The Big One

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-11-15 03:21pm

Stormbringer wrote:
That might well be true, but I've read some stories that have made even one sided slaughters interesting. I forget what it was, but I had read a great account of some of the suicide sorties of the Japanese navy and those were equally one sided. It does have potential if some one does it right. But it's your universe and I certainly don't presume to dictate what you write.

The battle is the complete annihilation of the German force. That's significantly more one sided then even Yamato's finnal sortie. At least there four of the destroyers escaped home, and the battleships waiting to finish off anyone who managed to break through the air attacks where upgraded products of WW1, rather then the swarm of fast modern battleships the USN would field against the Germans should they somehow manage to survive the carriers.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-11-15 10:42pm

High Frontier 5

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-11-16 04:45am

Stuart wrote: There is just a vague chance I suppose the story could be continued here; I do deeply hope that will happen.

If you don't mind that I do so, I will go ahead and do that, since there is a sizeable community of TB1-universe readers here. I've been thinking a fair bit about continuing it, but I have a frightfully large number of stories I'm working on purely as a matter of pleasure (four counting The Sun Set) and it's hard to juggle between them, especially in terms of creative inspiration. But I could forsee several new chapters before the end of the year if I can go ahead and post them here.

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2004-11-16 08:42am

The Duchess of Zeon wrote: If you don't mind that I do so, I will go ahead and do that, since there is a sizeable community of TB1-universe readers here. I've been thinking a fair bit about continuing it, but I have a frightfully large number of stories I'm working on purely as a matter of pleasure (four counting The Sun Set) and it's hard to juggle between them, especially in terms of creative inspiration. But I could forsee several new chapters before the end of the year if I can go ahead and post them here.

Please continue it if you possibly can; it really is a very well-written and well-received story and I really would like to see where it is going to end.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2004-11-21 08:57am

Having finshed TBO and now half way on Crusade, I say again, this rocks, totatlly.

Mind if I forward this to a few people?

P.S thanks Shep, I owe you one good link

acesand8s · Post by **acesand8s** » 2004-11-21 12:05pm

I just finished Crusade and I must say the entire storyline is excellent and very well-written.

Stuart, I do have one question from the end of Crusade.

LBJ wrote:Instead I will be remembered as the man whose actions ended the Pax Americana. I’d never thought of it that way, not until I read one of the commentaries. There are people in my party who called the Pax Americana ruling the world by terror. Clark was one of them, I think his long-term goal was to so tie us up in international treaties that we couldn’t keep the peace by ourselves. Pax Americana, it had a nice ring to it. Now its gone.

How did LBJ end Pax Americana? It seems to be intact, the Caliphate submitted to American demands and those directly responsible for knocking down the bomber were nuked.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-11-21 04:00pm

acesand8s wrote:I just finished Crusade and I must say the entire storyline is excellent and very well-written.

Stuart, I do have one question from the end of Crusade.

LBJ wrote:Instead I will be remembered as the man whose actions ended the Pax Americana. I’d never thought of it that way, not until I read one of the commentaries. There are people in my party who called the Pax Americana ruling the world by terror. Clark was one of them, I think his long-term goal was to so tie us up in international treaties that we couldn’t keep the peace by ourselves. Pax Americana, it had a nice ring to it. Now its gone.
How did LBJ end Pax Americana? It seems to be intact, the Caliphate submitted to American demands and those directly responsible for knocking down the bomber were nuked.

Because for thirty years it was "Hurt America and suffer total destruction.", now there can be acceptable losses when dealing with America.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-11-21 06:05pm

I don't think LBJ ended Pax Americana ... he just has the misfortune to be in office when it ended.

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2004-11-23 11:13am

acesand8s wrote:How did LBJ end Pax Americana? It seems to be intact, the Caliphate submitted to American demands and those directly responsible for knocking down the bomber were nuked.

