Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

And they have no interest at all in control of sea lanes? Land-based aircraft can't effectively secure your freedom of the seas.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

No, but a superior aerospace force + a regular navy is another matter.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

Only if a 'regular navy' is well supplied with carriers, and you count naval aviation as not contributing to the power of the navy.

According to Wikipedia, only 9 countries on Earth currently have aircraft carriers at all, and most don't have more than one in current commission.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

'Regular navy' as in 'at the setting TL, without deviations from average troop or equipment quality as compared to other navies'.

That being said, I'm not sure maintaining many oceanic paths under control is a priority for a faction that has primarily air-based both in terms of combat and logistics vehicles. Island-based aircraft should suffice to safeguard the naval paths between the islands, the local fishing operations etc.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

Sure, but if that means that they have a bunch of CBGs, I definitely don't know that.
Do they do all their civilian bulk cargo transport by air-freight?

It's probably not impossible for their rivals to conduct naval-based interdiction of airlanes, for that matter. I'd be inclined to invest in some submarines with SAMs.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

CBGs?

A large extent. Not all islands even have a clear delivery path between the shore and the central lands.

Doesn't that basically require already having achieved regional dominance in the first place?

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

Carrier Battle Groups
Is this a contra-grav setting? You said TL10^, but didn't specify that I noticed.

If it is, their airforce probably could have unlimited endurance with airborne carriers. If it isn't, I'm wondering how this can be economically viable.
I don't see why. It's commerce raiding made slightly more inconvenient because the commerce you're trying to raid is relatively fast-moving.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

Yes, though the Khæn favour Hyperdynamic VTOL Ornithopters (they aren't as good at hovering statically, but they can take off from and land pretty much anywhere, and are pretty economical).

Why isn't it? Sure, by MC rules, air logistics are about 2x as expensive (IDHMBWM). But transports don't need unlimited endurance - they just need enough endurance to perform their job plus a bit extra. On the plus side, they can deliver stuff fast. Also, they can deliver stuff to places where a navy or land logistics force can't (or can barely) reach. I guess it just puts them into a niche.

I still don't get it: you're saying that an 'average' enemy navy would be enough to seriously try to threaten the Khæn's local naval commerce, which is protected by both the local 'average' navy and a local 'superior' airforce? While having a stretched logistics trail?

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

I think that the problem is that by weight, aerial transport is much more than twice as expensive as water transport. Closer to an order of magnitude, all told.

At least when you're dealing in bulk, which you will be, when it comes to fuel and ordnance.

Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings
 

The issue isn't the military logistics...air logistics might not be feasible for truly massive campaigns, but if you aren't doing something like Operation Overlord I wouldn't worry that much. It will be unreasonably expensive but you can potentially absorb that cost.

However, there has been no point in recent history, possibly in history at all where civilian trade didn't make heavy use of water transport as the cheapest of all bulk transport methods. (I have no clue why Mass Combat sea logistics cost more than land logistics.) Contragrav might be able to upset that, though.

"Unable to import or export heavy goods at reasonable prices" is not an economic niche I can believe.
Well, I thought you said they didn't have naval commerce to speak of, I was aiming for their air commerce instead.

Do they not engage in long distance trade? As a nation in a TL9+ world? That's very hard to credit. If your Khæn have no commerce outside easy air patrol range of their land bases that might protect them from raiding, but it's unbelievable.

Also, naval forces don't so much require a 'logistics trail' as such. They can have one, but they also have internal range and stores to allow them to cruise for long distances and timeframes. A modern SSN (nuclear submarine) can circumnavigate the globe without surfacing, never mind resupplying. Operating far from logistics limits how much they can do before withdrawing for resupply, but when each SAM brings down an airliner or cargo plane and a handful of shells or a torpedo destroys a surface freighter that limit is more than enough to be intolerable.