could go with YAM or BAK though. BAK sounds a bit better, but then I'm sure YAM appeals to your crazy humor nature.

Yes. YAM is awesome!

FART!

SiegeTank wrote:You did, and Constantinople Shipyards also took our contract for an LPD, did it not?

Really? I forgot altogether. EDIT: I remember now. You wanted some European LPD. I think it was Dutch or something.

I'm not sure we agreed on any specs yet... X-band radar, I think, and fleet command facilities aboard. Throw in a few RAM launchers and maybe a SAM or two? Basically a (much) smaller and more modern of the Project 1941 'Ural'.

Pretty much...

Right; so the first of those frigates should be ready by the end of the year as well, I gather?

Those frigates should take 9 months to construct, though there will be a trials period probably. I want a few for my ocean going navy while the other existing ocean surveillance vessels relegated to home defence duties.

Hey Shroom, that's a nice designation system you have made. CF (CATO fighter or "continental fighter"), sounds way cool.

I propose that if we unify to the Su-50 (PAK FA) as our baseline 5th generation, we call that CF-01 and proceed from thereoff. CF-02 would be navalized. The fighter-bomber (Su-54) would be CFB. A bomber would be CTB (continental tactical bomber) and CSB (CATO strategic bomber).

Stas Bush wrote:Hey Shroom, that's a nice designation system you have made. CF (CATO fighter or "continental fighter"), sounds way cool.

I propose that if we unify to the Su-50 (PAK FA) as our baseline 5th generation, we call that CF-01 and proceed from thereoff. CF-02 would be navalized. The fighter-bomber (Su-54) would be CFB. A bomber would be CTB (continental tactical bomber) and CSB (CATO strategic bomber).

I'm cool with that.

In that case, the CF-03 would be the Yak-241.

We ought to also add alphabets to designate the successive updates to the fighter.

Exactly.

Fighters (the first four will have names to represent the first four CATO nations, for coolness' sake!):
CF-01 "Crimson" (Su-50 or the Shroomanian "F-22s", 5th gen mainstay - called 'Crimson' to represent the UCSR in the CATO's next-gen airforce)
CF-02 "Constantine" (Su-52 - the naval fighter - obviously 'Constantine' is for Byzantium)
CF-03 "Cocktail" (YAK-241/F-35 analog - Cock = Shroomanian, if it has the F-35's VTOL system then it's got a funny tail too )
CFB-01 "Corona" (Su-54, Corona's also a PeZookian place I had to see PeZook's OOB for that )

Tactical bomber
CTB-01 "Cormorant"?

Strategic bomber
CSB-01 "Condor"?

[I don't know if the bombers should have designations starting with 'C' as well. We'll run out of words starting with C. Cutthroat, Candor, Callous, Canker, Custer, Catnip, Cataract, Castoff, Canteen, Casserole Castrate...etc.]

Shinn Langley Soryu wrote:I'm looking up those posts myself. Shep only managed to bag one of Wilkens' S-3s with a VLS-launched Sidewinder; I could probably buy that. Getting the drop on and sinking two of Wilkens' Virginias and getting away without a scratch after taking down the Katie Voegele? Yeah, right.

As for the final fate of CG-58, there's nothing on it, save for that Shep wasn't the one responsible. Maybe we should write a story on it...

Shep was, it was damaged and scuttled during the ill-fated (or fabulous depending upone whose post you read) amphibious invasion of Shepistan. I may have forgotten to actually write that in but she was a casualty at that point from the shore batteries that attacked the incoming amphibs and escorts.

Also as I said I wasn't really mad about the Voegele incident because I did write the CVBG as making a speed run to get into position it was really just the two Adriana Limas getting sunk that ticked me off those fuckers didn't make a speed run (and couldn't have kept up with the CVBG if they had) becuase they were and are an independent formation
which was sitting along the Shepistani coast much as how in Game 1 I had most of my subs sitting off the coast of Shepland waiting to torch him to the ground in a nuclear cinder.

I like the designation system, but I think we should add a N to navalized versions, and an S for space fighters.

So we get CF-01 for the PAK-FA, CFN-01 for the navalized version.

CFS-01 would be the Mig-105 or something similar.

Oh, and for a while, I had an idea to reveal another shepistani submarine that escaped detection or destruction, so that we could've had a cool hunt for the red october thing going

Too late for that now, though.

PeZook wrote:I like the designation system, but I think we should add a N to navalized versions, and an S for space fighters.

So we get CF-01 for the PAK-FA, CFN-01 for the navalized version.

CFS-01 would be the Mig-105 or something similar.

Oh, and for a while, I had an idea to reveal another shepistani submarine that escaped detection or destruction, so that we could've had a cool hunt for the red october thing going

Too late for that now, though.

