Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
hope you find it useful when writing about the Unit's operations, too. Also, emphasis is inconsistent - sometimes bold is used, at one point triple-asterisk is used, previously mentioned !!!!!!. etc.The Big One, page 5 wrote:... and became seriously snowed up in winter, So, all the base buildings were connected....
That does appear to be what happened; a lot of people have commented on the editing problems and it will be addressed with the next book to be published (Anvil of Necessity). What seems to have happened this time is that the penultimate copy was used and a lot of corrections didn;t get made. Apologies all around.GuppyShark wrote:Sorry to say, it really needed proofing. There's lots of instances of the wrong word being used as a result of a typo (which spellchecker software won't pick up), and missing punctuation. There's an example on the very first page of prose. I'm going to presume this was the publisher printing a draft - I've had that happen to me before.
One of the motivations behind writing TBO was to stress just what nuclear bombing actually means in human terms. At the time it was written, there was a lot of talk about the desirability of going back to the "Mutual Assured Destruction" concept without people realizing what "Assured Destruction" for the people on the receiving end. Nuclear weapons are horrifying things, their primary virtue is that they are so dreadful that they make people fear using them. The devices used in TBO are small, very small by modern standards. In some ways, TBO is an anti-nuclear tract; it was a conscious effort to shock people into realizing the consequences of letting a nuclear device hit a city.The sections about the effects of the bombs was also really evocative, far moreso than I was expecting. Now that I've read the whole book, I shouldn't have expected anything less. The point of the book seems to be to ram home just how ugly the conflict was, not to glorify it.
This is one of my pet hobby-horses, television and cinema so rarely show the consequences of an act of violence. It's all sanitized and trivialized, and the effects on the victims are marginalized. Somebody gets hit on the head with a baseball bat and they shake their head and carry on like nothing has happened. In reality, they're a good candidate for serious brain damage and may well die. I note that in a few recent shows (especially the CSIs), they have started making that point - a severe blow to the head, even one that's apparently not immediately fatal, can kill.I'd never have suspected that much of the story would be about the struggle to save the crew of a damaged carrier. By the end of the book you've practically forgotten about the bombing run that put her in trouble in the first place... but you'll not forget the damage in a hurry. A nice divergence from the usual dramatic style - usually it's all about the thrill of the attack, some pretty explosions go off, then the hero zooms off to his next fight scene.
Good luck indeedIf I was still in Uni, this would be an interesting book to analyse, though good luck finding the professor to read it.
Thank you very much for your kind and much-appreciated words.At first, I was in horror of it; but as time went on, and the other stories came out; and I read more about the Sainted General through his autobiography and "Iron Eagle", I began to gravitate more to the Curtis E. LeMay school of international relations as exemplified by (paraphrased):Stuart wrote: In some ways, TBO is an anti-nuclear tract; it was a conscious effort to shock people into realizing the consequences of letting a nuclear device hit a city.
I can't stop laughing!“Radio message sir, from the C-94 in front. He asks what our plans are.”
Dedmon snorted, viewed from the perspective of the tiny utility aircraft, the C-99 must look like a massive monster towering high in the sky. The thought gave him an idea. “Cargo deck, start opening the clamshell doors, radio patch me though to the C-94. Dedmon waited until the connection was made and the rumble of the nose doors showed they were opening. Then he spoke to the C-94 pilot, “I am going to eat you!”
Oh I know it wasn't original (it was a C-5 to an F-4 IIRC), but I still liked it.Sea Skimmer wrote:Funny, but it isn’t original, that bit comes from a story out of IIRC Ramstein airbase involving a C-5 Galaxy
That's right, the Sangamons were the first batch of conversions, being built from the hulls of Cimmaron class fleet oilers. They were so sucessful that the design was used as the basis for the Commencement Bay class, the primary difference being that the Commencement Bays were twin-screwed. Norman Friedman's "US Aircraft Carriers, an Illustrated Design History" has a good account of CVE development.That NOS Guy wrote:Stuart, I saw you mention that the CVEs are of the Commencement Bay type. IIRC, the Jeep carriers converted from oilers were the Sangamon-class.
Ah, further inspection of my guide to aircraft carriers confirms that. Thanks for clearing that up.Stuart wrote: That's right, the Sangamons were the first batch of conversions, being built from the hulls of Cimmaron class fleet oilers. They were so sucessful that the design was used as the basis for the Commencement Bay class, the primary difference being that the Commencement Bays were twin-screwed. Norman Friedman's "US Aircraft Carriers, an Illustrated Design History" has a good account of CVE development.
By the way, I need lots of names for Corsair and Skyraider pilots. Who wants in?