NationStates Jolt Archive

OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
of the
UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF BURTILANA


Dear world,
We are here again looking for Naval help, our designers are too busy at the moment. What we want is a landing craft suitable for carrying small Jeeps or tanks, infantry or humanatarian aid, they have to be self propelled, and be capable of beaching.
Judging by the efforts on our last competition, we shall have some good craft.
This time their are no size or price limitations.
We are not sure if anybody else uses landing craft like this, but we have for the last 5 decades, and plan on contiuing to do so.

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

Trilon Defense Inc. Desgin and proposal Team is currently working hard to get a proposal together for you request. if you have any special request or specs please contact us. thank you.

Trilon Defense Inc. D&P Team

OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
of the
UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF BURTILANA


We thank you for your interest


Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

The Binarian Empire can deliver several ships of that type. Our primary landing craft is the Monitor class Landing Ship. It meets all of your requirements, and can carry all but the largest vehicles.

Monitor Class Landing Ship Heavy
Class type: Landing Ship Heavy
Displacement:
Length: 320 meters
Beam: 85 meters
Draft:
1st 80 meters- 3 meters
Rest of the hull-12
Propulsion and power: 4 screws (geared turbines) 2 x Gas Turbines
Speed: 33 knot maximum
Complement: 1637 officers and men
Troop Capacity-4000-2500 combat troops-1500 logistics personel
25x M-78 Kilgore MBT
125xM-77 Rattler UWV
100xM-694 Field Artillery
10x M-55 MLRS "Sweeping Death"
50x Crusader Infantry Fighting Vehicle
Armament:
4x 6 inch/ 55 cal dual turrets
4 x Goal Keeper CWIS
12x Mrk 2. VLS Cells
Air Wing
10x Helicopters

The Monitor Class Landing ship Heavy is a new Landing ship design to land large amounts of troops quickly, and providing light support for the landing forces. It can land half an Army or Marine regiment and all of their equipment and support units. The soliders on board have a 1500 man logistical unit attached to them. This ship lands the whole unit, equipment, and logistics in one ship.

The hull is is more flat bottomed at the bow, and is a very shallow draft for the first 100 meters, but as it goes farther aft, it becomes a round bottom ship. This allows the ship to land directly on the beach head and land armor and artillery directly onto the beaches which is critical for any amphibous assualt.

The 6 inch cannons are placed with 2 fore and 2 aft, with one pot and one starboard, this allows for support to be directed from the bridge which functions as regimental comand and control until an HQ is set up in hostile territory.

Aft of the Bridge are the VLS tubes and the helicopter launch platforms. The choppers are stored in 2 hangars; fore and aft. The first is directly behind the bridge, and the second is aft ahead of VLS tubes which are fore of the rear hatch; used for launching of divers and smaller landing craft. It has a over head crane system that can lift tanks into smaller landing craft in the event that the ship cannot reach shore, or close enough for the men to wade to the target.


Price:7 Billion USD Per Vessel


Our second proposal is the M-334 LCAC:

M-334 LCAC
Propulsion:
SLEP: 6–Vericor Power Systems ETF-40B gas turbines with Full Authority Digital Engine Control
Length: 42.8 meters.
Beam: 18.3 meters
Displacement: 98.6 metric tons light;
215 metric tons full load.
Speed: 44 knots full load.
Range: 400 km at 40 kt with payload
Crew: 7
Load: 215 metric tons max
Military lift:
50 troops
or
2x M-78 Kilgore MBT+crews
or
6x M-55 MLRS "Sweeping Death"+crews
or
4x M-77 Rattler UWV with 40 troops+crews
or
4x Crusader IFV with 40 troops+crews
Armament:
4x 14.5 mm machine guns.

Price Per Unit: 500 Million USD


Note to buyers: Equipment does not come with the landing craft.

OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
of the
UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF BURTILANA


We are looking for something similar to 1010102's second proposal.

