Welcome to the HeavyMetalPro Forums

It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 1:11 am

All times are UTC-04:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:17 pm 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
we have a rough description in one of the rulebooks, but how would a modern fortress really look like?

looking at the description i would say that the outer wall could be breached with a vehicle loaded with explosives( it does not matter if the vehicle would be remote-controled, by a suicide bomber, or if someone would park it at the wall and run for it).

looking at the different threats and what i know about fortifications i would build a CB like this:

A. outer defences

the outer defences should, IMHO, be organised like this, from outside inwards:
1. perimeter fence, or two in a distance to each other, with sensors and cameras, to keep saboteurs and spys out.
at a distance behind that obstacles that are able to stop trucks tanks and mechs:
2. minefields
3. a deep and wide trench, wide enough that a tank cannot drive over it, deep enough that a mech cannot climb in and out.a full line of hexes that is one level deeper maybe.
3a.. a number of gun emplacements that can fire along the trench
4. the wall, as it is being described in the original description, directly behind the trench.
5. obstacles behind the wall that make landing difficult for jump-capable mechs and infantry as well as VTOLS. this could be metal poles that are erected closer to each other than a mech is wide, connected with steel cables or a surface that is covered in ferrocrete that is sloped to give mechfeet no grip, imagine a chessboard where the white fields are sloped 45° in one direction and the black in another. or a combination of the two.
5a a line of gun emplacements that is used to fight jump capable mechs/infantry and VTOLs, this could double as AAA, as the targeting would be similar.

B.gun emplacements
to stop nearing enemys there would be a number of gun emplacements additional to those mentioned above.
1. a number of light turrets behind the fences as anti infantry defence, distance close enough to each other so the loss of a single turret would not leave a hole in the defence.
2. between the trench and the wall, firing outwards, a number of large turrets that are able to damage heavy attackers, distance close enough to each other so the loss of a single turret would not leave a hole in the defence. their position and range should also allow them to fire over the line of light turrets.
3. a number of capital turrets behind the wall that could destroy a warship before it could start an orbital bombardment.
4. a CIWS-system that is able to kill incoming capital rockets

description of the light gun emplacements: above ground a turret that traverses 360°.
below ground a Room that contains all supporting machinery like a fusion-generator, ammunition(if needed by the weapon) a computer(for automated weapons) or a ready room that allows the gun-crew to stay under the turret for a long time. below that are tunnels that allow the acces of each turret from at least two directions

description of the large gun emplacements: above ground a turret that traverses 360°.
at level -2 a room for the gun-crew, at level -4 generator computer etc, at level -6 access to at least two tunnels for each gun emplacement. this sort of gun emplacement has is fully automated, but has a gun crew, both in case the automat(or other systems) fails and to give the weapon advice about targets.

description of capital gun emplacements: like the large gun emplacements but the access-tunnels, as way as the different rooms are deeper below the surface.and they are of course bigger.

description of the CIWS: like the large gun emplacements.

no gun emplacement outside of the main wall can be acessed from the outside, also they do have an emergency exit that can be opened from the inside.


C. underground facilities

unlike the descriptions in the book i do not believe that there would be very large cavities below the ground, as they could collapse when the complex is nuked or orbitally bombarded(or in case of an earthquake)
instead most cavities are not wider than neccessary.

for all rooms underground there are always at least two accesses at opposit sides.

i would construct a castle brian to be able to at least house a complete RCT underground, including repair facilities, spare parts, hospital, food for a prolonged siege, life support, energy supply, comunication( including a HPG).then there are hangars for a sufficient number of ASFighters, maybe even dropships( the only exeption from the "no big cavities"-rule)

D Above ground

i would give every CB at least a landing stripe for ASF and several landing patches for VTOLs, then a spaceport for several dropships makes sense, both for defense and logistics.

E Access

it makes no sense when there is a RCT underground when it cannot leave fast and effective. therefore there would be several exit gates that allow the complete RCT to leave the CB in a very short time, right behind the exit there would be space for large units to collect, behind that fast and large elevators would be positioned that could transport whole mechcompanys at the same time.

then the spaceport would allow the units to be transported out(or in) by dropship.

i declare the discussion open.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:26 am 
Offline
Commanding General
Commanding General

Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:22 am
Posts: 2198
Quite few Castles Brian are underground and entrances are concealed. Such fortifications wouldn't be so... hidden.

_________________
[i]You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights errant, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.[/i]

[url=http://www.mekwars.org][u]MekWars[/u][/url]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:53 am 
Offline
Stratego
Stratego

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 10855
Location: Ft. Hood Texas
They use to have rules for installations and such, and in the old Star League sourcebook they had a picture of what was suppose to be the front of a Castle Brian.

There was an attempt in issues 12 and 13 of Battletechnology magazine that showed what the inside might look like. Not sure if that helps.

The Castle Brians where meant to be a permanent hindrance to an enemy when they invaded a planet. It as a base, not a fortress. Thus the defenders could sortie from the Castle, launch their attacks and have some place to go back to, that would be their sanctuary, which would be well hidden and well defended, thus safe from attack.

If you want simple battlefield forts, all you need is to berm in an area and stick the troops in there and they can defend from the walls of the berm.

Now if you want the high tech base, that means it needs to be something that can handle strikes from naval grade weapons and artillery as well as survive a nuke or three and be safe from CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiation, and Nuclear new term for NBC). This means to me, well hidden and well armored and deep in the ground. It can have built in defenses like AA turrets with missiles or guns. And close in weapons could be any thing, mines, hidden lasers turrets.