Chewie's got the reasoning right; its the horrible flaw in the Massive Retaliation policy - here, there came a case where it should have happened and those responsible simply couldn't do it. As a result, people now believe (rightly or wrongly) that they can pull things on the Americans without ceasing to exist as the penalty. So the Pax Americana has ended. It wasn't actually LBJs fault; it was just that it happened on his watch. Some time or another, the same thing would have happened to another President with the same result; its an inherent flaw in the strategic theory.

The only way around it is never to get into the position where Massive Retaliation is required. Crusade was full of flawed decision-making but the proximate cause of the disaster was putting Marisol in the position where she could be shot down. She should either have flow that mission is a way that prevented her being shot down or not flown it at all. That symbolized the whole problem; the secret of Massive Retaliation was that one never gave the other guys a chance to be massively retaliated on - but in Crusade over-confidence and policy-blurring lead people to forget that.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2004-11-26 02:11am

High Frontier 6

Zed Snardbody · Post by **Zed Snardbody** » 2004-11-26 02:51am

Very nice

ZShade · Post by **ZShade** » 2004-11-26 06:49pm

Stuart, I've been wondering about something for a while. In TBO's Epilogue, it's mentioned that CVN-74 is John C Stens, but in your US Force Structures, all of the CVNs after Shiloh have gone back to state names. Is -74's name changed in the one year gap between High Frontier and TBO's Epilogue?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-11-26 09:20pm

Actually, it probably represents something of a break down of naming conventions. It's my guess that she's an abberation in the naming convention or possibly part of the beginning of the trend to name ships for political gains.

Of course my question is whether it's meant to be John C Stens or the actual name, John C Stennis.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-11-26 09:23pm

Stens was a RN surgeon onboard Shiloh, the carrier is named in his honor.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-11-26 09:41pm

You guys might be thinking of the real-life John Stennis.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-11-26 09:44pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:You guys might be thinking of the real-life John Stennis.

Umm, yeah.

ZShade · Post by **ZShade** » 2004-11-26 09:57pm

Stormbringer wrote:Actually, it probably represents something of a break down of naming conventions. It's my guess that she's an abberation in the naming convention or possibly part of the beginning of the trend to name ships for political gains.

Of course my question is whether it's meant to be John C Stens or the actual name, John C Stennis.

Well, this lists the carriers through CVN-86 or so. All states, which is why I asked.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-11-29 05:24am

I just realized something about The Contractors (or the Seer and his associates).

They are nothing special. They merely are the average american
businessman from the 1940s-1950s, nothing more. They just look
superhuman and prescient to us, because we are looking at them
from nearly forty years of McNamara-esque cost-analysis which has
turned our business executives into numbercrunchers, not clear headed
analysts.

(Business in a way requires careful analysis and balancing the
various proposals put forth to your desk to pick the right system
that will be successful, and make lots of money, incidentally.
Nowadays, the objective is on picking the cheepest route to get
the quickest boost to your short term profit/loss ratio.)

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2004-11-29 09:54am

ZShade wrote:Stuart, I've been wondering about something for a while. In TBO's Epilogue, it's mentioned that CVN-74 is John C Stens, but in your US Force Structures, all of the CVNs after Shiloh have gone back to state names. Is -74's name changed in the one year gap between High Frontier and TBO's Epilogue?

It was, yes, by Congressional Diktat that stipulated all CVNs should have State Names. So John C Stens will have gone to another ship (probably one of the big command cruisers).

The truth is that when TBO was written I couldn't resist renaming the @ CVN-74 (John C Stennis) to the TBO CVN-74 (John C Stens). At that time, TBO was a stand-alone story. As it later developed into a whole alternate universe, a few things had to be changed to fit the developing story line. However, I simply forgot to accommodate the name of CVN-74

and she picked up a state name like all her sisters,

Sorry.....

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2004-11-29 10:06am

MKSheppard wrote:I just realized something about The Contractors (or the Seer and his associates). They are nothing special. They merely are the average american businessman from the 1940s-1950s, nothing more. They just look superhuman and prescient to us, because we are looking at them from nearly forty years of McNamara-esque cost-analysis which has turned our business executives into numbercrunchers, not clear headed analysts.