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

Trilon Defense inc. has come with the following proposal for your navy. Please look at your proposal and let us know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Artemio Trentino
Director of foreign sales and services

Here is the link to your proposal
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/grimreaper6/viewtopic.php?p=23&mforum=grimreaper6#23

OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
of the
UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF BURTILANA




Trilon Defense inc. has come with the following proposal for your navy. Please look at your proposal and let us know if you have any questions. Thank you.
[/url]

Just the two questions, how what types of units, and how many units can each of the Netherlands Landing Craft hold?
Secondly, what other specs so they have, speed, range, etc.

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

bump

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

This memo is to answer your naval department’s questions about the Netherlands class landing craft. I hope the following will answer your questions. If there are further questions please fill free to ask. Thank you.
Artemio Trentino
Director of foreign sales and services

LLCU-201: Can carry two main battle tanks M1A2 size or 4 medium trucks, it has a range of 200 miles and speed fully loaded of 25 knots. 400 soldiers
LCU-100: Can carry 1 MBT or 2 medium trucks, has a range of 200 miles at a speed of 20 knots fully loaded. 250 soldiers
LLCVP-5: Can carry 1 APC or I medium Truck or 3 smaller trucks, Range 150 miles at a speed of 15 knots fully loaded. 150 soldiers
LCVP-4: Can carry 2 small trucks 100 soldiers and a range of 150 miles at a speed of 15 knots fully loaded.
SLCVP-1: Can carry 4 atvs or 60 soldiers have a range of 100 miles at a speed of 13 knots.

bump
pnwb

OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
of the
UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF BURTILANA


Dear world,
We are here again looking for Naval help, our designers are too busy at the moment. What we want is a landing craft suitable for carrying small Jeeps or tanks, infantry or humanatarian aid, they have to be self propelled, and be capable of beaching.
Judging by the efforts on our last competition, we shall have some good craft.
This time their are no size or price limitations.
We are not sure if anybody else uses landing craft like this, but we have for the last 5 decades, and plan on contiuing to do so.

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

Get a large hovercraft, rather like the ones used to ferry tourists and their cars across the English channel.

Put 2 105mm howitzers, a small mortar battery, heavy machine guns, autocannon and suitable air defences on it.

Now, not only do you now have a sea going landing craft, you now have a sea going landing craft capable of supporting the troops and vehicles during the landing, and immediately after in the first few miles inland. Over most terrains too.

You probably carry 2 Challenger 2's. Or, 4 APC's (Warriors or Scimitars for example) or smaller vehicles, Or 6 Land Rover Scratch's
Obviously there is a certain amount of customising that could be done.

Its a company scale assault craft. 120ish men. 2 companies at a push (240men plus support units such as mortars + command). is useful for special forces use. Bigger battalion or brigade scale craft are also available.

Get a large hovercraft, rather like the ones used to ferry tourists and their cars across the English channel.

Put 2 105mm howitzers, a small mortar battery, heavy machine guns, autocannon and suitable air defences on it.

Now, not only do you now have a sea going landing craft, you now have a sea going landing craft capable of supporting the troops and vehicles during the landing, and immediately after in the first few miles inland. Over most terrains too.

OOC: Cause thats not a rip off of my bigger design at all. :rolleyes:

OOC: You could just use the LCU-2000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landing_Craft_Utility#LCU_2000_class) be done with it, they're much cheaper and almost as good as anything else you'll find on NS.

OOC: Cause thats not a rip off of my bigger design at all. :rolleyes:

No actually....

It's what is/was used by the British Royal Marines.

Plus mine actually can go inland and support the troops, retrieve special forces. etc.

No actually....

It's what is used by the British Royal Marines.

Plus mine actually can go inland and support the troops, retrieve special forces. etc.

OOC: Armed hovercraft have some utility as FACS, but aren't very good fro ground combat.

OOC: Armed hovercraft don't work very well.

They must be rather effective

The Royal Marines are a elite organisation, and the UK is known for using pretty good equipment. And considering the small size of the British military, it has the 2nd biggest defence budget in the world. So I'd be almost certain the equipment wouldn't be sub standard.

Only thing against it is the age of the technology. It may of been replaced by something else. The footage I saw of Royal Marines in Norway using these types of craft was at least 12 years old.

(If you wondering why the UK is in Norway, Norway's defence is partially the responsibility of the UK.)

One other benefit, Hovercraft shouldn't set off pressure based mines.