Once found though your fortress will be come the target enemy attacks that will be either two fold, take and capture or destroy it. No fortress is impenetrable, thus for all the awesome defensives you give it and all the neat electronics, a small group of soldiers would be likely to get in and cause a lot damage.

A good example of this is the novel "Guns of Navarone" and the movie that was made from it.

To get a better idea of what you are trying for could you post a copy of the fort using the rules found in the old BMR, unless they have a newer one in the core rule books, I didn't have time to read Strategic Ops cover to cover...

_________________
Karagin-

Darkness is a friend of mine. Sometimes I have to beat it back, or it would overwhelm me. Shirley Meier

[url]http://karagin12.livejournal.com/[/url]

The Wookiee, he's not wearing any pants!

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-army.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 8:36 am 
Offline
Lieutenant, SG
Lieutenant, SG

Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 206
Location: Canada
I thought the new and old material covered this quite well. Castle Brians aren't singular fortifications. They're a series of interconnected fortifications up to a city in size.

Even a city of 50,000 covers would cover dozens of map sheets and say you get a Metropolitan city like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles or London, Toronto, Berlin etc etc and we're talking hundreds of map sheets worth of cityscape. 10x10 30m hexes is only about one third of a square kilometer or a sixth of a square mile. That's really not that big of a space when we're comparing against the real world.

The purpose of a Castle Brian isn't to defeat an opponent outright but rather force an opponent to invest it, diverting tremendous resources that could be fighting elsewhere to defeating the Castle Brian. Sure, given time and effort, any fortification can be reduced piece by piece but time isn't a luxury in warfare. While a fortress is being removed as an obstacle, you're stuck in one place while your enemy is being given time to reposition and reinforce itself elsewhere. He could be counter-striking your line of supply or could be assembling a big enough force to deal with your invasion or any number of things but he has that time because you're spending yours reducing planetary defenses.

That said, these things were part of a network usually - not just on the world its on but over a number of nearby systems. If each of these planets requires a large amount of troops to hold down, to deal with the Castle Brian(s) on it then of course you're going to have to bring a bigger army in the first place. That isn't the easiest of feats.

Now, of course Castle Brians have weaknesses. The biggest is cost. These things are enormously expensive and take years, if not decades to emplace then the upkeep and replacement cost on top of that. Not exactly something just anybody could do. These things could only have been built by the fabulous wealth the Terran Hegemony and later the Star League provided.

The next problem is that they became rote constructions meaning they were quite literally built in similar configurations to such an extent that if you knew how one was built and laid out then you know how most of them are built and laid out. Amaris made use of such knowledge to gain entry and control of many of them during the coup. That was an enormous mistake on the builders part. Probably done of course to create cost savings in this massive endeavor.

Also, as you pointed out a small force could do significant damage to a Fortress Brian but I'd contend that any damage done would be pretty small compared to the overall size of the entire defensive layout and that a defensive force in sufficient strength to utilize the Castle Brian would suffer little impact unless a critical system was taken out and such a system should have some redundancy. The problem becomes more so if the small force is able to evade the defenders and still be in position to strike again.

Then there is the vulnerability to things like artillery, bombings, nukes, orbital bombardment or biological or chemical weaponry. They're incapable of dodging such attacks (though they ARE able to shoot back...) so enough wide scale damage will demolish the defenses but again that's going to take allot of firepower and allot of time and effort to put it into play.

Anyways I'm sure there are many more pros and cons and my summary is far from exhaustive. Like any element in warfare, Castle Brians are just part of a bigger puzzle.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:17 am 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
the pros and cons of fortifications always were there: all fortifications are immobile and expensive.
the reasons for building one are:
-as a base to retire to
-to bind enemy forces( only possible when the base is at a place the enemy needs to hold strategically)
-protect something that is also immobile( like a mechfactory)

and for a space station like karagins torpedo sphere: when a fortress is below a geosynchronous station it can protect the fortress, and when the enemy has to take out the fortress for any reason that forces him to take on the station...this in turn binds a lot of forces.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:27 am 
Offline
Lieutenant, SG
Lieutenant, SG

Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 206
Location: Canada
Last time I checked, planetary based capital weapons weren't all that effective (if at all) a defense against Aerospace Fighters in space. Send in the ASF to take out the orbiting defense and keep the transports away from the firing arc of the planetary based capital weapons. Sure it's not easy but I'd presume if someone is intent of taking a world with a Castle Brian, they're bringing enough force to do it with and as such, have some basic knowledge of warfare.

When you consider just how much firepower the SLDF supposedly had at it's disposal just with Royal units, let alone Regular units or planetary militias we're dealing with a magnitude of scale or more greater than Battletech as we know it operates on.

Lets say a planet has a single Castle Brian plus some attendant bases with a infantry division plus planetary militia - we're looking at a military force equivalent to half the size of a comparable house brigade - and it's in heavy defenses... you're looking to bring at least the same sized force to beat and ideally 3 to 4 times as much to do without dragging it out for months/years. We're talking bringing in the entire Crucis Lancers or the Davion Guards brigade to crack this nut. Yowch!

According to at least one source, Terra had twenty Castle Brians as part of 500 bases the Hegemony had on the world. Talk about entrenched eh?


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:02 pm 
Offline
Freedom Fighter
Freedom Fighter

Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2002 8:00 pm
Posts: 3483
Location: Ft Lauderdale Florida
“Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man.”

