Draka vs TBO America

SF: discuss futuristic sci-fi series, ideas, and crossovers.

Moderator: NecronLord

Post Reply
User avatar
MKSheppard
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Posts: 29872
Joined: 2002-07-06 06:34pm

Post by MKSheppard »

SirNitram wrote:I had to stop and go get confirmation, but yes, Draka computers can't be reprogrammed.

Fucking pathetic!
The Alliance for Democracy's computers are like that too; all this is apparently in response to the widespread espionage and paranoia in the Drakaverse.
As to Stirling's comments? Author's Intent vs. evidence. The timeline shows they will attack anyone, anytime, for any excuse.
Oh, there's no questioning that; but I have to agree with Stirling on this that they're not like the Nazis who just did everything on the fly; they're more like the Soviet Union and their planning apparatus. What does strain this heavily is the speed of the Drakian advance against the Nazis in the Drakaverse WWII; they move from the Caucasus to the frontiers of the Ukraine and Poland within about oh four months, something that took the Soviets a lot longer in OTL.
"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong

"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

MKSheppard wrote:
SirNitram wrote:I had to stop and go get confirmation, but yes, Draka computers can't be reprogrammed.

Fucking pathetic!
The Alliance for Democracy's computers are like that too; all this is apparently in response to the widespread espionage and paranoia in the Drakaverse.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this idiocy. Just wow.
As to Stirling's comments? Author's Intent vs. evidence. The timeline shows they will attack anyone, anytime, for any excuse.
Oh, there's no questioning that; but I have to agree with Stirling on this that they're not like the Nazis who just did everything on the fly; they're more like the Soviet Union and their planning apparatus. What does strain this heavily is the speed of the Drakian advance against the Nazis in the Drakaverse WWII; they move from the Caucasus to the frontiers of the Ukraine and Poland within about oh four months, something that took the Soviets a lot longer in OTL.
This is why I assume they are, basically, psychopaths. It strains the credibility to beleive they talk these things out rationally given the sheer tempo that occours. I prefer not to invoke 'This is bloody stupid.' where I can get away with it.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
Ford Prefect
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 8254
Joined: 2005-05-16 04:08am
Location: The real number domain

Post by Ford Prefect »

MKSheppard wrote:Given that the fastest atmospheric fighter in the Drakaverse is only capable of Mach 4 or so...
That was mach 4 in the sixties.
What is Project Zohar?

Here's to a certain mostly harmless nutcase.
User avatar
Imperial Overlord
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11978
Joined: 2004-08-19 04:30am
Location: The Tower at Charm

Post by Imperial Overlord »

The mach 4 craft was a trainer. And Alliance orbitals were hitting Draka fighters in the cockpit (only to blind alas, they didn't want to expand the war) when they strayed into Alliance territory during dogfights in the war where the Draka conquer India.

The computers have portable physical instruction sets which can add programs and command when inserted (they're designed to be able to do that, which is how the Alliance got its virus into the Draka systems), so they can sort of reprogram their computers, but yes their computer capabilities suck.
The Excellent Prismatic Spray. For when you absolutely, positively must kill a motherfucker. Accept no substitutions. Contact a magician of the later Aeons for details. Some conditions may apply.
Norseman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: 2004-07-02 10:20am

Post by Norseman »

SirNitram wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:
SirNitram wrote:I had to stop and go get confirmation, but yes, Draka computers can't be reprogrammed.

Fucking pathetic!
The Alliance for Democracy's computers are like that too; all this is apparently in response to the widespread espionage and paranoia in the Drakaverse.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this idiocy. Just wow.
Indeed but that's not all!

* Everyone in the Drakaverse must have travel papers and identification to go anywhere!
* There is total gun control, to the extent that when a group of Alliance agents visits the Dominion and discover that guns are legal they go: "I understand why a Draka wants a gun, to be ready to kill at any time, but why would a civillian need one?"
* A couple dozen people each year are locked up for illegal comping (e.g. messing around with computers!).
* Computers are massively restricted ROM devices with very little memory, and generally relies on the big central machine with tiny peripherals model.

Despite all of this the Draka were not only able to consistently execute defectors (not all of them but enough), but they also stole every secret the Alliance had so that they were only 4-5 years behind the alliance.