They must be rather effective

The Royal Marines are a elite organisation, and the UK is known for using pretty good equipment. And considering the small size of the British military, it has the 2nd biggest defence budget in the world. So I'd be almost certain the equipment wouldn't be sub standard.

Only thing against it is the age of the technology. It may of been replaced by something else. The footage I saw of Royal Marines in Norway using these types of craft was at least 12 years old.

(If you wondering why the UK is in Norway, Norway's defence is partially the responsibility of the UK.)

One other benefit, Hovercraft shouldn't set off pressure based mines.

OOC: France's is actuacly higher. However many analysts think China isn't completely disclosing theirs. Most Estimates put them in the 200+ Billion range.

OOC: France's is actuacly higher. However many analysts think China isn't completely disclosing theirs. Most Estimates put them in the 200+ Billion range.

Yea fair enough, I was looking at out of date figures.

Still, in proportion to the size of the force, the budget is huge, the equipment isn't cheap. So I really doubt its sub standard.

They must be rather effective

The Royal Marines are a elite organisation, and the UK is known for using pretty good equipment. And considering the small size of the British military, it has the 2nd biggest defence budget in the world. So I'd be almost certain the equipment wouldn't be sub standard.

Only thing against it is the age of the technology. It may of been replaced by something else. The footage I saw of Royal Marines in Norway using these types of craft was at least 12 years old.

(If you wondering why the UK is in Norway, Norway's defence is partially the responsibility of the UK.)

One other benefit, Hovercraft shouldn't set off pressure based mines.

OOC: There's a difference between arming hovercraft for stand off fire support or naval strike purposes and arming them for in shore operations. You really can't armour a hovercraft so you better hope you move fast to avoid everything shot at you.

Yea fair enough, I was looking at out of date figures.

Still, in proportion to the size of the force, the budget is huge, the equipment isn't cheap. So I really doubt its sub standard.

Lulz. Just because its expansive doesn't mean its top of line. I've purchased expensive steaks and they've ended up being tough and rubbery.

Lulz. Just because its expansive doesn't mean its top of line. I've purchased expensive steaks and they've ended up being tough and rubbery.

This is true.

But the UK's equipment is top of line.

Training is also excellent. Only thing we lack is numbers.

OOC: There's a difference between arming hovercraft for stand off fire support or naval strike purposes and arming them for in shore operations. You really can't armour a hovercraft so you better hope you move fast to avoid everything shot at you.

You would be surprised.

The skirts could be doubled or tripled layered. Coated in tile like metal or ceramic plates. Allowing for flexibility. While still armouring the vehicle. The actual structure could be better armoured. I'm not saying its going to be a giant tank, because to have the kinda of armour on a hovercraft just would not be effective. But they could be armoured to take damage from large calibre rounds. Lighter variants of missiles, mines wont be a problem. Plus speed is an advantage. Countermeasures would be fitted too.

Its not like vehicles such as the Stryker, or the British Scimitar are plated in 10 inches of armour is it.... they are still successful. Scimitars and Scorpions were the front like tanks in the Falklands war of 1982, because the British could not get Chieftens\Challenger 1's down there fast enough. These light vehicles preformed well against the Argentines, so armour isn't everything.

You would be surprised.

The skirts could be doubled or tripled layered. Coated in tile like metal or ceramic plates. Allowing for flexibility. While still armouring the vehicle. The actual structure could be better armoured. I'm not saying its going to be a giant tank, because to have the kinda of armour on a hovercraft just would not be effective. But they could be armoured to take damage from large calibre rounds. Lighter variants of missiles, mines wont be a problem. Plus speed is an advantage. Countermeasures would be fitted too.

Its not like vehicles such as the Stryker, or the British Scimitar are plated in 10 inches of armour is it.... they are still successful. Scimitars and Scorpions were the front like tanks in the Falklands war of 1982, because the British could not get Chieftens\Challenger 1's down there fast enough. These light vehicles preformed well against the Argentines, so armour isn't everything.


Performing well against the Argentines don't mean crap. You know a lot about the Falklands Conflict do you? Then you certianly rember when your "Elite" Royal Marines where taken prisioner...