That said… the ideal Castle Brian in my mind would almost resemble the stupid “legion of doom” fortress from the superman cartoons.

You start with limestone caves near a lake at least 30-50 feet deep on a lakebed of solid rock. Prefferably one with dirty or brackish water that is outside the normally used waterways. You dam the lake as a “public works” project and build a hydroelectric plant there for the locals. You ALSO seed a few wires to your base to power construction efforts...

Start out with a network of caves dug out of the stone, with reinforced concrete lining the walls. Over engineer the place so not only can it hold up the weight of the lake against the pressure seals, but the place needs to be resistant to seismic activity and near-misses from thermonuclear weaponry tasked to kill your deployed forces.

Entire base is set up with multiple sets of tunnels linking giant “silo” style “rooms” big enough to house a battalion of forces each, with each silo having its own elevator platform to the surface of the lake. The facility is treated like a space station or space ship and has its own oxygen reclamation equipment and is completely sealed off from the planet.

The area around the elevator needs to be fouled with razor wire and other hazards to discourage divers from attempting to enter the elevators., but also seeded with seaweed or something similar to disguise the wire.

After completing the facility, raise the water levels back to about half their original levels with the ability to use the dam to raise or lower water levels to facilitate base operations and maintenance.

Possibly cut the power cables and use fusion plants to power your base if you're worried about keeping your base a "secret" from the locals (hint: locals ALWAYS know when there's a military base nearby from the simple expedient that soldiers need "leave") otherwise don't bother.

_________________
Big Nick, the Chainsaw Assassin
[i]Making Bad News Worse since 1980[/i]
[b]What... There's only ONE of you?[/b]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 9:46 pm 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
The biggest vulnerability of a Castle Brian would most likely be a suicide saboteur. When someone gets into a supposedly secure area with no intention of coming out alive, even the best laid security plans gang aft a-gley.

That saboteur doesn't have to be carrying a backpack nuke, either. He most likely would have a more specific target, since in most cases, a Castle Brian is much more valuable captured than destroyed. The saboteur could just open the gates in classic medieval fashion, disable key defense systems (like the orbital guns!) or whatever. Heck, just killing the main power plant would cause all kinds of havoc throughout the base...lights and life support reduced, active defenses half crippled, defenders (and infiltrators) trapped by doors that won't open (possibly in areas without light or life support), other defenders desperately fighting to keep the enemy out of doors that won't shut...fun times for all. Sounds like a great scene for a CBT:RPG campaign.

Life support is a particular point. Castles Brian mostly seem to be enclosed facilities located at least partly underground, and they aren't all necessarily located on worlds that are ideally hospitable to humans. These characteristics make ventilation and life support a Big Deal. So imagine a scenario where the life support gets whacked by sabotage or other means, and now the garrison (including your CBT:RPG group, haha!) is in a race against their own breathing (and/or the hostile outside atmosphere coming in) to get the ventilation back on. To make it even more interesting, have your group be infiltrators instead of part of the garrison, and now they have to at least partly unturn the tables on themselves...like I said, fun times for all.

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:11 am 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
Quote:
Heck, just killing the main power plant would cause all kinds of havoc throughout the base.
thats correct, or better: it would be correct IF there is just one power supply. something as important as the power supply of an enclosed facility would be made redundant. I'd say 3-4 power plants at least that have enough energy production for the whole complex, or better 6-8 for half that amount. plus emergency batterys for each of the doors (or manual opening options) and life support would certainly have tanks with oxygen for several days, and chemical CO2-removers as well. life support would also be redundant: several small units that are distributed over the whole complex, with an overall capacity that has a good reserve, like 200-300% capacity. then the cables to deliver energy, as well as the pipes to transport the air, would be redundant as well: no life support system would be delivering fresh air through only one pipe, no room would get the air throug only one pipe. electricity and lifesupport would be having a net-structure.

in short: all systems would be constructed in order to avoid any weak spots.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:44 am 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Quote:
Quote:
Heck, just killing the main power plant would cause all kinds of havoc throughout the base.
thats correct, or better: it would be correct IF there is just one power supply. something as important as the power supply of an enclosed facility would be made redundant. I'd say 3-4 power plants at least that have enough energy production for the whole complex, or better 6-8 for half that amount. plus emergency batterys for each of the doors (or manual opening options) and life support would certainly have tanks with oxygen for several days, and chemical CO2-removers as well. life support would also be redundant: several small units that are distributed over the whole complex, with an overall capacity that has a good reserve, like 200-300% capacity. then the cables to deliver energy, as well as the pipes to transport the air, would be redundant as well: no life support system would be delivering fresh air through only one pipe, no room would get the air throug only one pipe. electricity and lifesupport would be having a net-structure.

in short: all systems would be constructed in order to avoid any weak spots.
To that, I have two replies:

- Agreed that there would be SOME redundancy and local backups, but nothing built by humans is perfect. That especially applies to anything built by the old Star League. Given all the examples of crappy designs, corrupt contractors and shoddy products that we have in the canon, I believe that the Castles Brian probably looked cool on the conceptual surface, but in actual execution, they were riddled with flaws, much like the Cameron class warships.

- My scenario is much more interesting than a "perfect" base, IMHO. :devil:

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:57 am 
Offline
The Walkin' Dude
The Walkin' Dude

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:20 pm
Posts: 1716
Location: End-World
There are actually Castle Brian construction rules now. They can be found in Tactical Operations (page 141 and 142 have a good description of one, and an example one is on page 142).