That's perfectly correct. Its not an accident that the network of consultants and research institutes that surround the Pentagon is called "The Business" by insiders. Mostly we got started in the late 1940s and early 1950s when the US services (realizing that industry was a critical part of military build-up) started to bring in people from industry to cast their opinions on things. I hope "The Contractors" in the TBOverse don't come over as infallible or exceptionally prescient. I've tried to paint them as skilled but fallible (Crusade is one screw-up after another).

Likewise, US military procurement in the TBOverse is nothing particularly special or prescient; its just run the way things were run before McNamara got hold of DoD and wrecked everything. The US Defense structure outlined in TBO actually costs less to run than its equivalent (I did some very elaborate cost/currency/value calculations to relate TBO purchasing power to @). A lot of the difference is the elimination of the bureaucratic insanities that McNamara introduced. (You may note, for example, there are no Permissive Action Links on the US bombers. If they wanna shoot, they shoot. )

Another subtle thing, in the TBOverse, the US Armed services are "joint" much earlier than in our timeline. For example, the TBO "NORAD" is a joint Air Force/Army operation with the Air Force running the fighters and the Army running the missile batteries. That's because a lot of the Kennedy era games playing off one service against the others simply didn't happen. "Joint" was slowly (and painfully) evolving in the 1950s but pretty much got killed for more than 30 years by the Kennedy/McNamara era followed by the Vietnam War and the Carter disaster. It only started to pick up momentum again in the 1980s under Reagan.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-11-29 10:59am

Stuart wrote:I hope "The Contractors" in the TBOverse don't come over as infallible or exceptionally prescient. I've tried to paint them as skilled but fallible (Crusade is one screw-up after another).

Crusade isn't as bad as you think it is; they still managed to
salvage something out of that total mess, and they managed to
deal with McNamara and Clark's monkey wrench in a reasonably
good manner.

Crusade's exile of Strange at the end does mirror @, except for the
part about him being responsible for a major world crisis. He finally
got LBJ annoyed enough that King Lyndon had him golden parachuted
away from DoD to the World Bank in @.

Likewise, US military procurement in the TBOverse is nothing particularly special or prescient; its just run the way things were run before McNamara got hold of DoD and wrecked everything.

Or in other words, we buy a system and keep fixing it's flaws as they
are discovered, rather than waiting for perfection and burning massive
amounts of cash, as happened with SAM-D (Patriot).

(You may note, for example, there are no Permissive Action Links on the US bombers. If they wanna shoot, they shoot. )

I assume then, that LeMay's programs for personnel reliability are even
more stringent than in @....

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2004-11-29 11:11am

MKSheppard wrote:Or in other words, we buy a system and keep fixing it's flaws as they are discovered, rather than waiting for perfection and burning massive amounts of cash, as happened with SAM-D (Patriot).

Exactly. That was one of the undertones in "A Matter of Returns." The B-70A had a serious problem with its EW equipment; instead of delaying the program until it was fixed, they continued building the aircraft so the crews could train on them while also trying to fix the problem (the technical details of the problem, by the way, are historically correct in @ although they weren't experienced with the XB-70. Only the very, very foolish demand instant, 100 percent efficiency before a system enters service. The sensible approach is to take what you can get and build up from there.

(You may note, for example, there are no Permissive Action Links on the US bombers. If they wanna shoot, they shoot. )
I assume then, that LeMay's programs for personnel reliability are even
more stringent than in @....

Uhh, one might also say that the TBO view on PALs is a lot more realistic than @. However, in TBO the crews are simply trusted. They are carefully selected, carefully trained and their careers monitored. If they aren't trustworthy, they don't get near nuclear weapon. Note that Airman Basic Probationary Zipster was on B-60s, not B-52s (and is still doing runway FOD in Shemya, Alaska).