Sounds like a better idea.

So basically CF is for fighters, CFN are for navalized fighters, CFB are for fighter bombers, CFBN are for navalized fighter bombers, CB are for bombers and so forth.

I guess then the issue is to update the OOBs..

Our helicopter base is quite well so far, but something to counter RAH-66 and slowly replace the Mi-28Ns and Ka-50(2)s would be nice. So I'm proposing the Ka-58.

The RAH died in RL, but it's Soviet twin will live in SDN World

Nice. I was thinking of introducing the Commanche, but decided that the thing was too lightly armed to be better than Apaches or Hinds or something.

That's basically a stealthy Hind, armament-wise. Also, lots of AT missiles.

As for the lightweight 5th generation, here's a prospective counterpart to F-35.

I was wondering. Wouldn't it be awesome for helicopters to sport tactical nukes? I mean, why did they never think of it IRL? If infantry groups can have Davy Crocketts to stop massive tank invasions during the Cold War, then why not give some to the helos?

Of course, that would be silly, but no more silly than giving infantry Davy Crocketts.

Stas, your link doesn't work!

Stas Bush wrote:That's basically a stealthy Hind, armament-wise. Also, lots of AT missiles.

As for the lightweight 5th generation, here's a prospective counterpart to F-35.

Shall we make that our YAK-241 or do we want to make it a MiG?

As for the heli, I'm cool with it. We can start deploying it from 2020 which I assume will be the operationally ready date. By the way, no rear rotor?

We've already mentioned BAM and YAK working on the 241/CF-03 and that thing kind of looks rather big to be a counterpart to the relatively small F-35. It looks about as big as an F-22 or something.

Also, it lacks the VTOL thinggy.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:We've already mentioned BAM and YAK working on the 241/CF-03 and that thing kind of looks rather big to be a counterpart to the relatively small F-35. It looks about as big as an F-22 or something.

Also, it lacks the VTOL thinggy.

Erm... the F-35 has a VTOL and a normal take off version, and you have no idea what the size is just by looking at it.

Well, proportion-wise and judging by how the cockpit compares to the rest of the body, Stas' plane looks bigger than the F-35. Since Stas' plane has a cockpit that's tiny compared to the rest of the body, the body looks bigger. The F-35's cockpit isn't as tiny compared to the rest of the cockpit, so the body looks smaller. I am assuming that the cockpit size can be used as a base of reference to roughly compare plane sizes, since cockpits are generally similarly sized to fit pilots (although it may vary depending on the plane being single or double-seater).

Or unless the pilots are midgets. But we know Crimsons keep their midgets in cages.

Also, most (if not all) VTOL aircraft designs have only single engines. That plane has two engines and I don't know how that can work (don't VTOL stuff take up space?).


ALSO:

PeZook, when are Svetlana and Shroompard going to space together? We've got a plan to conceive!

Hmm...I suppose I should write about the first Selene flights. I'll put them on Selene 3, the first manned Selene test flight, planned for around April 2015. The mission profile would be simple: complete several orbits without anything breaking down, deorbit. The Silver Streak would launch and meet them right before deorbit, so that its passengers can marvel at the speeding spaceship and capture awesome photos.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Well, proportion-wise and judging by how the cockpit compares to the rest of the body, Stas' plane looks bigger than the F-35. Since Stas' plane has a cockpit that's tiny compared to the rest of the body, the body looks bigger. The F-35's cockpit isn't as tiny compared to the rest of the cockpit, so the body looks smaller. I am assuming that the cockpit size can be used as a base of reference to roughly compare plane sizes, since cockpits are generally similarly sized to fit pilots (although it may vary depending on the plane being single or double-seater).

Or unless the pilots are midgets. But we know Crimsons keep their midgets in cages.

Also, most (if not all) VTOL aircraft designs have only single engines. That plane has two engines and I don't know how that can work (don't VTOL stuff take up space?).

There's no explicit limitation to how many engines VTOL aircraft can have. It's only the issue of complexity and ensuring both engines give the same amount of thrust or the flight control computer can compensate and adjust to ensure the craft is stable in flight. The Harrier for example has thrust vectoring capability just be adjusting the direction at which their nozzles fire the thrust, despite having one engine.

And in any case, if the craft is going to even remotely a counterpart to the F-35, it jolly well better be smaller than the CF-01.

PeZook wrote:Hmm...I suppose I should write about the first Selene flights. I'll put them on Selene 3, the first manned Selene test flight, planned for around April 2015. The mission profile would be simple: complete several orbits without anything breaking down, deorbit. The Silver Streak would launch and meet them right before deorbit, so that its passengers can marvel at the speeding spaceship and capture awesome photos.

And then... DISASTER STRIKES!