I must say this is a tad incompetent, the books are well written and exciting, but the ADN is so mindbogglingly stupid at times...
Norseman's Fics the SD archive of my fics.
User avatar
Stuart
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2935
Joined: 2004-10-26 09:23am
Location: The military-industrial complex

Re: Draka vs TBO America

Post by Stuart »

hongi wrote:The Domination in 1998 face off against nuke-friendly America in the year 1998. At the exact moment the final war on Earth is taking place, everyone in the Domination is transported over to the TBO-verse in exactly the same position in terms of land and geography. For example, a Draka citizen in Africa is still in Africa, a Draka spy in California is still in TBO California.

The same goes for TBOers. The TBO Chinese have all been transported to the Draka-China and the same for all Draka-held territories. The Draka still have the virus in their possession, but no TBO person is infected yet (not enough time). I haven't read the book where the Draka and the Alliance fight it out, but I'm assuming that it was a conventional war scenario along with the superweapons. So when the replacement happens, all ships and missiles and planes that were about to drop weapons find themselves over TBO America or other allied nations. TBO America goes WTF we're getting invaded and we have war.
I hope uou'll excuse this bit of thread necromancy but I only just found this thread (by accident as it happens) and I thought some "author's input" might be helpful.

A few bits of background; I've never read the Draka series so I'm going more or less by what's been said here. Also, the level of technology that's being described as part of the Draka simply isn't practical, To put this into context, S.M. Stirling knows absolutely nothing about military technology, how it works or how it is developed. Or, to be more precise, he knows nothing beyond what's printed in the lowest tier of public magazines and he gets almost all of that wrong. That's not a guess; I've discussed these issues directly with him and his standard of knowledge is abysmal. His arguing technique is simply to make "facts" up and then demand you prove him wrong. In contrast, I've been working in the defense industry for 34 years and have been involved in a lot of these programs from the inside. The aircraft, weapons etc in TBO up to High Frontier all really existed even if some of them never went into production. So in this situation, we're dealing with a military practicality on one side (TBO is what the US could have had if it had made different decisions) against wild-eyed delusional nonsense. Having got that out of the way,......

Your first scenario isn't going to happen. The U.S. military forces in the TBOverse are not some sort of "super-military". They are, instead, a military force that is optimized for strategic warfare - it's a direct lineal descendent of the U.S. force structure that was evolved in the 1950s. Now that has plusses and minuses (TBO isn't an attempt to propose a perfect or ideal situation, it's an attempt to explore what the consequences of certain strategic and tactical decisions are likely to be). One of the consequences of that series of decisions, flow of development if you like, is that the U.S. forces in TBO simply don't do tactical warfare. The thought of fighting a war without using nuclear weapons simply wouldn't occur to them. If attacked they'll go straight for their enemy's heart and brain and do so with overwhelming force.

So really your second scenario is "the one". Here, there is no doubt what would happen, it would be a U.S. walkover, a strategic victory so massive that the Draka would join the ranks of the dodo and dinosaurs (and Germans) as "extinct". The reason is quite simple and one that shows just how little Stirling understands about modern military technology. It's that computer thing and the problem is electronic warfare. This depends upon having very fast, very agile, very easily reprogrammable computers. Hard-wired non-reprogammable systems are just useless deadweight. This is what would happen. On the outset of war, all the U.S. Units would shift to what are called War Only Operating Modes (WARMs) for short. These are combinations of frequency sequences, jitter and twitter ratings and all sorts of other things that are never, ever used in peacetime. Without knowledge of those system parameters, they can't be jammed. The threat library, the listing of those parameters, is software controlled in TBO, hardware in Draka. So, the threat libraries can't be modified by the and the WARMS can't be identified or countered . That means the TBO bombers have perfect situational awareness, there's nothing the Draka can do about it. Now, this is the catch; TBO can intercept Draka radars, isolate their operating modes and reprogram their jammers to counter them. This can be done in real time (the present techno-story, RotV describes this being done). BUT, the hard-wired Draka systems can't shift around to evade the jamming, they;d have to be software-controlled to do that. So the Draka would be completely blind.

So we have a fully-sighted air force on one side facing a completely blinded opponent. Almost nothing else matters, the TBO strategic recon aircraft (really strategic level wild weasels) would have a field day, they'd have no effective opposition while they ranged over enemy destroying the defenses and clearing the way in for the heavy bombers following them. Within a few hours, the Draka would be extinct.

As to any counterblow, I don't know what the Draka use for their strategic nuclear delivery system. Bombers or ICBMs? It doesn't really matter, the ECM issue really decides it. If the Draka use bombers, they'll be running in blind and defenseless against a defense system that is operating at full efficiency and with complete situational awareness. The NORAD fighters and missiles would handle it. ICBMs would be even easier, they are much more vulnerable than bombers, they come in on fixed tracks and would be shot down like clay pigeons (it's that easy; if the missiles are MRVs or MIRVed, the NORAD misileers would just shoot down the busses before they started to release their warheads. That's it, over. Now, we have to put the world back together after the Draka screwed everything up.

