NationStates Jolt Archive

The United Socialist States of Zvarinograd is searching for aerospace contractors that will develop a massive gunship, comparable to the AC-130 Spectre gunship in function that will provide bombardment of enemy installations in replacement of naval battleships or cruisers. This is because the United Socialist States of Zvarinograd has no navy, as decreed by the Premier. This aerial behemoth must have the following requirements:

1) Ability to defend itself from any and all airborne and land antiaircraft threats.
2) Ability to provide enough firepower (preferably more than the AC-130 currently provides) to defeat a large group of land forces, infantry or otherwise.
3) If it is to have missle weaponry, it must be able to carry a sufficient load of guided munitions to destroy a large group of armored land vehicles.
4) With a full weapons load, it must have a maximum safe range of at least four thousand kilometers.

OOC:
I know that this might seem absurd and that it might not be possible due to the fact that there may not be engines powerful enough to lift it and still have a sufficient fuel economy of four thousand kilometers. If so, please politely tell me it's impossible. Thank you for your cooperation.

OOC: HHmmm well i know DT has a gunship based on the An-255.

As for the fire power of the BB-66 do you mean in original or 80s refit configuration? either way how on earth do you propose to get close to 3x 16" and 6 x 5" (i had a site that had the total throw weight of the ww2 config and it was pretty sky high)

I suppose you might be able to get a couple of rapid fire 155s on a really large aircraft (the 155 AGS turret is rated at something like 50tons so with lighter mountings and feed system etc you might even get 4) but i don't think the Iowa type stuff is reach able.

but still 3-4 155mm guns on a gunship would be nice (although unlikely to have the RoF of the AGS as it needs water cooling to stop the barrel melting) although with all the selfdefence equipment (mix of long and short rnage AAMs as well as precision giuded muntions and anit radiation weapons for use against AA targets) you might find yourself a bit more restricted.

OOC: Well, sir, it's a good idea. And here comes the big "but".

Fact is, the aircraft will be dangerously lopsided. If it's even possible to fit a 16" gun inside the fuselage of the aircraft, you'd need to sufficiently strengthen not only the interior such that it's "anchored" and won't rip loose. Further, you'd need a hugely armored, thick and inflexible armored wing and fuselage, lest the blast rip the aircraft apart.

And before you reply, you should take a look at pictures of the Iowas firing their main battery. You actually see depressions in the water from a blast recoil. You should also note that in the movie "Under Siege", Tommy Lee Jones was standing on the deck when one gun fired. It almost deafened him and sent him sliding halfway down the length of the ship.

So even if you manage to sufficiently strengthen the airframe to withstand the impact (that it won't literally rip apart), the wings would probably be too stiff and crack (I'm not an airframe designer, but wings actually need to flex during flight and too stiff would lead to structural fatigue); not to mention the recoil would probably tip the plane straight over.

My question is, sir, why bother with guns? If you really want to create an "Airborne Iowa", the only way I can see it happening is if you make it literally the size of a small island. Or better yet, a Gravship.

Personally, sir, a few more handfuls of fighter-bombers and just plain old bombers is far cheaper and easier to maintain. It'll also be a lot faster, a lot more accurate and less vulnerable to attack.

OOC:
I already knew and took into consideration the implications of such firepower on an airframe. I was only hoping it was possible, however I still need a gunship that can supply bombardment in order to defeat superior numbers of land forces. I'll edit the Iowa thing off.

OOC: Zvar, the "Gravships" seem to be the way to go, but with every other NSer and their dog having them, it seems fruitless. I actually wrestled with much the same problems when my nation was younger.

My eventual solution was the cluster bomb (or cluster munitions dispenser). If you manage to gain Air Superiority, cluster bombs will literally shred infantry. Tanks are a big better, as they can be separated. In that case, fill up your cluster munitions dispensers with mines.

And before you balk that maintaing B-52s, B-1s and B-2s are extremely expensive, the A-6 Intruder which was retired in the mid 90s could carry more ordnance under their wings than any other aircraft except those three bombers mentioned. A very little known fact is that they dropped more bombs on Vietnam than the B-52s and the Intruder is carrier capable! Except it was a specialised plane with only one real role, so the US scrapped it for more Hornets and putting air to ground on Tomcats.

Again, this would be far cheaper to equip and maintain and far more flexible.....

I think an airship would be perfect for this type of thing. Just a thought

How about a giant zeppelin or blimp? They can carry lots of munitions, but they are slow. I don't think you could put a battleship cannon on them, but they could hold a lot of bombs. Just make sure they aren't filled with hydrogen, as it tends to explode.

