New to the forum? Check out our Introduction Page and New Members Guide!
| Military Total Cost of Ownership | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 21 2015, 02:10 AM (66 Views) | |
| Sovy Kurosei | Nov 21 2015, 02:10 AM Post #1 |
|
I've been wikipedia-mining some figures to find out how much shooty things costs. This list is going to get updated as I go. I'm hoping to get enough information so people can put together a realistic armed forces and not just hoping what they want happens to have a real life analogue to be based off of. Like what if the Soviet Union went with a carrier-based navy instead of a submarine one for example, what would they expect to field. Or what a professional army would look like if Canada had one. Dunno if this is the right forum for this or not though. I've included some annotations, particularly with maintenance contracts. It isn't just enough to buy a plane or a ship but the maintenance, servicemen, and supplies need to run them too. For ships like aircraft carriers there is also the airplanes and escorts that need to go with it. I'm hoping with enough data I can break everything down to the total cost of ownership (purchase, supply, maintain, overheads, etc) per unit/regiment/brigade so it is just a matter of punching in what you want and getting a good idea of what it costs to buy and support it.
|
![]() |
|
| Demoness | Nov 21 2015, 05:09 AM Post #2 |
|
So... Is the Fenwicki-Demonessian alliance feasible? I don't recall if you were around for that. Demoness was heavily navy with Fenwick being more toward the army, but we have both. I'm not sure about Fenwick's air force, though Demoness' recently "split" from its army. What should it look like? |
![]() |
|
| Sovy Kurosei | Nov 22 2015, 01:35 AM Post #3 |
|
Yeah, having an alliance and different military priorities is okay even if all you have is rocks and sticks. ![]() About the only thing I can say with confidence is that running an active aircraft carrier is really, really, really expensive. Like so expensive to maintain that the UK was between mothballing or selling off their second super carrier while it was still under construction. They eventually decided to bring it in service but are giving it a fairly weak complement of planes/helicopters. |
![]() |
|
| Demoness | Nov 22 2015, 04:39 AM Post #4 |
|
I honestly wonder what the world's average military budget would be like if the United States didn't "help" so many nations with security, their equipment, etc. Like if the US went back to being isolationist after WWII and the Cold War didn't happen. |
![]() |
|
| Sovy Kurosei | Nov 30 2015, 09:23 PM Post #5 |
|
Western Europe would have probably been invaded and the only free country in Europe left standing would be the UK only by the grace of it being an island nation. Saying that at least the Korea's would have been united!
Edited by Sovy Kurosei, Nov 30 2015, 09:23 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Demoness | Dec 2 2015, 05:50 AM Post #6 |
|
So you're saying there wouldn't have been a corresponding rise in budgets from European countries to compensate for the lack of assistance? |
![]() |
|
| Sovy Kurosei | Dec 2 2015, 11:48 PM Post #7 |
|
They could have but Warsaw Pact is a military juggernaut. The only Western European country with an intact armed forces at the end of WWII was the UK and they would have pulled a Dunkirk II back to the home island if the Soviets invaded. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Introductory Seminar · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
8:25 PM Jul 10
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy







8:25 PM Jul 10