Your third scenario is probably equally one-sided. The Draka orbit-to-earth weapons don't matter, the finest weapons in the world are useless when the targeting systems have been destroyed. Also, remember, TBO systems are all manned, if something goes wrong, there are humans on the spot to deal with them. The Draka computers are a disastrous weakness again, they allow the TBO forces to both jam the Draka systems into oblivion and to protect their own systems from Draka jamming.

Genetically engineered chimps and super-men (Boy is that revealing about Stirling's mentality). I can just envisage the conversation in the war room now

General McPeak Seer, we've received word that 250,000 genetically engineered chimpanzees supported by 100,000 enhanced humans are advancing.

The Seer Where are they General?"

General McPeak Ground Zero!


As for the rest of the Draka space stuff, blind and defenseless, it would just be hunted down and destroyed. The colony on Mars? Its defenses jammed then nuked then the population centers cracked open with nukes. The Draka who aren't fried, blasted or irradiated suffocate.



Space weapons and nukes allowed.

Who wins?[/quote]
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others
Nations survive by making examples of others
Norseman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: 2004-07-02 10:20am

Post by Norseman »

Well now about their computers I think that you should read this segment on Computers and Technology in the Draka Universe. (If that doesn't work here's the Google cache of the same page).

That said there is some RAM and room for improvisation and counter-measures, I haven't read the last book in a while so I'm not quite sure how much. It is at any rate far less flexible than OTL systems.

Power System and Transportation for an overview of their early development in those fields (and the Google Cache just in case).

Additionally I can give you some information on the Drakan bombers (yes they use bombers) they use Ramjets and Scramjets. Additionally they also use highly maneouvrable scramjet cruise-missiles that can reach sub-orbital heights.

There are no ICBMs, they'd be useless given the technological paradigms, and even submarines are considered obsolete given powerful sensors.
Norseman's Fics the SD archive of my fics.
Norseman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: 2004-07-02 10:20am

Post by Norseman »

Ghetto Edit: Moreover the superhumans are in the experimental phase, only a handful had been made, the same applies to the ghooloons.

As for the Draka themselves? They have the Mother of all Civil Defence networks, every single plantation has extensive bombshelters, every major building the same. Additionally most plantations are reasonably self-sufficient, and the Domination is pretty damn huge.

On the other hand they prefer to do their heavy manifacturing in enormous mega-combines run by tens of thousands of serfs, it'd be hard to miss those even from the air.
Norseman's Fics the SD archive of my fics.
User avatar
Stuart
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2935
Joined: 2004-10-26 09:23am
Location: The military-industrial complex

Post by Stuart »

Norseman wrote:That said there is some RAM and room for improvisation and counter-measures, I haven't read the last book in a while so I'm not quite sure how much. It is at any rate far less flexible than OTL systems.
"Some" doesn't cut it I'm afraid, the difference between hard-wired and software-driven systems is so yawning that it can't be bridged. Again it comes back to the fact that Stirling simply doesn't understand these systems ro how they work. Everything, excepting nothing depends on the ability to totally reconfigure the threat libraries in real time. Without that capability, the equipment is just so much deadweight. I did a lot of work on these systems back in the 1980s, even then, using teh computers that were available, the extent to which software-driven equipment outperformed hard-wired was stunning, Today, it's orders of magnitude more so.
Additionally I can give you some information on the Drakan bombers (yes they use bombers) they use Ramjets and Scramjets. Additionally they also use highly maneouvrable scramjet cruise-missiles that can reach sub-orbital heights.
That doesn't matter; the poor things wouldn't even know they're being tracked. Not that it would matter with "highly manoeuverable scramjet cruise missiles (do they sing and dance as well - sorry, I'm being sarcastic. That's just Stirling getting a string of catchwords and linking them together without understanding what they represent.) In short, the Draka level of technology in aeronautics terms is about level with TBO - and they're at least half a century behind in electronic warfare. To get a comparison, imagine the bombers that the Luftwaffe used in the 1940 Blitx up against today's missiles and fighters. That's how bad it is.
As for the Draka themselves? They have the Mother of all Civil Defence networks, every single plantation has extensive bombshelters, every major building the same. Additionally most plantations are reasonably self-sufficient, and the Domination is pretty damn huge.
Doesn't really matter, what kills people isn't the attack itself, its the aftermath. that happened in Germany, TBO killed roughly 20 million Germans in the actual bombing - but almost 40 million more died in the aftermath as a result of disease, starvation, untreated injury etc etc etc. Now don't get me wrong, civil defense is very valuable but only when one's facing a single assault like a ballistic missile attack. The situation here is completely different. The Draka have no defense against TBO's bombers, they probably won't even see them coming. SAC's causalties will be so light, they're inconsequential. So, if anything is left, the bombers go home, reload and come back. A self contained plantation isn't much use if its Ground Zero for 550 kilotons.
On the other hand they prefer to do their heavy manifacturing in enormous mega-combines run by tens of thousands of serfs, it'd be hard to miss those even from the air.
Needless to say, they're gone.
There are no ICBMs, they'd be useless given the technological paradigms, and even submarines are considered obsolete given powerful sensors.
I'd agree on ICBMs being useless, they are in the face of a well-developed defense system and SLBMs aren't any better. However the thing about sensors making submarines obsolete, that's Stirlings basic ignorance coming out again, I'm pretty certain he gets everything hfrom reading Popular Mechanics and doesn't have the basic knowledge to critique what he's reading. We've been battling that problem for forty years and not only haven't we solved it, we don't know how to start.. Everything out there at the moment has hit a brick wall and we can't get around it.