Or fill it with ALOT of Hydrogen and crash into the enemy capital :lol:

OOC: If you haven't, I suggest that you read Dale Brown's novels where B-52s, B-1s, and B-2s are modified into what he calls "airborne escort battleships." The bombers are converted to carry self-defense air-to-air weapons, advanced ECM gear, and ultra-precise AGMs... including modular cruise missiles. McLeod03 and I both already utilize airborne escort battleship theory in our air forces.

We will take the contract. Truth be told, we to are without a navy (they are quite useless to a space-farring, landlocked nation) and this seems a good substitute.

As for the actual product, we are thinking along the lines of a massive aircraft, with a fusealage simular to that of a C-130 Hurcules, and 6 tilt-rotor engines, like those of a V-22 Osprey. By mounting chain guns one either side, and perhaps a few light 105mm guns we can achieve the nessasary firepower. In other models, perhaps the equipment to carry and deploy bombs of different types, or the mentioned missles. The 15in guns you presumably wanted are too large to fit in any aircraft. The finer details will be worked out as we get to them.

OOC-Please keep in contact with me, as I have taken other contracts that went bad, because the other person simply left me alone.

OOC:
I took the AN-225 and crammed it full of weapons. Works.

OOC - In my opinion, the most practical and near to modern tech as you can get is a hovering weapon platform (However air fans wouldn't be powerful enough and jet trusters might burn too much fuel) using weapons such as missiles, small fire arms or rail guns.

IC - The Armed Republic of Jace will begin toying with various concepts and will present the results later...

Autonomous City-states...

ONE of Dale Brown's novels? Almost all of them revolve around the Megafortress or some other Heavy Bomber Modification. Some of them are configured to launch pilotless aircraft like the Global Hawk, meaning that today's B-1's could someday become Aircraft Carriers.

However, I've always wondered what the hell a Gravship would look like. Are they like the hovercraft from The Matrix?

OOC: I always imagined them looking more like the Protoss Carriers in Starcraft.

As for the Megafortresses described in those Dale Brown books... I remain skeptical. Mainly because of the enormous cost-to-effectivness ratio. Yes, this B-2 can somehow move like a super-heavy fighter and fight like a giant weapons platform. But here's the catch: a B-2 costs $2 billion. The loss of one is a massive amount of taxpayer dollars down the drain. It's just not cost effective, really, since you're sending a craft into close combat but it's too expensive to lose.

"The United Evil Di'Agwan Empire will begin development of a gunship to fit the needs of te Zvarinograd military.

At this point, all I can say is that the ship will be an airship(a.k.a. blimp a.ka.a zepplin a.k.a. giant balloon) and that it'll be armed."

Den Rodness, Air Force Chief of Research

Indeed, I too think it's ridiculous to consider using something as expensive as a B-2 when smaller or simpler aircraft could do a better or cheaper job of it. Losing one B-2 is like losing the WTC all over again. Not to mention that any stealth characteristics the aircraft once had go down the drain when the bomb-bay DOORS are open. :lol

OOC: I think I have what you want.

The GATEKEEPER ULA (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1568815#1568815) (Midway down the post)


BMV/A-7 ULA (GATEKEEPER):

The Gatekeeper is a craft in that was developed and deployed by WA several years ago that can provide long-term, wide-area protection of national and regional borders against invading forces or even some quick-strike offensive capabilities against enemy nations. Employing a system similar to that of the Sleeverian BM-747 Stand-Off Missile Delivery Platform (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=44821&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0), the GATEKEEPER is deployed with a number of internal rotary missile launchers (AKA ‘clip’. Note: the BM-747 bears about 12 (96 missiles)). Unlike the BM-747s, however, the Gatekeeper would be able to simply sit over an area, as on-board long-range radar seeks out targets. Then, when enemy fleets or forces are seen, the Gatekeeper opens its bomb-bay doors and rotary launch pods are presented.

A single BMV/A could eliminate entire invasion forces with a single load of missiles. Thanks to the format of the SkyCat 1000’s transport bays, a number of in-line bomb-bays could be set side-by side, allowing the BMV/A to launch several cruise missiles in rapid succession, multiplying the power and speed of its strikes against enemy fleets and formations. The upper deck of the Gatekeeper bay is used to reload emptied ‘missile clips’ with cruise missiles stored ‘on-hand.’ By this means, a single Gatekeeper could continue operations for an extended time period (a few weeks) over the covered area, even reloading some of the expended missiles without landing.

