Midtguardian Defence Force

Bozoo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #41
With the old leopards I would turn them into fixed gun emplacements like many small nations do with outdated equipment (old russian tanks T-34 etc). While not ideal, in certain situations its better than just a AK-47. Place them near high value targets, on hills, choke points, beaches etc. Even if they aren't manned it gives the opposition more targets. By manning them on a rotational bases, it would give them a major head ache.

While operating Leopards (esp older versions like you have) would be troublesome just maintaining the turret would be fairly easy and within your countries means. Shells and oil is cheap running costs would be simular to a large forklift. Extensive use of simulators and regular rotation will extend service lift.
Thanks for your input. I have allready used this option, but of coarse not with my Leopard I A4s which are still in front line use, and, allthough obsolecent, not totally out of date, especially not in some of the scenarioes I work with, e.g. the defence against other scale H0 military units.

What I have done is to use M 60 towers, the chassis' used for specialised versions, e.g. indigiunously produced mineclearing tanks such as rocket propelled exploding hose, radiocontrolled "iron slab" tanks to set off top attack mines as well as 155 mm direct fire assault guns and flame thrower tanks.

The towers are used partly on some of the small islands covering the one deep water approach to the capital, just outside the main highway tunnel leading through the mountain chain from Norway/Sweden to Midtguardia and on the outskirts of the airbase covering both the seaboard approach as well as the main gate entrance.:)
 

Bozoo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #42
Feanor.

Would it be too presumptiuos to suggest changing the heading of this thread from "Phantom II as platform for AIM 54" to something more descriptive?

Mod edit: Done, see the new title.
-Preceptor
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bozoo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #43
Thanks for your input. I have allready used this option, but of coarse not with my Leopard I A4s which are still in front line use, and, allthough obsolecent, not totally out of date, especially not in some of the scenarioes I work with, e.g. the defence against other scale H0 military units.

What I have done is to use M 60 towers, the chassis' used for specialised versions, e.g. indigiunously produced mineclearing tanks such as rocket propelled exploding hose, radiocontrolled "iron slab" tanks to set off top attack mines as well as 155 mm direct fire assault guns and flame thrower tanks.

The towers are used partly on some of the small islands covering the one deep water approach to the capital, just outside the main highway tunnel leading through the mountain chain from Norway/Sweden to Midtguardia and on the outskirts of the airbase covering both the seaboard approach as well as the main gate entrance.:)
Sorry folks, turrets of coarse, turrets, not towers:unknown
 

Bozoo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #44
Attached is a side profile view of an upgraded HAL (Hellenic Air Force) F-4F, with EO targeting (not sure of the type, probably Lightning II) pod and Paveway II LGB in addition to AIM-120B's. An F-4 with AIM-120B and AN/APG-66 equipped would be able to engage several targets (4+) simultaneously at greater range than the AIM-7M. Its a significant increase in BVR capability.

The AN/APG-66 is the radar used in the F-16, thus it is highly capable, widely available and small enough to fit in the F-4F airframe without modification. You wouldn't be able to tell from the outside that the work had been completed.

The AIM-120 is quite different in shape to the AIM-7M. The AIM-7M has much larger forward fins and the aft fins are a different shape. Additionally the AIM-120 is a smaller (in width) and lighter missile. It can be used on AIM-9 hard points, AIM-7 can not.

The F-4F's would need to be equipped with Link 16 to effectively communicate with the E-2C's.
Thanks for the info, Ozzy, and the pictures. For my untrained eyes, the Sparrow and the Amraam are quite similar, but I clearly see the difference, nad will go to work
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I absolutely agree with your suggestion about heavy infantry, and will start converting one of my motorized infantry battalions into a heavy infantry battalion, as I fully understand the usefulness of the heavier firepower, I have some quiestions though.

My first thought when thinking about heavy infantry, is supplying the unit with IFVs, in my case the M2 Bradley would be the best choice, as I already deploy more than 50 of these. But this would mean aquiring the corresponding support units, such as recovery, transport, recce, and air defence units, thus actually creating a Mech Infantry Bn, which I think might be a bit over the top as this unit is primarily intended to FIBUA combat.
Try cutting your airwing. It should free up personell.

I think it would maybe be a good idea to build the unit around the armoured Hummer with TOW II, Avengers, 105 mm towed light artillery, 50 cal' and whatever modern heavy infantry weapons I can lay my hands on. I have to update my knowledge on this to see if there are some new, interesting weapon systems for such use developed the last 10 years (which, more or less, is where my updates stopped) Any ideas would be appreciated.
Again my familiarity with western-style militaries is limited, but to the best of my knowledge Humvees are light infantry weapons. Bradley are a good choice. 50 cals, yes, but towed arty doesn't need to be part of the infantry units. If you want you can attach them as a brigade level asset.