I was personally involved in research on one technique for tracking submarines back in the 1990s. The only thing that came out of it was a new way of tracking Tsunamis. One thing I can tell you, if we do crack the problem, it will be by using very fast, very powerful, very flexible computers - exactly what the Draka don't have.
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others
Nations survive by making examples of others
Norseman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: 2004-07-02 10:20am

Post by Norseman »

Stuart wrote:
Norseman wrote:As for the Draka themselves? They have the Mother of all Civil Defence networks, every single plantation has extensive bombshelters, every major building the same. Additionally most plantations are reasonably self-sufficient, and the Domination is pretty damn huge.
Doesn't really matter, what kills people isn't the attack itself, its the aftermath. that happened in Germany, TBO killed roughly 20 million Germans in the actual bombing - but almost 40 million more died in the aftermath as a result of disease, starvation, untreated injury etc etc etc. Now don't get me wrong, civil defense is very valuable but only when one's facing a single assault like a ballistic missile attack. The situation here is completely different. The Draka have no defense against TBO's bombers, they probably won't even see them coming. SAC's causalties will be so light, they're inconsequential. So, if anything is left, the bombers go home, reload and come back. A self contained plantation isn't much use if its Ground Zero for 550 kilotons.
Ah... how many nukes does TBO America have? 200K? 300K?

I mean Land Tenure and Plantation Life the average plantation has 600 - 1000 serfs, and 30% of the Serf population lives on plantations so...

Minimum of 600K plantations, and their settlements are deliberately spread out as far as possible. Now a lot of them would be concentrated in places like the Nile Delta, but a lot of them would be in places like Kazakhstan.

That said what's the point? Unless I am much mistaken you claimed that the targeteers of the TBO ignored German populations in their calculations and went after industry and military resources. Plantations are self-sufficient in that they can feed and clothe the residents, and have some light industry going. In essence they are agricultural and residential areas.

At some point the rest of the Alliance for Democracy would be pleading with you to stop bombing, and offering to use their ground troops to mop up what was left of the Draka. So seriously, genuine question, when do you stop bombing and how far down the food chain do you go? Do you stick to airbursts? Do you concentrate on Africa? (Probably a good idea BTW.)

The Draka also have something called the Fenris Bomb, which is apparently a set of Super Dirty Super Secret Super Sized nukes that are going to go off and ruin the world if the Domination should lose. Will to power and all that.
Norseman's Fics the SD archive of my fics.
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

mind you having read Drake's comments (strangely someoen whose a "Friend" of Stirling and works with him in some co-laberations) Stirling just doesn't get technology, or biology, or anything and bascily needs a minder. The fact that his work in shared universes is miles better then in his solo work, not with standing. His premise was ok, when I was an ignorant high school student, but by the time I learned to code in AS400, C++, etc. his understanding cf computers was so basically stupid and blind, that his computers really shouldn't work AT ALL

the same goes for the army of Eugenic Tarzanmen*. Sorry bullet dodging is only in movies, your still dead. his sensors and spacecraft don't even work in the startrek sense, but only in the victorian Sci-fi john carter of mars, war of the worlds sense. (actually I keep post poning a fan fic about John Carter's martians vs. the WWI draka, where mars is getting back at them for virial warfare back in the 1890s)