Many of the PDE-improved cruise and precision-guided missiles proven in recent combat near Ell, launched from BM-747s, would also be capable of being used within the Gatekeeper system. These systems include improved Popeye II Have Lites, AGM-154A and C JSOWs, and AGM-86D and E CALCMS. Each of the missile engines have had Pulse Detonation Engines* incorporated, to extend their range and increase their speed. The CALCMs**, have had their speed boosted to a sustained 1.5 mach. A full-production run of these PDE-CALCMs is being begun already, both to please Western Asian commanders who’ve been pleased with the PDE-improved CALCMs’ performance and at the behest of allied nations that have requested access to the line of missiles.

Other modified missiles are also under consideration for development. Their types include:
-RADAR-SEEKING missile - homes-in on ship radar pulses (based on the HARM missile)
-RADAR-IMAGE missile - seeks a ships radar profile
-TORPEDO missile - releases a homing torpedo near the fleet (Similar to an ASROC)
-INFRA-RED missile - seeks heat produced by engines
-MAGNETIC missile - seeks metal
-ACOUSTIC missile - seeks the sound produced by engines
-FOCAL PLANE ARRAY missile - seeks large objects of a certain shape which are a different shade of color than the background
-RADIO WAVE missile - seeks out radio waves produced by communication systems (based on the HARM-R missile)

A variety of warheads, from HE to submunitions-scattering to EMP, could be employed in this role.

A variety of defensive systems would also be deployed with the Gatekeeper but the exact specifications have not yet been released. It is said that the systems might even include a number of UCAVs that would be deployed to intercept hostile aircraft.

Crew
Minimum: 19 (2 Flight Control Officers (FCO,Pilots), 1 Navigational Directions / Targeting Officer (ND/TO), 1 Communication Systems Officer (CSO), 6 Radar System Technicians (RSTs, + Targeting AI, operate in roles similar to radar techs aboard JSTARs), 2 Defensive Weapons Officers (DWOs, run and monitor defensive actions for the Gatekeeper), 1 EW/ECM Officer (EWO), 2 Bombardiers (+ Weapons Control AI, choose and fire upon targets), and 4 Ammunition Control Officers (ACOs, reload the missile clips).

Extended-term Missions: 30 (3 FCOs, 2 ND/TO, 2 CSO, 9 RSTs, + Targeting AI, 3 DWOs, 2 EWOs, 3 Bombardiers + Weapons Control AI, and 6 ACOs.)


Current Project Status: For now, only two SkyCat 1000s are set to be constructed with the Gatekeeper systems installed. It is expected that foreign interest will precipitate a more expanded production run than would otherwise be possible, paving the way for an expanded Gatekeeper fleet. Testing of the first of the GATEKEEPER systems has been very successful against simulated targets and is now being integrated into the IDF command and logistical structure. A third Gatekeeper unit is rumored to be set aside for Sleeverian use.

UPDATE: There are now several GATEKEEPER systems deployed in Western Asia, where they are cycled constantly for general national defense, and in Omz222, a friendly nation that has acquired several units.

Armaments and Systems:
The GATEKEEPER is equipped with a full suite of ECM/EW systems, which are operated by on-board specialists. A high powered radome allows the crew to seek out and identify enemy targets from stand-off distances and communications systems allow the GATEKEEPER to be fully integrated with friendly forces during operations.

Defensive systems include a handful of Sparrow missile stations converted for use, modified Millennium Guns (highly effective CIWS for ships), RAM-type rockets (cheap for use against incoming enemy fire). The ULA itself is fairly stealthy, since the inflated areas do not provide a radar return and since portions of the unit are designed to remain relatively stealthy. The inflated areas can also stand hundreds of 'hard' rounds thanks to self-sealing materials (for small calibers) and isolated gas packets (to minimize losses to larger rounds).

The ULA bears 128 missiles in its rotary missile launch systems (at the current time, this may change soon due to innovative alternate system testing) and has several dozen 'reloads.' Automated systems allow operators to choose the type of missile and to establish all mission-necessary modifications (such as programming range, angle of attack, and fusing factors).

Estimated Pricing:
>Purchase Cost
$280-300 million (not counting missiles)

------

*- Information about this can be seen in the thread developing the Sambizian S-43 series of craft.