As to the GDP question, please remember that Midtguardia has a major merchant fleet sailing international waters (just like Norway had when WWII broke out, when the Norwegian merchant fleet was the worlds third largest, generating a major income from international earnings) this, to some extent, explaining "the magically, giant sized income".
How giant?

Finally, on the logistic problem, catering for the different types of equipment, I'm a little bit non-plussed about the amount of flack coming my way in this regard.:p:

First of all, I know Norway for generations, have operated two types of tanks in comparable number as Midtguardia, e.g. in the 80's when operating Leopard I's as well as M 48 (in a norwegian configuration), without causing insurmountable problems.
A lot of it is coming your way because of the small country that Mitguardia is operating a military that is far beyond it's size. Hence why for example Russia has 4 types of MBTs in service. But the numbers on them are all (except for the T-62's of the 42 MRD) are in the hundreds, and supplies, spares, modernization, is all done locally in Russia. Economies of scale kicks in, and if anything spare parts won't disappear.

Secondly, the problems of maintenence and training are really not that much greater due to also using the Leopard I, this mainlys because many of the specialized armoured vehicles I do operate, are based on the Leopard I chassis, such as the Dachs (engineer vehicle), Gepard (air defence tank), Bergepanzer (recovery vehicle), Kieler (mine clearing) as well as the Leopard main battle tank.
But as I understand the Leo's are getting retired. So you would need to retire all the associated vehicles too, replacing them with equivalents on an M1 chassis.

I absoloutely do not agree that a permanent force of 5 - 6000 is not sufficiant to maintain operability of the listed equipment, as this is the same size as the norwegian permanent defence, operating a much larger airforce and navy as well as an army of more than comparable size. As far as I can see, the armoured brigade would need no more than 500 professionals to maintain the equipment and training of reservists.
That's just it. It would take at least the 5-6000 professionals, out of a population of 100000. That's an incredibly militarized society. I once again have to question the proportionality of your military to your country. A nation's military is not built in empty space. It's built based around the demographic, geopolitical, and economic realities of that country, and is meant to address real security needs.

The armoured squadron line up is:

24 M1 A1 Abrahms MBT
Mech INf. platoon with 6 M2 Bradleys
HQ platoon with 1 M 577 (M113 command vehicle), 2 Mercedes 300 GD minibus, 2 Motorcycle messangers, 2 M 551 Sheridan recce tanks
Support platoon with 2 Gepard AAA tank, 1 Leopard I ARV, 1 M 113 ambulance
Supply platoon with 6 M 548 tracked transport carrying supplies, POL, Ammo, one ow which carries tools and spare parts.

There are 4 such squadrons (although one with Leopards and one presently at cadre strength.
So you're operating (eventually) a total of 96 tanks in one armored brigade? Again awfully large.

In addition the brigade consists of:

HQ squadron with 7 M 577, MP section w/2 Fox armored transports, close defence platoon, commanders platoon, recce, transport units and 3 helicopters

Artillery sqd with 8 M 109 AG3
Air defence sqd with 12 Gepards
Combat engineer sqd, with 2 Biber bridges, 3 Dachs and 1 Kieler
Transport sqd with 12 M 923 5t trucks and 12 trucks with Fuel bowsers
Medical support coy with 6 M113 ambulances and Medical point
Try adding your SP arty as a brigade level detachment to the armored brigade.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Thanks for your input. I think Midtguardia in many aspects reflects some of the same defence problems that Singapore experience, but Singapore of coarse has a much larger population.

I could of coarse expand my populatoin, but creating housing, jobs and services for so many people is out of the question, som the Midtguardian defence system will have to be somewhat out of ordinary proportion, although, not as unfeasabel as some here would seem to suggest.

This discussion has, to a large extent, become a discussion on demographics, an aspect that I have only dwelved into in very limited degree so as to not be totally out of proportion with the civilian community. What I would like is to discuss whether or not the defence forces I actually do field would be able to hold their own in a real life battle and whether there are obvious deficiancies that can be dealt with.

I see you are from Singapore. I also see that you have used the M40A1 106 mm RCL. I have a FIBUA platoon of 12 jeep mounted 106 mm RCLs. Are these still in use? I know there is an upgrade availiable making the 106 mm a vialble weapon system on the modern battle field. Do you know anything about this?
You could also assume that Midtguardia is also oil rich, thus enabling its 'strong defence posture'. While we are on the subject of small oil rich countries, beyond Kuwait, you should also look at Brunei and its defence posture. IIRC Brunei has a population of approximately 300,000.

If you don't mind, I'm going to give you some limited feed back on some obvious deficiencies with regards to jeep mounted 106 mm recoil-less guns in a FIBUA battle. Some of the limitations I bring up can be overcome by the employment of other forces and the applicability of these will limitations will be determined by terrain features.