The idea that one couldn't trust the crews is pure McNamara. I'm told its because he debriefed B-29 crews coming back from Japan and they wouldn't tell him what he wanted to hear (there was a major row between LeMay and McNamara over guns on the B-29. LeMay wanted them removed, McNamara wanted them kept. McNamara wanted lots of B-29 gun kill claims and didn't get them. As a result, LeMay won and McNamara never forgave him.)

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-11-29 01:21pm

Stuart wrote:The idea that one couldn't trust the crews is pure McNamara.

I do seem to recall reading about the personnel standards that LeMay
instituted for SAC in @; basically if you had a speeding ticket, you wouldn't
get near the nukes at all. I'm imagining that standards in TBO are much
much stricter.

Note that Airman Basic Probationary Zipster was on B-60s, not B-52s (and is still doing runway FOD in Shemya, Alaska).

Still? I would imagine after a few years or so of doing that stuff,
he'd have redeemed himself somewhat to be promoted up, and out of
of Alaska. Probably won't ever be let near manned bombers again, but
he can probably find a niche for himself somewhere in the Air Force.

I'm told its because he debriefed B-29 crews coming back from Japan and they wouldn't tell him what he wanted to hear (there was a major row between LeMay and McNamara over guns on the B-29. LeMay wanted them removed, McNamara wanted them kept. McNamara wanted lots of B-29 gun kill claims and didn't get them. As a result, LeMay won and McNamara never forgave him.)

That's rather interesting, I never knew that. Thanks for telling us that,
Stuart.

Stuart · Post by **Stuart** » 2004-12-03 08:37am

The first part of a new TBO story is up. Written by Shane Rogers

Saigon dawn

This needs a little background on the Free City of Saigon.

When the Franco-Thai war broke out in January 1941, the Thai Army defeated the French Indo China Army at the Battle of Battambang then effectively occupied all of French Indo China below and to the west of the Mekong River. Japan had already "negotiated" basing rights in French Indo-China and had a complex of forces in place around Hanoi and Haiphong. They had intended to extend this comple with additional bases in the Saigon area and in Cambodia; obviously this was now impossible. The Japanese were seriously angered by this; they had tried to make the Thais accept a "negotiated" ceasefire with the French but this had been rejected. They'd also tried to push a unit over the border to chew up a Thai unit as an "inducement" only the fighting saw the Japanese unit getting worked over and unceremoniously bundled back across the Mekong. As a result, there is much bad blood between the Japanese and Thais.

The eventual situation was that Japan occupied all of Indo-China north and east of the Mekong (essentially Vietnam and Laos), Thailand all of it south and west of the Mekong (essentially Cambodia with small chunks of Laos and Vietnam). This left Saigon split between the two countries - almost exactly like @ Berlin post WW2. This was neither a stable nor a long-lasting situation. The Triple Alliance was formed in 1949 as a result of a serious Japanese incursion into India (think @ Chinese invasion of India 1962) and, in 1951 there was a serious border war between Thailand and Japan mostly over the status of Saigon. There were groups of incidents. steadily increasing in severity.

Eventually, this reached a situation where it was either going to explode into full-scale war or be ended. Neither side wanted a full-scale war so both backed down to some extent. The border between Thailand and Japanese Indochina was set along the Mekong, there were a clutch of other concessions on both sides and that left the problem of Saigon. The city being split was unworkable, neither side would give their half to the other (for deeply serious political reasons). In the end, the city was established as a "Free City", essentially an independent city-state but one paying "taxes" to both the Triple Alliance and Chipan. The Tripartite Police were a mutually acceptable solution to the policing problem. The city is run by a council that has Triple Alliance, Chipan and French interests. Its a sort of mixture of Hong Kong, Shanghai and Tangiers. It also has a distinct whiff of Danzig in July 1939.

The story is set in 1986 and is running parallel to High Frontier.

Andras · Post by **Andras** » 2004-12-03 08:44pm

HighFrontier7