_________________
"I have vanquished you, lizard slavers. And now, behold the pelvic gyrations of my victory boogie."
- Space Ghost


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:57 am 
Offline
Lieutenant.General
Lieutenant.General

Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 1306
Location: Ft. Campbell
I agree with Grey on this one. There would only be limited redundancy if for no other reason than to keep costs down. These things are meant to hinder an enemy and deny him the overall planet, not stop the invasion completely by themselves. And the redundancy more than likely stops at one place, the computer controlling the entire thing. (What, you thought humans did it?) Sure, its probably housed in a couple of rooms carved out of the continental bedrock and highly guarded. But there is one thing most people forget, all of the piping, conduits and wiring probably moves through the Castle via access tubes. Human sized access tubes. That way any problems with those portions of the base can be fixed. And, coincidentally, it gives a great way for infiltrators to move around, if they have a map. Again, along with Grey, gives a great ToW: RPG element.

_________________
Learn to fear the Night, for Death waits in the dark
You're just jealous cause the voices don't talk to you!
[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/flag-us.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:01 pm 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
Quote:
- My scenario is much more interesting than a "perfect" base, IMHO.
correct, a realistic government would try to get a perfect CB, as much as possible, BUT the GM of a GAME would of course allow the players to have a chance.


about the accessways: they, as well as airpipes, as well as the wastewater-collectors are a possible access to almost every part of a CB, they could of course be secured with code-lock doors, cameras, sensors(you name it) and they SHOULD be treated as the "official" entrances are, BUT its not entirely unlikely that they are easier to get through than the front entrance. both in "reality" and in a game.

about the computer: i would say that a CB should have more than one computer-center, but for reasons of cost or ignorance that might not happen.( and of course, again, because the GM would not want the CB to be too perfect)

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:31 am 
Offline
Loki
Loki

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 11444
Location: Minnesnowta
What I would find more likely is that the old school Castles Brian back during the Star League are going to be just about impossible to take out with anything short of full scale orbital dominance AND a perfect idea of what their weaknesses are. Which Amaris just happened to have both of.

Now adays, three centuries later, the remaining castles Brian would be still operating, though I can easily see them working at reduce capabilities. Some of their reactors shut down, sensors and computers the same way. Basically, imagine a PERFECT base like we have been talking about. Then imagine three centuries of wear and tear, maintenance robots shutting down, spare parts running out, and stuff like that. Then imagine what would still be working. Still a very hard nut to crack for your typical small unit, but now actually MANAGEABLE.

;)

_________________
Medron Pryde - The Great and Terrible :blah:
[img]http://faileas.greywolf.googlepages.com/WOTD.png[/img]
[url=http://www.pryderockindustries.com]P.R.I.[/url] - The home of BattleTech programs and files
"I'm gonna Tea Party like its 1776." - Medron Pryde
Who is John Galt?


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:41 am 
Offline
Stratego
Stratego

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 10855
Location: Ft. Hood Texas
Quote:
There are actually Castle Brian construction rules now. They can be found in Tactical Operations (page 141 and 142 have a good description of one, and an example one is on page 142).
And we have had rules for building forts for a long time, actually since City Tech came out...

_________________
Karagin-

Darkness is a friend of mine. Sometimes I have to beat it back, or it would overwhelm me. Shirley Meier

[url]http://karagin12.livejournal.com/[/url]

The Wookiee, he's not wearing any pants!

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-army.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:48 am 
Offline
Stratego
Stratego

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 10855
Location: Ft. Hood Texas
Quote:
What I would find more likely is that the old school Castles Brian back during the Star League are going to be just about impossible to take out with anything short of full scale orbital dominance AND a perfect idea of what their weaknesses are. Which Amaris just happened to have both of.

Now adays, three centuries later, the remaining castles Brian would be still operating, though I can easily see them working at reduce capabilities. Some of their reactors shut down, sensors and computers the same way. Basically, imagine a PERFECT base like we have been talking about. Then imagine three centuries of wear and tear, maintenance robots shutting down, spare parts running out, and stuff like that. Then imagine what would still be working. Still a very hard nut to crack for your typical small unit, but now actually MANAGEABLE.

;)

Excellent points, 99% of all SL bases and warehouse would be full of junk...neat, cool, hey we can use this get some idea how to make something kind of junk but still it is junk. Ammo rots. Seen enough of that in Iraq. Have a buddy who lost a testicle to bad ammo, mainly because lazy people can't remember to do the FIFO plan like they are suppose. (FIFO= First In, First Out)

Reactors fail like you said Medron, thus the base might be still sitting there, in all reality it is one big cave since it has no power. And if something is still working, there is no guarantee that anyone in the Inner Sphere will have a clue on how to operate it correctly. Sure you can push buttons and figure out that something happens when do push buttons, but that is something that only works in the movies. And with an old CB in use by say Laio for an example, the parts of the CB that have no power etc...means they still need to be guarded and are weak points in the defense of the complex. CBs are cool things, but really all they are is a base that has to be used correctly to keep an occupying forces busy chasing around the remains of the defenders forces till help arrives if it even shows up at all.

_________________
Karagin-

Darkness is a friend of mine. Sometimes I have to beat it back, or it would overwhelm me. Shirley Meier

[url]http://karagin12.livejournal.com/[/url]

The Wookiee, he's not wearing any pants!