**- CALCMs (Stats: nominal: "600nm" reality: more/ nominal: "High subsonic" reality: more)

AGM-86D can employ a steep terminal attack angle, boasts hundreds of miles range, and uses the BROACH system, whereby small initial charge followed by a large "follow-through" main charge (a principle similar to some dual-charge anti-fortification weapons): a 3,000 lb penetrating warhead. Incindiary materials are added to the shell in my modification.

The AGM-86E is reportedly a version with a range of 1350 – 1620nm and boasts similar specs (for my purposes).

Guidance includes (according to GlobalSecurity): Litton Inertial Navigation Element integrated with an onboard Global Positioning System.

Note: These are top-attack weapons so side-armoring of ships is mostly useless and while it may not sink any ships directly (by punching a hole in the side), there's a high chance that any fuel stored in the ship could be hit and that weapons and command crew, if they're using US-style ships, will be screwed. :wink:

---

Artists’ Conceptions and Pictures:
A 200-ton capacity ULA (CV/A-5) sits on the airfield at Camp Masada, awaiting off-loading (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/skycat_200_mil_01.jpg)
The same ULA unloading vehicles (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/skycat_200_mil_02.jpg)
Another CV/A-5 cruises by bunkered hangars in WA (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/skycat_200_mil_03.jpg)
The Interior of a CV/A-5 (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/skycat_200_mil_04.jpg)
A cut-away of the cargo bay for the CV/A series (displayed is that of a CV/A-5) (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/skycat_200_mil_05.jpg)
A modeled image of the CV/A-7 (http://istoedigital.terra.com.br/img/transp_zepellin_1_05102001.jpg)
A CV/A-4 on Naval patrol duties (http://www.worldskycat.com/improved/skyconverted_375/patrola.jpg)

A demonstration of scales (http://www.worldskycat.com/images/compare_wsk.jpg)

Costs:
Developmental Costs:
$2 billion in final development stages (including testing, improvements, and force integration measures). $420 million was spent on the development-advancement program for the Gatekeeper concept system, not including the cost of the two initial units, which comes out to about $700 million all-told.

Total program development cost (including ALL model types): $5bn to date (over 15 years, 3/4 of funds spent in last 5 years of development)

Foreign-Entity Unit Acquisition Costs (production and sale, not total development unit cost)
BMV/A-7 ULA (Gatekeeper): $280-300 million

OOC: A flight of BM-747s was used on behalf of Ell to utterly destroy several invading enemy fleets. Only a handful of GATEKEEPERs would be needed to do the same, but thanks to their nature as airships and their abilities to land on any terrain, they could be more effective (since they can reload/rearm rapidly and can stay 'on-station' to deal with emerging threats, while the BM-747s (admittedly wonderful craft) can only deal with pre-established mission profiles and are limited to strike-strike-retreat missions under fuel concerns.

OOC: Just sorta additionally:
The ULAs use helium, not explosive hydrogen.

The Stats for the GATEKEEPER (in terms of all factors except for cargo capacity, which is supplanted by the missile platforms) are the same as that of the SkyCat 1000 (CV/A-7 ULA, seen at above link for Gatekeeper.

The price does not include the price of the main armaments (it does include a full load of defensive weapons, however). The modified CALCMs may be found for sale here (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1866691#1866691) under "PDE-Improved CALCMs."

Basic stats requested:
Range:
Bearing max payload, at cruise: 8,200 nm
Ferrying, at cruise: 16,400nm

Operational Altitudes
Normal Operations: 9,000 ft
Maximum Operational Altitude (Operational Ceiling): 28,000 ft

Speed:
Cruise: 91 kts (169 km/h; 105 mph)
Sprint: 104 kts (193 km/h; 120 mph)

We would like to note that WA's GATEKEEPER is ver effective in our tests, and it will be finally "tested" in combat soon.

OOC: I always imagined them looking more like the Protoss Carriers in Starcraft.

As for the Megafortresses described in those Dale Brown books... I remain skeptical. Mainly because of the enormous cost-to-effectivness ratio. Yes, this B-2 can somehow move like a super-heavy fighter and fight like a giant weapons platform. But here's the catch: a B-2 costs $2 billion. The loss of one is a massive amount of taxpayer dollars down the drain. It's just not cost effective, really, since you're sending a craft into close combat but it's too expensive to lose.

Which is presumably why they only modified one B-2, and when they modified it the USAF was planning to buy 70+ B-2s, which would have reduced the cost a bit (due to economies of scale). Also the B-2 which was modified was then put back in active service as a normal bomber until it was needed to perform the escort-role again(in Iran).
And while it was expensive, the entire point was to be able to protect bombers while on long range missions, which fighters wouldn't be able to do due to fuel constraints.