106 guns are great direct fire weapons that if properly employed (with other weapons) can have a devastating effect on enemy infantry and tanks. The main problem I have is with employment of the 106 gun and the terrain must suit its employment.

The 106 gun has a large back blast area, limiting our ability to hide the guns in a FIBUA area (be it on a mounted or dismounted mode). The solution is to ensure that a Midtguardian force in a FIBUA defence is able to deny local air superiority against the enemy (please bear in mind your fixed wing air force is not the most modern), has superior artillery reach and are able to direct effective counter battery fire.

If they remain mobile, the 106 guns may be subject to air strikes and artillery fire, if they are spotted. So you will need multiple vehicle hides and the ability to keep shifting their positions.

For these reasons, Singapore infantry's current main anti-tank weapon is the 'Spike' AT missile. In fact, variants of the 'Spike' have been mounted by the Israel armed forces from helicopters to naval vessels (specifically, it has been integrated with Israel's the Typhoon weapons system).

Further, each of our infantry sections is equipped with 2 Matadors. The warhead is effective against both vehicle armour and brick walls. The Matador has little backblast, making it safe for operation in confined spaces. The Matador also has a dual-capability warhead, when acting in the delay mode, creates an opening greater than 450 mm in diameter in a double brickwall, and acting as an anti-personnel weapon against those behind the wall, offering an unconventional means of entry when fighting in built-up areas. (For more information, see Discovery channel's 'Israel Special' in season 3 of 'Future Weapons')

BTW we still use the 84mm RR gun, as it is man portable and a good direct fire weapon.
 
Last edited:

shrubage

New Member
I absoloutely do not agree that a permanent force of 5 - 6000 is not sufficiant to maintain operability of the listed equipment, as this is the same size as the norwegian permanent defence, operating a much larger airforce and navy as well as an army of more than comparable size. As far as I can see, the armoured brigade would need no more than 500 professionals to maintain the equipment and training of reservists.
Norway is an industrialised country on that basis it has technical colleges and other third level educational institutions that can provide trained engineers and technicians.

For Mitguardia to train that many skilled tradespeople is going to involve slewing the economy in some strange directions, it really just isn't practical. You're right some arab nations do it Kuwait, saudi arabia, by bringing in foreign techs to do all their maintainance for them. I'm not sure how much of a genuine defence it provides for them as without the foreign techs their militaries would cease to function in days.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Well some African nations go as far as to have foreign pilots and officers do their fighting, because they're incapable of producing a national officer corps. One only has to remember Sudan.
 

11561

New Member
In light of Mitguard's high per-capita military budget, large shipping fleet, and small population, it's a possibility that they sub-contract as much of their maintenence as possible to civillian firms. After all, it shouldn't be a problem to load her Leopards and other German-made hardware onto a ship a time or two per year and sail them back to Germany for depot-level maintenence. Perhaps they also pay to have some specialists in-country to do calibration and repairs that wouldn't necessitate a trip back to Germany. Similiarly, it probably wouldn't be a big deal to load up some M1's and F4's on a ship to go back to the USA for maintence. There might also be a few specialists on hand to repair turbine engines and electronics from firms like Honeywell (Or Lycoming, I forget who makes the M1's powerplant) and McDonnel-Douglas. It might be a better idea to purchase a service contract with forign-made equipment rather than take men off the firing line to maintain the stuff in-country.

Sure, this approach would be more costly, would lead to availability problems, and would probably become quickly impossible in wartime, (A ship full of tanks and Phantoms would be a nice kill for an enemy SSK) But with the choice being either able to deploy their war machines or not, this option might just be Mitguard's only one.
 

shrubage

New Member
For a small nation, the best investments kit wise are man portable systems. Modern ATGW's, MANPADS, mortars, good night vision, Flexible comms that allow you to control small units, and the old favourite the land mine. You should have a corps of well trained infantry and range maps of the entire country. If you want to spend big buy a few truck mounted cheap anti ship missiles that you can fire blind and keep an attacking navy away from the coast. And most importantly lots of live fire exercises so your army can work it properly, lots of army buy kit and then skimp on the practice firing.

In light of Mitguard's high per-capita military budget, large shipping fleet, and small population, it's a possibility that they sub-contract as much of their maintenence as possible to civillian firms. After all, it shouldn't be a problem to load her Leopards and other German-made hardware onto a ship a time or two per year and sail them back to Germany for depot-level maintenence. Perhaps they also pay to have some specialists in-country to do calibration and repairs that wouldn't necessitate a trip back to Germany. Similiarly, it probably wouldn't be a big deal to load up some M1's and F4's on a ship to go back to the USA for maintence. There might also be a few specialists on hand to repair turbine engines and electronics from firms like Honeywell (Or Lycoming, I forget who makes the M1's powerplant) and McDonnel-Douglas. It might be a better idea to purchase a service contract with forign-made equipment rather than take men off the firing line to maintain the stuff in-country.