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-army.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2015 8:59 pm 
Offline
Team Bansai Special Forces Commando
Team Bansai Special Forces Commando

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2002 8:00 pm
Posts: 1399
Location: Dunbar, West Virginia
Was just looking this post over and wondered if anyone has ever designed a CB in HMMap

_________________
Everyone here is crazy except you and me, and I am NOT TO SURE about you.

People like you are the reason People like me need medication.

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/flag-us.gif[/img][img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-marines.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:26 pm 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
A single CBT map sheet is about one square kilometer. In the real world, significant military bases cover tens to hundreds of square kilometers, and Castles Brian in canon are usually described as being pretty large. So on a realistic game scale, designing and playing a Castle Brian map would most likely represent just a portion of a much larger base. Almost like those fantasy RPG dungeons that go impossibly on for miles and miles.

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:21 pm 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
Quote:
Excellent points, 99% of all SL bases and warehouse would be full of junk...neat, cool, hey we can use this get some idea how to make something kind of junk but still it is junk. Ammo rots
I wonder if it is possible to conserve ammo(and other stuff)

there seems to be a shipwreck that is in the water for 1500-1600 years, and the wood is so well conserved that you can see the toolmarks of its manufacture, the mast is still upright etc. this condition is owed to the fact that there is no oxygen down in the lower layers of the black sea. teredo navalis cannot eat wood when it cannot breathe.

the question is: is it thinkable to avoid the rot of equipment by storing it in an inert gas( N2 for example) at least in N2 there is no rust.
would the rot of ammo be stopped by storing it in a cold room full of N2?

then there is a place where the US of A are storing aircraft, in the desert. in that case the trick is that it is very dry there.

conclusion: for storage the best condition is probably cool(low temperature reduces chemical reaction, including chemical decay), absence of oxygen and perfectly dry.

can a cold/dry/anoxic storage be made to last for centurys?

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 9:43 pm 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Regarding deterioration of ammo: chemical instability over time can be minimized via the formulas used in propellants and explosives, but eventual deterioration and instability is inevitable due to the chemical properties that make ammo go BOOM by design. Depending on the contents of the ammo and conditions around it, that could take only weeks (ammo goes bad quick in hot tropical conditions) to decades or longer. I know here in America, there's been still-live cannonballs from the American Civil War found in this century. Stuff from the World Wars is still being found all over the world and must be handled with kid gloves because not only is it still potentially live, but it's very likely unstable due to that deterioration over time.

As for those planes out in the desert: no one has any illusions about any of those planes ever flying again. Much like the US Navy's "ghost fleet", they're kept to inflate the "potential" of our military to deter aggression abroad and provide extra illusions of security at home. "Look at all this old stuff we've kept in case World War 3 breaks out!" Yeah...stuff that is most likely rotted to the point that IF you had to make it useful again, it would probably take until the war is over. Oh, and we stopped making parts for these old ships and planes long ago, and no current pilots are trained on them so we'd have to do that from the ground up. Bah. Real ready reserves require a lot more active upkeep than America has given its Cold War ghosts, that's for sure.

But overall, in theory, the idea of an environmentally controlled storage could definitely extend the life of a lot of things. Especially if things were deliberately treated and packaged and laid up with the idea of lasting til Kingdom Come. Of course, it also depends on what the particular items are...

- Chemically unstable stuff like ammo or fuel? Sorry, you're not going to find that in a useful state after centuries.

- Electronics? Mmmmm, not sure; electronics are sensitive to corrosion and have a lot of chemical stuff in them that can go bad over time. Open up an old computer or radio to see what I mean. Much would depend on how the stuff was stored. Sealed packages in a controlled environment, maybe...

- Solid metal items like projectile weapons or mechanical parts, coated in preservatives like cosmoline and packaged up properly, could potentially last forever. That's the kind of stuff you'll find in a Star League cache that's still useful. Heatsinks would be one good example; they're essentially just fancy radiators, so open the crates, clean them off and flush them out, and hey! Good as new, even if the tubing was drawn when Amaris was a baby...

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Last edited by Shades of Grey on Wed Sep 21, 2016 5:22 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 10:35 pm 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Oh, and if you don't know what cosmoline is...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmoline

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:48 am 
Offline
Loki
Loki

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 11444
Location: Minnesnowta
I would also note that the various Ghost Fleets have been used by a cash strapped military as spare parts depots for decades.

They've been cannibalized to keep the remaining active duty stuff operating.

Now the hulks are still there, and could be brought back online but it would take replacing all the parts that make them WORK to do it.

In our current factory-reduced environment due to the last decade or two of sending factories overseas, rebuilding the Ghost Fleets might just be the fastest way to get our air forces and naval forces and such back online, but have no illusions. Very few of those hulks out in the deserts or in safe harbors are in any way able to have crews walk in, start the engines, and roll out for war.

It would take weeks, months, or years to bring them back online.

I have something similar in my Jack of Harts writings. The opening strike of The War took out America's largest space factory, and the Alpha Centauri campaign cost them their SECOND greatest collection of factories. Three years later, they were STILL trying to bring the Ghost Fleets back online to make up for the capital ships they COULDN'T build while mass producing fighters, bombers, gunships, and frigates in hope of maintaining a reliable space fleet. They were even reducing the number of capital ships in their squadrons and replacing them with hyperspace-capable bombers and gunships to make up the loss in firepower. It was a bad time for the American navy.

The moral of the story? Once you put a tank, fighter, or ship in a Ghost Force with minimal maintenance it can take a LONG time if ever before it will ever fight again. And the longer it is in Ghost Force the longer it will take to bring it back online.