We could possibly modify one of our Scimitar Warships for this purpose, but it would be quite costly.

http://moderators.united.net.kg/NS%20Pic%20Hosting/untitled.JPG (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=88433)

Autonomous City-states...

ONE of Dale Brown's novels? Almost all of them revolve around the Megafortress or some other Heavy Bomber Modification. Some of them are configured to launch pilotless aircraft like the Global Hawk, meaning that today's B-1's could someday become Aircraft Carriers.

However, I've always wondered what the hell a Gravship would look like. Are they like the hovercraft from The Matrix?

I didn't say "one." I said "novels." :)

And, yes, I think that gravships would look quite a bit like hovercraft from the Matrix... even though those ships generate lift by creating electromagnetic fields as opposed to gravitic fields.

OOC: I always imagined them looking more like the Protoss Carriers in Starcraft.

As for the Megafortresses described in those Dale Brown books... I remain skeptical. Mainly because of the enormous cost-to-effectivness ratio. Yes, this B-2 can somehow move like a super-heavy fighter and fight like a giant weapons platform. But here's the catch: a B-2 costs $2 billion. The loss of one is a massive amount of taxpayer dollars down the drain. It's just not cost effective, really, since you're sending a craft into close combat but it's too expensive to lose.

That's why only the one B-2 airframe is converted. All of the other Megafortresses are either B-52s or B-1s. Besides, you run the risk of losing those bombers whenever they are sent into combat. The Megafortress concept allows the bombers to fight back and defend themselves.

Indeed, I too think it's ridiculous to consider using something as expensive as a B-2 when smaller or simpler aircraft could do a better or cheaper job of it. Losing one B-2 is like losing the WTC all over again. Not to mention that any stealth characteristics the aircraft once had go down the drain when the bomb-bay DOORS are open. :lol

Thus the development of stealthy pods carrying the air-to-air missiles for the EB-52. :) Opening the bay doors is always dangerous... that's why we've developed quick release technologies so that the bay doors don't have to be open for very long.

So far the BMV/A-7 ULA (Gatekeeper) with the modified CALCMs is our primary choice, unless anyone from from those who offered contracts would like to give drafts of thier work so we can see who we will choose?

OOC:
On a side note, I'm sticking to modern-near future technology. Gravships seem a little bit too far on the line for me. Oh, and my military is built for two things, air mobility and air superiority. It has to be, I don't have a navy, remember?