Sure, this approach would be more costly, would lead to availability problems, and would probably become quickly impossible in wartime, (A ship full of tanks and Phantoms would be a nice kill for an enemy SSK) But with the choice being either able to deploy their war machines or not, this option might just be Mitguard's only one.
If you're reliant on a foreign nation for anything more that first line maintainance its arguable how much of a military deterant you really have. If mitguardia (I'm warming to the name :)) were to ever get in a conflict with its neighbours its only going to last as long as long as your foreign suppliers want it to.

Also I realise he's picked the equipment for modeling reasons but a lot of it is really maintainance intensive M1's apache's (which the British army have struggled with) AWAC's !! old F4's. Also for a small nation spending that much money on military equipment is going to start a lot of alarm bells ringing with foreign nations, you don't think the Germans and US are going to consult Norway and Sweden before they sell arms to a country with issues of international recognition.
 

Bozoo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #51
Remember:

Midtguardia's origins stem from a military unit suffering a treachery by the powers that be, overcoming this and carving out their existence through sheer military persistance. The earstwhile commander of this unit and his hiers using all of their considerable wealth and family connections to care fore the people and ensure their well beeing and security.

This makes for a strong military tradition, and a loyal population with a good recogning of the countrys history and a vivid understanding of the necessaty of a strong and alert defence, thereby ensuring a willingness to participate in the countrys defence that passes that of the ordinary democracy by the power of magnitude. This allows for a professional defence force of approx 5% of the population.

These professionals are mainly used as cadre and as techicians and frontline troops manning the complex weapon systems, while the reservists, adding up to another 15% of the population, are used in all other aspects. I think I have established the necessary personell supply.

As for education, yes, the Midtguardian education system is thin on many parts, but there is a university with a technical education path producing engineers. For the more specialized military technical skills, we send our people to schools in the UK and, for aviation, to the US. To some extent, we also employ expatriots.

Now for the budgetary questions. Midtguardia is an industialized country. It has its own computor industry, although not exporting. We have a thriving financial industry with banking, insurance and corporate finance on the international scale, partly a legacy of Midtguardias benevolent veiws on jew refugees just before and during WWII, partly due to tax incentives on capital placement and rules to some extent comparable to the so-called tax havens.

In addition, Midtguardia has natural rescources in the form of some oil and rich iron ore rescources, the latter beeing the reason for Midtguardias thriving mining operations and steel production, much of which is exported.

Midtguardia has its own electricity production (waterfall) of which some is exported, its own fishery industry that makes us more or less self sufficient in this aspect, but we do rely heavily on imports as to the more advanced foodstuffs, consumer goods and heavy machinery.

There is a chemical plant, complementing the steel works, that has some exports and of coarse the international merchant fleet. Finally there is a large brewery that exports beer to most corners of the world.

When the income from these industries and natural rescources are coupled with the ruling families traditional defence spending from their extensive international business holding incomes, I beleive we have enough dough to keep our guys in curry.

Of coarse, the US and Germany would, in real life, never sell anything to Midtguardia. Then again, Midtguardia would not excist where it does. This is the conditions neceassary to conduct this simulation at all. The complexities of procurement in the real world is, in this scenario, represented by the scarcity of models avaliable on the market, and the budgetary limitations represented by the amount of money I can afford to spend on models. Please bear in mind, the military competes with civilian priorities in the model world as well.
 

Bozoo

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #52
For a small nation, the best investments kit wise are man portable systems. Modern ATGW's, MANPADS, mortars, good night vision, Flexible comms that allow you to control small units, and the old favourite the land mine. You should have a corps of well trained infantry and range maps of the entire country. If you want to spend big buy a few truck mounted cheap anti ship missiles that you can fire blind and keep an attacking navy away from the coast. And most importantly lots of live fire exercises so your army can work it properly, lots of army buy kit and then skimp on the practice firing.
I do understand, and I'm not blind for the effectiveness of this, and partly employ these ideas in the motorized infantry brigade. But, you know, a man is like 1,5 cm tall in scale 1:87, not really very fun. So, I'm sticking with my heavy units. I do have TOW II ATGWs as well as Armbrust (no backblast) for the special forces, I have Stinger MANPADS to the tune of one system pr. infantry platoon as well as a coy of Avengers (Hummer mounted quadrouple Stinger mounts) on brigade level. I have 107 mm mortars mounted in M 113 APC's (thats M 106) and man portable 82 mm mortars in the infantry units (two pr. company)

I'm working on night vision, communications and infantry radars, but have not deployed yet. The engineer batallion has a platoon of Scorpion (M 548 mounted) mine throwers.
 
Top