The Star League depots where 'Mechs are shut down and just waiting to be turned back on three centuries later? Or the automated sentry drones that were still hovering around and shooting up intruders? Well...here there be magic. It is one of the ways that FASA showed JUST HOW ADVANCED the Star League was compared to anything else. Up to the Arthur C. Clarke magic and technology levels.

_________________
Medron Pryde - The Great and Terrible :blah:
[img]http://faileas.greywolf.googlepages.com/WOTD.png[/img]
[url=http://www.pryderockindustries.com]P.R.I.[/url] - The home of BattleTech programs and files
"I'm gonna Tea Party like its 1776." - Medron Pryde
Who is John Galt?


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:22 am 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Yes and no about America's Ghost Fleet. Many of those ships date to the early Cold War or even WW2. They could be stripped of some basic mechanical parts; valves haven't changed a whole lot in the hundreds of years they've been around. But that would only put them even farther from readiness. Throw in the fact that they are old technology on which modern sailors are no longer trained and you have an even bigger issue. A lot of those old boats are boiler powered, the Boiler Tech rating was stood down two decades ago, and I'm honestly not sure if there's any boiler boats still left in the active fleet. Some of the older amphibs or auxiliaries, maybe? In any case, you'd be having to resurrect an entire field of technical expertise just to get those ships working again, let alone underway.

Now, imagine finding a SLDF Ghost Fleet in the 3025 era of CBT. Given that technology mostly went backwards from the Exodus until the post-3039 tech revival, only ComStar might understand at first how to do ANYTHING with those ships. Later on after warships have re-entered the picture, it might be easier to make something useful out of them, but even then, SLDF ships would represent old tech that isn't necessarily compatible or competitive with newer ships...like comparing an Aegis to an Avalon, to use two specific examples. Throw in a few centuries worth of language drift affecting the technical instructions (assuming you have them at all), finding parts to replace all the expired or broken stuff, corrosion control and all the other necessary wrench and hammer work to get the ships back into working mechanical condition, dealing with rotted fuel and ammo and so forth, sterilization (in real life, our space stations quickly become flying petri dishes without regular cleaning), training the new crew from scratch because first you have to train the trainers...yeah. Getting a mothballed spaceship flying again...let alone a centuries old mothballed spaceship...is a major endeavor even at the best of times.

Therefore, if you are not performing regular maintenance and training to keep up the readiness of your mothballed reserves...to keep them actually ready to be returned to service on short notice...then you might as well just send them to the scrapyard. Whether you're talking about ghost fleets, Castles Brian, or anything else.

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:41 pm 
Offline
Stratego
Stratego

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 10855
Location: Ft. Hood Texas
So the Dragoon fleet at Bristol was a bit of a stretch? As are some of the other "finds" in the BT universe of lost Star League tech and such...man what way to buzz kill the fun...but your points and others are ones that would be realistic to the universe, ammo falls apart and rots, even stuff that is new or newer in a bunker and if water gets in or other things aka rats, then its no good. Same with fuel, it doesn't have to sit for years to go bad, anything can ruin it. Same with the other lubricants in the vehicles or mechs.

Now what about the reactors on these mechs or ships...what issues would there be with those?

_________________
Karagin-

Darkness is a friend of mine. Sometimes I have to beat it back, or it would overwhelm me. Shirley Meier

[url]http://karagin12.livejournal.com/[/url]

The Wookiee, he's not wearing any pants!

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-army.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:05 pm 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
a reactor that is stored in vacuum should survive rather well, there is no rust in a vacuum. (this would probably be the case in any "ghost fleet" of any space-navy)
and the fuel used for those: H2 (as well as D2 and T2) are probably leaking out, but that sort of fuel does at least not damage the reactor and could be replaced.
coolant-pumps and any moving parts would be problematic. Magnetic pumps might look like an answer, but they only work with water, wich is corrosive...

hydrocarbon-fuel would be something else: it might stay in place in a somewhat clotted condition...

ammo is a problem, unless they invent some sort of storable propellant( maybe binary, two harmless chemicals mixed just before firing)and storable explosives.
gaussballs, stored in a vacuum, should last forever.
the functioning parts of a Gauscannon should also survive, the apparatus for turning them around however might be needing a lubricant to function. same for any moving part in the ammo-feeding mechanism.

I Wonder if it would be possible to build a spaceship that would last a few centurys/millennia by simply :roll: avoiding anything that rots/clots or deteriorates.
then there would be a method needed to train ppl without trainers,
any technical solution for this(like computers, Video-tapes,DVD etc) would have to be avoided,
so a handBOOK wich is guiding the new crew from the very first step, step by step, would be needed.
this handbook would have to heavily rely on diagrams and pictures, to avoid language problems. The same is true for any switches and labels on board.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:21 pm 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
I think there is only one way a ghost fleet could realistically be in exsistence for a long period of time and un-mothballed if needed:
1. the parts used in the ghost-fleet must remain identical to those used in the normal fleet, any changes made for the normal fleet must also be implemented in the ghost-fleet.
2. the ghost fleet must not be used as a source for spares. unless the spares are soon be replaced.(to bridge the time until the spares arrive is ok)
3. any material that is rotting or deteriorating must be removed, and kept ready for reinstallation.(that means that ammo would have to be replaced in the warehouses regularly)
4. a sufficient number of trainers must be ready, always.(this should be no real problem when the vessels are identical to those still used)
5. the vessels of the fleet would have to be constructed with mothballing/unmothballing in mind, as well as long time storage.


it remains questionable wether such a "ghost fleet" still would be one, or rather a reserve-fleet.
the cost of an effective ghost fleet might be to high for it to be worthwile.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:31 am 
Offline
Loki
Loki

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 11444
Location: Minnesnowta
Many of the Star League-era finds are...shall we say...unlikely according to our understanding of military technologies.