*stirling should pay royalties to Burrough's estate in Tarzana CA, the description of the superhumanly strong, hyper intellegent, leopard like draka is directly lifted from Tarzan.
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Post by K. A. Pital »

On a side note, how "well-developed" are Draka "defense systems"? To make ICBMs "obsolete", this must be an unimaginably precise and dense grid. Shaft-based ICBMs are the cheapest, simplest, most scalable and reliable type of weapon from our entire nuclear triade. To negate thousands and thousands of such MIRV-armed weapons, the defenses must be unrealistic IMHO.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

Simply, they know where all the items are, and laser them before they can launch, despite the physical impossibility of all that, writer's fait and all that.
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Post by phongn »

Stas Bush wrote:On a side note, how "well-developed" are Draka "defense systems"? To make ICBMs "obsolete", this must be an unimaginably precise and dense grid. Shaft-based ICBMs are the cheapest, simplest, most scalable and reliable type of weapon from our entire nuclear triade. To negate thousands and thousands of such MIRV-armed weapons, the defenses must be unrealistic IMHO.
ICBMs by themselves are cheap - but silos and their command-and-control systems are tremendously expensive. They are neccessarily that reliable either (hell, rocketry in general is still rife with reliability issues). The ABM system needs not be "unimaginatively" precise or dense, either, to obsolete ICBMs: they need only take down enough incoming RVs to ensure that the attack plan is untenable. Something like the proposed ABM add-on to Nike would have been sufficient.
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

fuck it, the whole premise of Draka technology would only work in a universe created by Burroughs, Haggard, Verne, and Lovecraft. Might as well include explosive radium bullets, Aether, Space traveling fungus, and civilizations within the hollow earth while we are at it.
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
Stuart
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2935
Joined: 2004-10-26 09:23am
Location: The military-industrial complex

Post by Stuart »

Stas Bush wrote: Shaft-based ICBMs are the cheapest, simplest, most scalable and reliable type of weapon from our entire nuclear triade.
By shaft-based I assume you mean Silo-based (sorry to be pedantic but it's an important difference).

I'm afraid your basic presumption is wrong. ICBMs are nota cheap way of doing things they are very expensive. That's because they require heavy silos to sit it (to prevent them being pre-empted) and they require an enormously elaborate communications and warning system to control them,. There are two reasons for that, one is that once a missile is fired,its gone, there's nothing to stop it hitting its target other than an enemy defense system. ICBMs/SLBMs can neither be aborted nor retargeted in flight so their launch is irreversible. That means we have to be very sure we know what we are doing before pressing the Big Red Button. They are not reliable, they have a high failure rate (the exact rate is classified; one public source has quoted 60 percent but I can't confirm or deny. They are not scalable (I assume you mean the force can be increased in size easily); that isn't true. The basing for missiles means they are very unscalable - the missile is only a small proportion of the total cost of the system.

Bombers are, in terms of overall cost, actually a cheaper alternative to missiles. They deliver more warheads at lower cost when expressed as a total system. Above all, they are recallable, once sent out they can be turned around and brought back, they are retargetable - they can be taken from one target and assigned to another,
To negate thousands and thousands of such MIRV-armed weapons,
MIRVs are irrelevent to the equation; their development had nothing at all to do with ABM. We just shoot the bus down before it discharges its warheads, we had that capability back in '67. MIRVs are only viable (as are ICBMs) in the absence of a defensive system.
To make ICBMs "obsolete", this must be an unimaginably precise and dense grid.
Actually its easy to imagine (grin). I worked for eight years (partly) on just such systems. Getting tight coverage is pretty easy once one has the tools to do it. It's expensive to set up but once we've got it, its pretty economic to run. As for precision, not so. We've got a lot of flexibility in where the batteries go. Its more a question of how many do you want.

the defenses must be unrealistic IMHO

In my professional opinion, based on many years working with these sytems, a ballistic missile defense system is entirely practical and affordable. It costs less than the destruction inflicted bya single ICBM hitting a large city. It's realistic, we've had the technology since 1964 - in fact the first ICBM-target was shot down in (IIRC) 1959. Out of 64 Zeus shots at RVs, 59 hit their targets including (a classified number) of skin-to-skin hits.
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others
Nations survive by making examples of others
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Post by K. A. Pital »

