| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| My final Dutch AU http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=880 |
Page 1 of 7 |
| Author: | Vossiej [ March 6th, 2011, 8:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | My final Dutch AU |
As part of my final Alternate Universe for the Netherlands, I am taking the details and history way back than I ever did before. It will be a long lasting and slow moving thread, as I will take my time for it. It will also be combined with the Coast Guard I made earlier. The history is really worth reading, I am quite proud of it actually. Here we go! ![[ img ]](http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn82/Vossiej/NLAU-1.png) ![[ img ]](http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn82/Vossiej/NLAU1.png) ![[ img ]](http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn82/Vossiej/RNLAFAU-1.png) http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn82 ... /NLAU1.png http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn82 ... NLAU-1.png |
|
| Author: | MC Spoilt B'stard [ March 7th, 2011, 9:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
This looks so fcking HUDGE! Cant wait to see the armed forces (completed) |
|
| Author: | Vossiej [ March 7th, 2011, 9:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
It will come, in time 
|
|
| Author: | Vossiej [ March 8th, 2011, 7:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
Updated first page, history about the armed forces next! (probably tomorrow). |
|
| Author: | Philbob [ March 8th, 2011, 8:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
when did the A160 get made?? |
|
| Author: | Vossiej [ March 8th, 2011, 10:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
In real life I believe it first flew in 2002 or 2003, but in this case the time line in development has somewhat shifted, some projects were completed way earlier, while the Hummingbird would have first entered service (at least with my Air Force) in 2010. |
|
| Author: | Thiel [ March 8th, 2011, 11:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
That's a lot of different aircraft, a lot. Your logistics are going to be a nightmare, and I find the argument for the F-18 and the F-35C dubious at best. The level of training required to maintain a carrier capable squadron means that they'll have to be on almost constant deployment. You also have several helicopters with overlapping capabilities and a general lack of commonality, both between and within the different services. Why, for instance, have the AW139 when you already have MH-60ies and the associated infrastructure? Their performance are close enough that the extra costs from training and integration will make it not worth it. The Hi-Low mix of F-15 and F-16 makes sense, and so does F-22 and F35, but the F-18 doesn't fit anywhere and neither does the Tornado |
|
| Author: | Vossiej [ March 8th, 2011, 1:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
Ok I am going to try to answer your comment as good as possible. Let's first start with the aircrafts. You said: The Hi-Low mix of F-15 and F-16 makes sense, and so does F-22 and F35, but the F-18 doesn't fit anywhere and neither does the Tornado As shown in the article you can see the current inventory, that means that aircraft which are being replaced or phased out, are still in it. For instance, let's go back to 1995, the air force inventory (so thats all flying equipment, including naval helicopters/aircrafts) consisted out of the F-16 (Multi-role), F-15(Air Superiority) and Tornado (Close air support/attack). The navy operated the F-4 phantom and Harrier, which were replaced by the F-35B and F/A-18. Over the last few years the Air Force started to replace the older aircrafts, so the F-16s and F-15s will be phased out and replaced by the F-22A/B and F-35C respectively. The Tornado's were all upgraded to continue in the role in Close air support. The reason why I chose the F-35C over the F-35A is because of its longer range, larger payload and the ability to operate from Dutch and Allied carriers (So they all carry a mix of F/A-18s and F-35Cs). So lets say by 2020 the Air Force (including naval aircraft) looks like this: F-22A/B-30 (Air Superiority) F-35C (Multi-role) GR4. Tornado (Close air support) ((The Tornado would probably be replaced by more F-35s at this moment)) F/A-18 Super Hornet (Naval Multi-role) F-35B (Multi-role STOVL) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- With the helicopter force it is the same, all helicopters from the Army, Navy and Air Force are brought under the command of the Air Force. For instance, back in 1990 the Army operated the Chinook, UH-1, Gazelle and Bolkow helicopters. These were all replaced by the Chinook, NH90-TTH, CH-71C, Cougar and AW139. The extra transport types (CH-71, NH90 and Cougar) were because of the growing need for cargo helicopters. But for instance the NH90 TTH and CH-71 can also be deployed by the navy, while the Cougar and AW-139 can not. In 1990 the attack role for helicopters was only for filled by AH-1s and the Gazelles. The AH-154 and MH-60 serve as the main attack helicopters (while the MH-60 can also be used as additional transport), the AH-47 for special missions by all service branches, and the Wildcat as replacement for the light Gazelle support/recon helicopter. In 1990 the Navy operated the Lynx, S-70 (later to become MH-60) and the SeaKing. The NH90 NFH serves as the replacement for the SeaKing, the S-70s were reconfigured to the latest MH-60R version (eventually to be phased out near 2025, same counts for MH-60 Battlehawk), and the AW-159 for service from the smaller surface combatants. Does this kind of sort out your difficulties? It may look like a lot of variety, but try imagining the Air services of both Army, Navy and Air Force together for eg. The United States, France or the UK. You would get a similar image. |
|
| Author: | Thiel [ March 8th, 2011, 2:58 pm ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU | |
Does this kind of sort out your difficulties? It may look like a lot of variety, but try imagining the Air services of both Army, Navy and Air Force together for eg. The United States, France or the UK. You would get a similar image.
Not really. A combined air arm would also mean common procurement. So for instance your light/medium transports, both naval and ground based, would be one model of the MH-60s or another. Not two different helicopters.As for the F-18 and the F-35, the only reason to have them is if you have a carrier, and judging by the lack of support craft, you don't. You simply can't keep a squadron carrier capable without direct access to a carrier. Sure you can do land based training, but it can only take you so long. As for the fighters, as I said, the Hi-Low mix works and I get that you're in the middle of transitioning from one type to another, however, why keep the Tornado when you're getting the F-35? As it says in its name it's a strike fighter, just like the Tornado. Plus, since all the Tornado operators are beginning to disband their fleets, maintenance costs are going to skyrocket as parts begins to get scarce. |
||
| Author: | Thiel [ March 8th, 2011, 4:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My final Dutch AU |
Oh and you'll need a prop trainer for initial flight training. Simulators are all well and good, but it's nothing like the real thing. |
|
| Page 1 of 7 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|