Things just wear out. Even in deep storage.

It is one of the things that showed FASA's Star League as far beyond the powers of mere man and all that. The Golden Age of mankind. Weapons of war ready to fight when they were found because they just didn't rust or whatever. Realistic? No. Making for a cool story?

Oh yeah.

I prefer to just run with it and when people ask how it could happen just say...because it is the Star League. They did lots of impossible stuff that nobody can replicate now.

That is one of the things I think that Catalyst messed up when they tried to make the Star League more "believable" and less advanced during their reboot of the BattleTech universe.

_________________
Medron Pryde - The Great and Terrible :blah:
[img]http://faileas.greywolf.googlepages.com/WOTD.png[/img]
[url=http://www.pryderockindustries.com]P.R.I.[/url] - The home of BattleTech programs and files
"I'm gonna Tea Party like its 1776." - Medron Pryde
Who is John Galt?


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:56 am 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Well, therein lies part of the problem that Catalyst and FASA before them have had ever since the game started: many of us have military and/or technical backgrounds and understand how such things work in reality. We also have enough rational flexibility that given a starting point, even if it's a fictional handwavium starting point, we can take some pretty good shots at extrapolating from the fiction to create our own extensions of the tech and the stories.

The people who first created this game didn't have that realistic, rational perspective, and the people struggling to fill in the huge gaps since then aren't much better, with a few exceptions like Cray. There is so much handwavium involved that we might as well be talking about a fantasy game. "It's magic!" "It's Lostech!" "Hidden Wobbly bases in the Deep Periphery!" It's all the same crutch for bad and/or lazy authors. Bottom line: we need a new game in the same general universe, started over from the very beginning.

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:06 am 
Offline
Stratego
Stratego

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 10855
Location: Ft. Hood Texas
You can have the magic ala Tech level 23 Traveler civilization and still be believable at the same time, sure lots of things won't be doable by the Houses aka the robotic factories as mentioned in the original House Marik Housebook, before the heresy of Nystul saying the books were deeply flawed and had nothing to add to the story any more beyond the basic history, and then have certain things work centuries when found again, some not all though...

_________________
Karagin-

Darkness is a friend of mine. Sometimes I have to beat it back, or it would overwhelm me. Shirley Meier

[url]http://karagin12.livejournal.com/[/url]

The Wookiee, he's not wearing any pants!

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-army.gif[/img]


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:56 am 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Quote:
I think there is only one way a ghost fleet could realistically be in exsistence for a long period of time and un-mothballed if needed:
1. the parts used in the ghost-fleet must remain identical to those used in the normal fleet, any changes made for the normal fleet must also be implemented in the ghost-fleet.
2. the ghost fleet must not be used as a source for spares. unless the spares are soon be replaced.(to bridge the time until the spares arrive is ok)
3. any material that is rotting or deteriorating must be removed, and kept ready for reinstallation.(that means that ammo would have to be replaced in the warehouses regularly)
4. a sufficient number of trainers must be ready, always.(this should be no real problem when the vessels are identical to those still used)
5. the vessels of the fleet would have to be constructed with mothballing/unmothballing in mind, as well as long time storage.


it remains questionable wether such a "ghost fleet" still would be one, or rather a reserve-fleet.
the cost of an effective ghost fleet might be to high for it to be worthwile.
I prefer to think of it as a reserve fleet. It is perfectly possible to put old gear into storage and mothball it for future use; you don't even have to actively upgrade it. But that doesn't mean you can mothball (for example) a Star League cruiser and just leave it parked in a hidden orbit behind Jupiter for two centuries without touching it. You have to do upkeep to maintain at least a basic level of operation and readiness.

- Clean, preserve, do necessary maintenance. Start up and shut down machinery to confirm readiness, train personnel, and maintain free operation (mechanical things tend to seize when left idle too long). Replace things that expire; that includes ammo, fuel, food, and mechanical consumables such as lubricants or valve packing (a constant task on real naval ships).

- Doing the above means maintaining a supply of parts, many of which will have their own expiration dates. Fortunately, many consumables (ammo being one big exception) tend to be common and maybe not even mil spec; in reality, I can go to any hardware store and get O-rings, WOG valves, and many other basic items that will work just fine on US Navy ships today, even the ones that are decades old. But you will still have to make new ammo to replace the old, and potentially replace other old specialized equipment.

- That last need could be a good argument for upgrades, or at least replacing obsolete parts with current ones. Big E is THE example of what happens when a ship becomes outdated; most of the companies that made her original equipment in the 1950's and 1960's were long out of business before my time there in 2004-2007. When something broke, we very often couldn't get parts anymore. The solution to that is obvious: replace obsolete, out-of-production equipment, with current equipment that meets the same specs.

- Then there's the people factor. All of the above requires maintaining at least a reserve crew trained in the regular operation and maintenance of the ship. They handle the upkeep described above, and also are your experts and trainers when you have to activate and fully man the ship. At a minimum, that reserve crew should have enough people with the required skills to man stations and get the ship underway on its own in an emergency, much like a US Navy duty section. That crew needs food, quarters, gravity, duty rotation, and so forth. So either the ship's habitability must be maintained at a reasonable level, or your reserve fleet's super secret hidden base will need a supporting space station for the crews. Most likely both.