Performing well against the Argentines don't mean crap. You know a lot about the Falklands Conflict do you? Then you certianly rember when your "Elite" Royal Marines where taken prisioner...

Yea, at the beginning of the conflict, when 1 small unit is faced by an entire invasion force fighting is pointless, guess what, they still fought, and yea were taken prisoner.

By the end of the war, 11000+ Argentines had been taken prisoner, by a smaller British force. Mainly Para's and Marines, I think Gurkha's as well.

I know quite a bit about the Falklands, as my father did serve there...

Many an occasion where Americans have been captured too. Many an American Marine was captured in nam, At least the entire Argentine force was actual military, unlike the Vietcong, (differing from the NVA) A fair few Americans have been captured in Iraq and Afghanistan too. And that helicopter pilot in Somalia?

Ghost Soldiers by Hampton Sides

^ About capture of US troops in the Philippines's I think. Unsure of time, I think WW2.

Its not like vehicles such as the Stryker, or the British Scimitar are plated in 10 inches of armour is it.... they are still successful. Scimitars and Scorpions were the front like tanks in the Falklands war of 1982, because the British could not get Chieftens\Challenger 1's down there fast enough. These light vehicles preformed well against the Argentines, so armour isn't everything.

A. The Argentine Army is far from being a world class opponent.

B. The Scorpion/Sabre combo was effective because the same terrain that prevented the Brits from using their heavy armor did the same to the Argentines. Try taking Scorpions up against any MBt, even T-55, and see how successful you are.

C. I'm no expert but I don't think the Argentines had any AT weapons because they didn't think the Brits could deploy armour in that kinda terrain.

D. We should stop hijacking this thread.

OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
of the
UNITED SOCIALIST STATES OF BURTILANA


Thank you to all you who took part, we would like to do the following:
Purchase 40 of 1010102's M-334 LCACs a well as the following from Imbrinium:
40 LCU-100
40 LLCVP-5
40 LCVP-4
40 SLCVP-1

Head of the Burtilanian Navy
High Admiral Luke Santaz

Trolon defense inc. thanks you for your purchase will send detailed massage on delivery and total price a later time.
once again thank you for doing business with us.

The EMPIRE OF EVOLUTIONED WARFARE will help any army, nation, navy with war, power control. Just as long as you join the Empire.:sniper::mp5::sniper::mp5::sniper::mp5:

The EMPIRE OF EVOLUTIONED WARFARE will help any army, nation, navy with war, power control. Just as long as you join the Empire.:sniper::mp5::sniper::mp5::sniper::mp5:

Ermm....

A. The Argentine Army is far from being a world class opponent.

B. The Scorpion/Sabre combo was effective because the same terrain that prevented the Brits from using their heavy armor did the same to the Argentines. Try taking Scorpions up against any MBt, even T-55, and see how successful you are.

C. I'm no expert but I don't think the Argentines had any AT weapons because they didn't think the Brits could deploy armour in that kinda terrain.

D. We should stop hijacking this thread.
A. The Argentine Army is, indeed, farm from being a world class opponent. In 1982, the situation was quite different however. Although there were large formations of conscripts on the islands, there were also professionals formations, amongst them, the 1st battalion of Marine Infantry. This is beside the point, the point is that the Argentine Army has been the most effective, modern, and professional force that the British forces have engaged in any substantial conflict since 1945.

B. Key point, but this favored the Argentines rather than the British. British armor was superior to Argentine one, although the logistic issues might have been too troublesome.

C. There were AT weapons, but not in the widespread use and as modern as the ones employed by the British, and they were not used very much. The Scropions were expected, to a degree, the Argentine Army even deployed Panhards on the islands.

Armour is far from everything. The Malvinas was is perhaps not the best conflict to demonstrate that point though.

The EMPIRE OF EVOLUTIONED WARFARE will help any army, nation, navy with war, power control. Just as long as you join the Empire.:sniper::mp5::sniper::mp5::sniper::mp5:

Uh, what is this?

Please take the time to read the stickies before posting, as well as the opening post of the thread you're posting in.

Also...

NEVER. USE. SMILEYS. FOR. IN-CHARACTER. POSTS. PL0X.