ICBMs by themselves are cheap - but silos and their command-and-control systems are tremendously expensive.
Cheapness:
1) Soviet silo is less expensive than Soviet MBRC
2) Soviet silo is less expensive than Soviet submarine
3) Soviet silo is more expensive than Soviet strategic bombers
Vulnerability:
- Soviet silo is less vulnerable than both submarines and strategic bomber forces if grounded. The patrol intensiveness, even at top USSR times, was too bad for a first-strike counteraction. Thus, only silos remain.
The ABM system needs not be "unimaginatively" precise or dense, either, to obsolete ICBMs: they need only take down enough incoming RVs to ensure that the attack plan is untenable. Something like the proposed ABM add-on to Nike would have been sufficient.
This would only lead to an implosion of RV numbers in a warhead. To create a sufficiently dense grid that would offer a large country total ABM protection, you would need to sate all urban zones with anti-BM weaponry.

On a side note, what's the MIRV versus proto-ABM standoff, how many RVs does it intercept from a block?
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
Norseman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: 2004-07-02 10:20am

Post by Norseman »

Unrealistic? Look at: Power System and Transportation for an extensive explanation of why the Draka use the powersystems that they do Google Cache just in case). I'm not sure what your problem with it is, but basically the idea behind the Draka is to explore paths not taken.

BTW I also work in IT and let me just say one thing about hardwiring: patches! That is all... I find his computer stuff a tad hard to believe, but I've been yelled at for suggesting it's out of whack so I won't.
Norseman's Fics the SD archive of my fics.
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Post by K. A. Pital »

Bombers are, in terms of overall cost, actually a cheaper alternative to missiles.
I agree. However, they are not reliable as a retaliation weapon. Bombers are too vulnerable to a first strike attack.
We just shoot the bus down before it discharges its warheads, we had that capability back in '67.
With interceptors? :? Where do you shoot it - at liftoff or at discharge point?
It costs less than the destruction inflicted bya single ICBM hitting a large city. It's realistic, we've had the technology since 1964 - in fact the first ICBM-target was shot down in (IIRC) 1959. Out of 64 Zeus shots at RVs, 59 hit their targets including (a classified number) of skin-to-skin hits.
Oh, certainly it costs less than the resulting damage in the war. However, if this goes into ground interceptor missiles like the Zeus system you mention, there's little difference between bombers/ICBMs and MBRCs. All missles, whether silo-based or not, would be destroyed.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
User avatar
Stuart
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2935
Joined: 2004-10-26 09:23am
Location: The military-industrial complex

Post by Stuart »

Norseman wrote:Land Tenure and Plantation Life[/URL] the average plantation has 600 - 1000 serfs, and 30% of the Serf population lives on plantations (snip) .That said what's the point? Unless I am much mistaken you claimed that the targeteers of the TBO ignored German populations in their calculations and went after industry and military resources. Plantations are self-sufficient in that they can feed and clothe the residents, and have some light industry going. In essence they are agricultural and residential areas.
So they're not self contained. They have an illusion of independence until their supplies run out. If they don't have proper industrial resources, once the heavy goods run out, they're back to the stone age. In TBO the planning was aimed at making it impossible for Germany to carry on fighting; as a sideline that destroyed the country. Same logic applies, if its necessary for the Drakan war effort, it dies. What's left isn't a threat so it can do what it likes. Civilians are not specifically targeted, if they get in the way, that's their fault (and before you say anything that was precisely the attitude throughout the Cold War.)

At some point the rest of the Alliance for Democracy would be pleading with you to stop bombing, and offering to use their ground troops to mop up what was left of the Draka.
At which point, they get told to go pound sand. The TBOverse US is not part of any international treaty agreement and acts only in its own vital interests. If the Russians asked the Americans to stop, then the US would listen carefully, the Russians have a lot of influence with the US government but the TBOverse Russians would probably be even keener to see the Draka erased from the face of the earth. The bombing continues until Draka collapses and surrenders.

So seriously, genuine question, when do you stop bombing and how far down the food chain do you go? Do you stick to airbursts? Do you concentrate on Africa? (Probably a good idea BTW.)

Say again, keep bombing (probably a mix of conventional and nuclear, never underestimate a group of 72 B-74s dropping 100 tons of conventional bombs each on one of your plantations) until the Draka collapse and surrender. And I mean surrender, unconditionally with any attempt at treachery punished by the bombing starting again.