Bring us massive firepower

It's already been done, by me/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
:idea: Hyperion Class Rigid Airship
http://www.hpphoto.com/servlet/LinkPhoto?GUID=71b94c61-2186-5777-955c-394d1ed248a2&size=
The Hyperion Class of Rigid Airship is a helium filled, rigid airship (not a blimp). The helium is contained in several self-sealing cells which are packed in a kevlar/polymer composite skin which is wrapped around a lightwieght titanium alloy skeleton. There are 8 turboprops which provide foward flight propulsion, 5 gas turbines powering 4 rotating and one stationary ducted fan provide additonal power(one fan is located in the tail the other 4 help make speedy liftoffs with thurst vectoring).The Hyperion class combines the capabilites of the AC-130 Spectre gunship, the KC-10/KC-130 Tankers, the E-2C Hawkeye, the Graf Zepplins of WWI, the B-52 bomber, the A-10 and the 747-400 ABL aircraft. It carries an impressive amount of cannons and machine guns and can saturate and orbit an area for many hours laying down cover fire. It also carries a large array of anti-tank, anti- aircraft anti-ship or cruise missles and many types of bombs. It can hold 20 fully equipped paratroopers or spec ops in the cargo bay. In lieu of troops, the cargo bay can hold a MOAB or Daisy Cutter or Hades fuel-air bomb. A massive radar is enclosed by the skin of the airship (the skin acts as a massive radome) It can tract multiple airborne targets. If if it tracks an ICBM, SCUD, or cruise missile, it has the ability to destroy it with its airborne laser(ABL). The ABL can also be used for defense, to destroy SAMs or AAMs. (It carries a large variety and quantiy of counter measures to keep it protected from enemy fire. If a missile does get by all the complex systems, the airframe can take a heavy hit since it is heavily armored with boron carbide plates. and should the skin of the airship be punctured, up to golf ball sized holes can be self-sealed. It can also refuel helicopters, bombers, fighters, even another Airship via 2 house and drouge systems and 1 flying boom system. Also all on board batteries and fuel-cell systems are supplementd by solar panels which recharce all systems, in-flight, saving on fuel.
Specifications
Crew: 4 flight crew, 16 weapons/AWACS operators, 1 boom operator, up to 20 paratroops.
Length: many feet
Power Plant: (8} Turboprops (5) Gas Turbines in vectorable/rotating ducts.
Service Celing: 30,000 feet,
Cruising Speed: 280mph
Maximum Speed: 320mph
Weapons
(8} 56mm rapid fire Cannons in 4 turrets
(2) 105mm Howitzers in 2 turrets
(4) 30mm 3 barrel cannons in 2 turrets
(1) ABL/COIL High Energy Laser in turret
(7) CIWS 20mm Phalanx turrets
(2) Cruise missiles up to the size of a SS-N-22
(1) 40mm MK-109 Grenade machine gun in nose turret
(1) 25mm 3 Barrel Gatling Cannon in nose turret
(2) 25mm Bushmaster MGs in 1 rear turret
(4) bomb bays that can carry a number of laser guided bombs, JDAMs, nuclear bombs, air to ground missiles,anti-ship missiles, nuclear or conventional depth charges, phoenix or amraam anti-air missiles
(48} AIM-9Z Sidewinder in 2 turret launchers
(8} FIM-92 Stinger in 4 swivel mounts
(6) Tomahawk Cruise Missiles
(6) Patriot PAC-3 modified SAMs in 2 launchers
(12) AGM-65 Mavericks
(24) Rockeye cluster bombs or regular bombs of simialr size, or (8} JDAM sized bombs on wing bomb racks
(4) AIM-120 AMRAAM
(12) AIM-132 ASRAAM
(4) AIM-54 Phoenix missle on 360 degree turret mount.
(2) ALMV/ASAT missiles
Counter Measures/Electronics
300 RR-129A/AL Chaff Countermeasures
40 MJU-53/B Infrared Decoy Flare
106 MJU-51/B Advanced Infrared Flare
AN/AAQ-24 DIRCM pod
2 AN/ALQ-178 ECM pods
ALR-56C Radar Warning Receiver
Air Search Radome (Same as the one on the E-2C)
Price
$999.9million
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting. However, can the Hyperion class carry a 55,000 pound, 200 inch long and 54 inch wide AZ-MCOB-A "Grandfather of All Bombs" instead of a MOAB or FAE/TB munition?

If you keep the ammo for the big guns to the minimum and sacrifice some of the extra fuel, just about any sized bomb could fit in the bay with slight modifactions of the carrige system.

How about some egxisting models of heavy bombers, armed with missiles with nuklear and/or emp -warheads ?

Bump, anyone else?

Very well then, the United Socialist States of Zvarinograd offers $10 billion for the production rights (domestic military use) of the BMV/A-7 ULA Gatekeeper. That will be all.

OOC:
Population: 228,000,000
Civil Rights: Few
Economy: Powerhouse
GDP per Capita: $25,000
GDP: $5,700,000,000,000
National Budget: $1,572,105,600,000
Percentage of GDP Spent on Defense: 5.52%
Percentage of Budget Spent on Defense: 20%
Military Budget: $314,421,120,000

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

OOC:
Bump for Western Asia

Very well then, the United Socialist States of Zvarinograd offers $10 billion for the production rights (domestic military use) of the BMV/A-7 ULA Gatekeeper. That will be all.

OOC:
Population: 228,000,000
Civil Rights: Few
Economy: Powerhouse
GDP per Capita: $25,000
GDP: $5,700,000,000,000
National Budget: $1,572,105,600,000
Percentage of GDP Spent on Defense: 5.52%
Percentage of Budget Spent on Defense: 20%
Military Budget: $314,421,120,000

SkyCat International, Ltd. and its partners in the GATEKEEPER project have agreed to sell these rights to your country upon the condition that the technology not be sold or permanently transferred to other countries and upon the condition that it not be used against Delta Triumvirate nations or their respective forces (OOC: To date, WA, Sniper Country, and Gradenk).

Once these terms have been agreed upon, the sale will be completed at the tendered price and industrial and technology advisors from SkyCat International, Ltd. and related firms will be flown to Zvarinograd with blueprints and designs to advise your personnel in the construction of GATEKEEPER units. These advisors will remain until your productions operation has been sufficiently (to your satisfaction) set underway.

We are pleased to do business with you and look forward to any other interests that you may have in SkyCat's cargo transportation dirigibles or other products produced by Western Asia's fine military manufacturers.