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 8:54 am 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
When talking about these really old ships, it might be best to think of them as a continuous entity like a city, changing internally and organically over time while retaining the same basic identity, rather than a typical mechanical device like a car that is built once and keeps the majority of its parts for its whole life.

To use an example from my own fiction, let's look at ARS Astraeus, former SLS Astraeus. She is a Potemkin troop cruiser, and the flagship of the Astral Republic. By the 32nd century time period in which I am currently writing for the Republic, she is one of the last (if not THE last) of her class, and has existed as a single continuous entity for 500ish years. But to suppose that she is even remotely the same ship as originally built in the 27th century is ridiculous. Countless people have walked her halls, and after five centuries, her KF core might well be her only original major component left; the rest of her has been replaced, repaired, modernized, and/or upgraded many times over.

A similar example from canon would be FWLS Olympic. The Aegis class was almost 700 years old at the start of the Jihad in 3067, so no way in realistic hell was she still flying on her original construction. Like Astraeus, she probably had virtually everything outside her KF core replaced at some point in her long life.

Like Cake sang, rock on completely with some brand new components...

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Last edited by Shades of Grey on Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:39 pm 
Offline
Supreme Mugwump
Supreme Mugwump

Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:42 pm
Posts: 3183
Quote:
Then there's the people factor. All of the above requires maintaining at least a reserve crew trained in the regular operation and maintenance of the ship. They handle the upkeep described above, and also are your experts and trainers when you have to activate and fully man the ship. At a minimum, that reserve crew should have enough people with the required skills to man stations and get the ship underway on its own in an emergency, much like a US Navy duty section. That crew needs food, quarters, gravity, duty rotation, and so forth. So either the ship's habitability must be maintained at a reasonable level, or your reserve fleet's super secret hidden base will need a supporting space station for the crews. Most likely both.
one main reason why I think that a reserve fleet has to be made of the same type of vessels is that on an active vessel crews could be kept in training.
I think every vessel has a few crews that work in shifts, and maybe one or two shifts at land-leave. with a reserve-fleet I would ad one crew for maintenance. I would exchange this crews regularly.
in case of conflict this crews would be distributed one crew per vessel, and would train the remaining crew.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:35 pm 
Offline
Loki
Loki

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 8:00 pm
Posts: 11444
Location: Minnesnowta
An example of REALLY OLD ships from my writing.

The Peloran ships can recycle and remanufacture basically anything. Any damage that does not kill them can be repaired in time. Eat up an asteroid belt or two and they have all the resources they need to perform repairs. Or upgrades. Peloran scout ships on the borders of their territory rarely go home. They often stay on station for centuries, watching for threats while going on about their lives. Whenever a new technology is developed back home and added to the ship designs, couriers are sent to the border with the specifications of the new technologies, and the ships simply upgrade themselves without ever leaving their station.

Many of these ships are two thousand years old or older. But none are exactly alike anymore. They have all changed to a certain degree. Each ship is unique. And none of the components that were built into them two thousand years ago still remain. Even their basic structures have been eaten and rebuilt numerous times over the centuries.

That is how I see any long lived ship. Whether through advanced tech or through the simple use of lots of workers cutting and replacing bad pieces, any ship that is going to be around for a LONG time has to have a constant barrage of repair work going on. We are actually seeing that right now with our modern nuclear aircraft carriers or our B-52s. They are becoming generation ships with kids serving on the craft their fathers and even grandfathers served on. Always updating, always fixing, and always keeping them working as they continue to see technologies never dreamed of when they were first built.

_________________
Medron Pryde - The Great and Terrible :blah:
[img]http://faileas.greywolf.googlepages.com/WOTD.png[/img]
[url=http://www.pryderockindustries.com]P.R.I.[/url] - The home of BattleTech programs and files
"I'm gonna Tea Party like its 1776." - Medron Pryde
Who is John Galt?


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 3:51 pm 
Offline
Antisocial General
Antisocial General

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 8:35 am
Posts: 7883
Location: MLC, Lyran Alliance.
Your comment about the carriers becoming generation ships is correct. Two examples:

- When I served on Big E in 2004-2007, I worked with a young Vietnamese-American mechanic down in the nuke world. One day, his father came aboard for a visit -- or actually, a return. He was a South Vietnamese fighter pilot who had evacuated from the fall of Vietnam via Big E back in 1970-whatever, over 30 years prior to his son serving on the same ship.

- A year or three ago here in the shipyard, I supported overhaul work on Ike, CVN-69 -- which was my first ship in the Navy, back in 1992-96. Twenty years gone, some new technology in the controls but nothing radical, still the same old bucket. I had to remind myself repeatedly to keep my hands off the gear because it wasn't my plant anymore; more than once, I spotted something wrong and gave the sailors, who were young enough to be my kids, some good natured crap about "What have you done to my ship?"

_________________
Be careful what you wish for. I might let you have it. :evil:


Last edited by Shades of Grey on Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
 Post subject: Re: castles Brian
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:31 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:13 pm
Posts: 670
Location: Sheffield UK
Just thinking of the british WW2 light fleets a couple of which served in 3 navies. The ex HMS Hermes laid down in WW2 completed 1959 served 28 years in the Royal Navy, has spent 30 years in the Indian Navy as INS Viraat decomms this month.

_________________
hmmm hooom


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ] 

All times are UTC-04:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
American English Language Pack © Maël Soucaze