How far down the food chain? As far as it takes. A quote from The Seer for you "We don't start wars. We do end them."
The Draka also have something called the Fenris Bomb, which is apparently a set of Super Dirty Super Secret Super Sized nukes that are going to go off and ruin the world if the Domination should lose. Will to power and all that.
Oh no, no the doomsday bomb AGAIN. I told you before, that thing's an impossibility (guess how I know guys). Hint, guess who worked out what it would take to build it and who was his mentor in such things. That's Stirling's lack of knowledge coming out again. No "Fenris Bomb", its a joke in bad taste.,
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others
Nations survive by making examples of others
User avatar
MKSheppard
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Posts: 29872
Joined: 2002-07-06 06:34pm

Post by MKSheppard »

Stas Bush wrote:I agree. However, they are not reliable as a retaliation weapon. Bombers are too vulnerable to a first strike attack.
Bombers can be scrambled and recalled at any point before they drop their bombs. It really doesn't matter if we launched our bombers on a target plan to Soviet Russia in response to a computer glitch saying a massive soviet first attack is underway.....and then 10 minutes later we find out it was a computer glitch - the bombers can be recalled.
With interceptors? :? Where do you shoot it - at liftoff or at discharge point?
Stuart Essay on MIRVs

If you're too lazy here's the sailent point

Multiple Independently-Targeted Re-Entry Vehicles (MIRVs)

Why they exist Although MIRVs are often regarded as a development of MRVs, in fact they come from a totally different logic. In a ballistic missile site, the missile itself represents only a small proportion of the cost of the system (usually 10 - 20 percent). The bulk of that cost is represented by the silo and the command control system that goes with it. That cost is dorectly related to the number of missiles, not the number of warheads on each missile. Therefore, it is much less expensive to built 100 missiles with ten warheads each that 1,000 missiles with one warhead each. All the money saved can be invested in making the silos much harder and thus more difficult to destroy (meaning the enemy must fire more missiles at them to guarantee their destruction).

How it works The missile bus containing the warheads is designed so that it can make changes in its attitude and pitch between discharging warheads. It is then programmed so that, at the appropriate time, it can make those changes before discharging a warhead and can, thus, aim each warhead at a separate target. In theory it can aim all its warheads at different targets, in reality things are much more complex.

The problem is that the system has to discharge its warheads one at a time. It cannot discharge the whole lot at once. This puts a limit on how many it can discharge in the time available. Also, the degree of manoeuvering is strictly limited. So, the targets engaged by a single MIRV missile are limited toa relatively restricted footprint. Also, there are a lot more variable, many random and unpredictable, in aiming and discharging the MIRV bus which mean that MIRV missile-delivered RVs are a LOT less accurate than unitary RVs. So much so that if the launch distance is too far back from the target, the MIRVs are likely to miss by so much that they will be useless. So the distance at which the MIRV can discharge is severely limited. It should also be noted that the MIRV bus is very complex and very sensitive.

Effects on ABM MIRVs are also often promoted as a way of beating an ABM defense by "swamping it", apparently on the assumption that each descending RV would have to be destroyed individually. In fact, this is, again, not the case. Using nuclear-tipped ABMs, the relatively tightly clustered MIRVs would be taken out by a single shot. However, the simplest technique of eliminating MIRVs is, once again, to kill the bus before it discharges its warheads. This needs some extended range - the effect of MIRVs on the Nike-Zeus program was to upgrade the Zeus interceptor so that it had the range necessary to kill the MIRV bus before it discharged its warheads. That's why the range was increased from 250km (more than adequate to kill an MRV bus) to 740km (way more than adequate to kill any projected MIRV bus. Also, as a bonus, it needed only tiny amounts of damage or disturbance to render the MIRV bus ineffective. Far from being a way of beating an ABM defense, MIRVs were only credible in the absence of ABMs of adequate range.
"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong

"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944
User avatar
Stuart
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2935
Joined: 2004-10-26 09:23am
Location: The military-industrial complex

Post by Stuart »

