Search results for query: *

  • Users: Jukra
  • Order by date

Forum search Google search

  1. If the USSR does not fall, would it currently be more powerful militarily than the United States?

    Chechen War was portrayed as a special military operation to pacify the "rebels" with the initial force far too small for the actual task, as displayed by disastrous initial assault on Grozny. But the actual military potential of 1994 Russia was large, if there was, by some ASB, say, a...

  2. If the USSR does not fall, would it currently be more powerful militarily than the United States?

    Russian Army in 1994 could take advantage of vast Soviet production of weapons, just like the Russian Army of today does. The difference is, that in 1994 the newest Soviet stuff was just a few years old and despite poor upkeeping was far more useable. Also, Nato was of course superior to Russia...

  3. If the USSR does not fall, would it currently be more powerful militarily than the United States?

    Was the USSR ever superior? At sea, certainly never at all. In the air, not at all, especially as NATO had powerful ground based air defenses from 1960's onward. On land, maybe for a few years in late 40's, early 50's, but that was the time of de facto US Atomic monopoly. In addition to the US...

  4. What if the Magnetic Mine was not captured by the British in early WW2

    A more interesting POD might be that what if Germany delayed deployment of magnetic mines till Fall of France, ie. time when their stockpile would be higher and the possible impact greater?

  5. The best aircraft that never should have been built

    With nukes, anything is possible. As for MLRS, DPICM munitions themelves were quite powerful.

  6. The best aircraft that never should have been built

    This... ...and this instead. Cheaper, all-weather, less vulnerable.

  7. AHC : Worst possible US Navy

    Then again an all-nuclear CBG provides also some benefits, such as longer endurance at sea and rapid transit to crisis area thus requiring less CBG's total. And even with all nuclear CGN/DDGN force USN would have numerical and qualitative superiority over any opponent.

  8. How strong a military would Belgium have needed to remain neutral in 1914?

    And how about the consequences for people of Belgium? How many dead?

  9. How strong a military would Belgium have needed to remain neutral in 1914?

    Germany of 1914 was not Germany of 1939. What did Belgium, or to be more exact, the Belgian people, win from their participation in WWI? By simply letting German Army pass they might have been on the winning side, or even if they did end up on the losing side it's hard to believe their losses...

  10. MacArthur in Europe/North Africa, Eisenhower in the Pacific

    One has to remember correlation of forces. With MacArthur in Europe there's going to be a real lot of awkward moments with UK. On the other hand, MacArthur may press more for the US line, so we may end up with Allied invasion of Western Europe in 1942 - more immediate casualties but quicker end...

  11. How strong a military would Belgium have needed to remain neutral in 1914?

    Belgium is also tiny and with well-developed rail network and there's no threat of an air attack on rail network yet. Telegraph can transmit signals in an instant. As a comparatively rich country, Belgium can also utilize bicycles for concentration marches. If the mobilization machinery is...

  12. Fictional Airline Aircraft & Fleets

    Finnish Aero (From 1953 known as Finnair) buys British aircraft instead of mostly American due to favorable trade terms. After all, UK was the most significant Western export market for Finland, and Finnair was owned by the State. Historically Aero and Finnair bought following aircraft between...

  13. 90s Cold War films

    "Groundhog Day" (1993), how Bill Murray lives the last day of peace again and again before dying in a nuclear explosion. How this eternal life becomes a nightmare but also a chance to do good, and finally die. "Dumb and Dumber" (1994) Comedy about a failed US businessman meeting a Soviet...

  14. Iran Further Develops and Manufactures the F-14?

    Like this?

  15. Iran Further Develops and Manufactures the F-14?

    Not engines as capable as the West and Russians have to offer, but bear in mind that F-14A had Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-414A , high tech for early 70's, 10800lbs / 20900lbs thrust, 1800kg weight.

  16. ATL Challenge: Airplanes designed for global war on terror?

    POD: It's 1990's and either RAF, AdA/MN or USAF realizes need for aircraft available for OOTW and wars in which the enemy has no air defenses beyond MANPADS. The aircraft will have to have usefulness in a major war scenario too, in which the enemy has air defenses. Thus various light attack...

  17. Carriers delenda est. Happier, more efficient navies without carriers

    Exactly. Nuclear tipped cruise missiles offer similar capability which can be spread out to surface combatants or attack subs if needed. As for CDG's real world operations, the list is: - Afghanistan 2001: Achievable with ground based airpower. Probably the best choice would have been...

  18. WI: Black Buck raids with F-111K's?

    Availability of South African bases would change the dynamics of the conflict altogether, IMHO.

  19. Carriers delenda est. Happier, more efficient navies without carriers

    1980's prices vs. 2000's prices. CDG as a ship isn't worth much by itself, there's also the issue of air wing. Horizons or Burkes aren't just air defence vessels, but also strike assets capable of striking hundreds of kilometers inland. And, unlike Rafales, they don't have pilots requiring CSAR...

  20. Carriers delenda est. Happier, more efficient navies without carriers

    France has an extensive network of foreign bases, and for intervening in most countries attack helos, cruise missiles, land based air and and area air defense missiles are more than plenty enough for an intervention. Solid long range ground based air assets are more useful for France than...
Top