Stas Bush wrote:I agree. However, they are not reliable as a retaliation weapon. Bombers are too vulnerable to a first strike attack.
Not so, remember they can be launched and recalled. So we cxan launch them on threat warning, and recover them if it turns out the threat was false. We can't do that with missiles, once they're gone, they're gone. That means we would have to wait until warheads were actually hitting US territory before launching (thats why the comms system is so expensive). Also, we could get a B-70 off the ground in less than five minutes - again, we can recall if necessary. It actually takes longer to pop off a missile.
With interceptors? Where do you shoot it - at liftoff or at discharge point?
In flight, hit the bus before it discharges. We'vebeen able to do that for a long time. Look at the intercept ranges of teh various Zeus missiles, that'll tell you when we gained the capability.
Oh, certainly it costs less than the resulting damage in the war. However, if this goes into ground interceptor missiles like the Zeus system you mention, there's little difference between bombers/ICBMs and MBRCs. All missles, whether silo-based or not, would be destroyed.
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. If you mean a Zeus net can bring down all missiles regardless of how they're launched, I'd agree. SLBMs are the trickiest targets but they're stille asily doable. If you mean that bombers are as vulnerable as missiles, that's not so. Bombers can manoeuver, missiles can't. Bombers don't have a predictable flight path. Bombers are loaded down with electronic countermeasures and come in behind a wall of anti-radar, air to surface and >>>AHEM<<<< Other weapons. Missiles have no defensive systems, no ECM, decoys don't work and they have no means of blasting a path through the defenses.
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others
Nations survive by making examples of others
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Post by K. A. Pital »

Using nuclear-tipped ABMs, the relatively tightly clustered MIRVs would be taken out by a single shot. However, the simplest technique of eliminating MIRVs is, once again, to kill the bus before it discharges its warheads. This needs some extended range - the effect of MIRVs on the Nike-Zeus program was to upgrade the Zeus interceptor so that it had the range necessary to kill the MIRV bus before it discharged its warheads. That's why the range was increased from 250km (more than adequate to kill an MRV bus) to 740km (way more than adequate to kill any projected MIRV bus. Also, as a bonus, it needed only tiny amounts of damage or disturbance to render the MIRV bus ineffective. Far from being a way of beating an ABM defense, MIRVs were only credible in the absence of ABMs of adequate range.
Ahh, I see his logic. But frankly, what stops the missile designers to use orbital strikes? The "Voevoda" as the main missle of the force, has this capability. Intercepting MIRVs in orbit? You should have lots of nuclear interceptor missiles which are faster, more agile and capable of striking at orbital targets. Only the "treaty" stops from using space as a platform for MIRV discharge, and it seems that treaties are nonexistent in our scenario.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
User avatar
Stuart
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2935
Joined: 2004-10-26 09:23am
Location: The military-industrial complex

Post by Stuart »

Stas Bush wrote:1) Soviet silo is less expensive than Soviet MBRC
2) Soviet silo is less expensive than Soviet submarine
3) Soviet silo is more expensive than Soviet strategic bombers
You're forgetting the command system that goes with them. ALWAYS think systems, not weapons.
Vulnerability: Soviet silo is less vulnerable than both submarines and strategic bomber forces if grounded. The patrol intensiveness, even at top USSR times, was too bad for a first-strike counteraction. Thus, only silos remain.
Not so. The Russian Navy is building three new SLBMs and is investing a lot of monet in rebuilding the Tu-160 fleet. In contrast, ICBM missile production has been slowed to a crawl. However, once again THINK SYSTEMS NOT WEAPONS.
This would only lead to an implosion of RV numbers in a warhead. To create a sufficiently dense grid that would offer a large country total ABM protection, you would need to sate all urban zones with anti-BM weaponry.
Number of warheads per missile is irrelevent . It has nothing to do with penetrating defenses. Also, the number of missile trajectories that can be used is very limited. They don't need all that much to cover them.

You're Russian right? I was one of the people working out how to (a) fry your country and (b) stop you from frying ours. It was very easy to provide a missile defense that would have aborted your attack. We could have done it any time from about '62 onwards. On the other hand, even today, nobody can stop a B-70. It flies higher and faster (and is more agile than a SR-71 and your fighters and missiles failed dismally against those.
On a side note, what's the MIRV versus proto-ABM standoff, how many RVs does it intercept from a block?
All of them. With one shot.
Nations do not survive by setting examples for others
Nations survive by making examples of others
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Post by K. A. Pital »

Not so, remember they can be launched and recalled.
You're assuming that the "tensions period" (escalation of relations) exists. This is the same idea that led the USSR to the disaster in Barbarossa. Today if someone decides to attack with nukes, it would most likely be a sneak attack with full power.
Also, we could get a B-70 off the ground in less than five minutes - again, we can recall if necessary. It actually takes longer to pop off a missile.
You mean America. We, however, are done in such a case. If Tu-160s and Tu-95s aren't wiped out sleeping, they're dead meat if they rise anyway - the US has too good a coverage over Russia.
If you mean that bombers are as vulnerable as missiles, that's not so. Bombers can manoeuver, missiles can't.
I think most of the precision ICBMs developed a midflight maneuver ability, no? :?
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
Post Reply