tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post8194785489892230044..comments2024-03-28T00:36:19.403-07:00Comments on Rocketpunk Manifesto: Revolt of the ColoniesRickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comBlogger82125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-12024602942269156042021-07-04T06:33:55.365-07:002021-07-04T06:33:55.365-07:00The assumptions of a ROC (or ROTC, though that acr...The assumptions of a ROC (or ROTC, though that acronym's already taken) usually revolve around nation-states as the primary space powers. Since the time this blog post was written, circumstances have changed. SpaceX and other companies are thriving; largely under the rubric of government spending at present, but not as limited to that alone as national space programs. Former-pie-in-the-sky like asteroid mining and space hotels are being seriously considered by people with business degrees and shareholders. <br /><br />It seems in a populated system, corporations are likely to have as much power in space industries as Earth nations will. I can easily see monopolistic Company Towns making a comeback, especially in a situation where you have to pay for the very air you breathe. Certainly tales of oppressive robber barons, desperate workers, and brutal strike-breakers will produce much story fodder.Saint Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-56517058081700056312010-07-19T17:10:30.344-07:002010-07-19T17:10:30.344-07:00The question of 'armed ships' versus '...The question of 'armed ships' versus 'warships' comes partly to how much previous military development there has been. <br /><br />At the beginning of deep space warfare, no one really knows how to build warships - even if nominally purpose built military craft exist, they might be 'armed ships' in practice, based on civil designs with a few modifications such as weapon mounts. Or, they may be designed according to theoretical assumptions that do not survive contact with real combat conditions.<br /><br />But even when experience is gained, it may turn out that there is little you can do to make a ship more combat worthy beyond arming it ('arming' including sensors, etc., as well as weapons.)<br /><br />For example, if one hit one kill is the rule, there may simply be no point in trying to build in greater survivability (armor, compartmentation, redundant systems, etc.)<br /><br />My guess, from earlier posts and discussion, is that in the ideal world of spherical war cows, ship design and crew experience hardly matter - but in the messy circumstances of real combat encounters, they will turn out to matter after all.<br /><br />As a commenter observed some time back about the 'ideal' Lanchesterian duel, it is not a fight anyone will show up for.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-58727849090464902402010-07-19T11:42:07.808-07:002010-07-19T11:42:07.808-07:00Understood the point. The best you can get from an...Understood the point. The best you can get from an engineering team specialized in liners is a fast and sturdy liner. But they will do a subpar job on things a liner doesn't have like weapons, sensors or a hull with low profile. <br />Sure they won't screw up badly, but that ship will not be good as if the designers were military navy designers.<br />Will be something in the middle. Not a civil ship, not a warship.<br /><br />A (hollywoodian) pirate ship? o.O<br />Or a Rebel Ship. Full of Snubfighters of course.<br /><br />Still, could be feasible to hire people from nations that have the know-how?<br /><br />At least with rockets and Von Braun they did it. <br /><br />-AlbertAlbertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-41512638920258128812010-07-19T10:53:25.282-07:002010-07-19T10:53:25.282-07:00No, it's easy to parade around armed ships. W...No, it's easy to parade around armed ships. Warships are another matter entirely. An actual warship will likely be the product of generations of experience and design work, as opposed to just "a ship with weapons." I agree that people will also need organizational and tactical experience, but I think that the equipment, particularly at sea, is just as important.Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-73736829054271198242010-07-18T20:00:56.711-07:002010-07-18T20:00:56.711-07:00Building a large ship is a special skill set, whic...Building a large ship is a special skill set, which a few nations have lots of experience in doing. The United States has let that skill set atrophy in the commercial market, but still commands it in the military market. Norway and South Korea have the ability to build large ships for commercial purposes (cruise liners, container ships and tankers), but for various reasons have never chosen to put these skills towards building large warships.<br /><br />On land, certain companies specialize in building large structures, a company which builds residential houses would not have the skill sets to build a skyscraper, warehouse or large factory. If you do have the tools and skillsets to build large structures, then you can adapt those skillsets readily to other large structures (within reason. really specialized large structures like chemical plants or nuclear reactors require even more specialized skills, which are in limited quantity and high demand).<br /><br />The real point I was trying to get at is while it is relatively easy to parade around warships, armies and the like, the professional skills and corporate knowledge are what make these forces in being effective. Going back a few millenia, the Greek Hoplites were able to clean the clocks of the vastly larger Persian armies from the time of Xerxes to the march of the 10,000 for these very reasons. If the skillsets are inappropriate, such as the British knowledge of European open field warfare during the American revolution, then the situation is reversed; American frontiersmen, "rangers" and other irregular formations caused considerable damage and limited the logistics and mobility of the British forces in ways the British could not answer.<br /><br />Once again, the situation is something Heinlien alluded to in "The Moon is a harsh mistress", when the various forces of the Authority and the Federation were unable to come to grips with the Loonies.Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-8470066686872506472010-07-18T18:41:43.835-07:002010-07-18T18:41:43.835-07:00I think we have different views of how hard it is ...I think we have different views of how hard it is to put ships together. I personally think that even if you had all the pieces, it'd be hard to make an effective warship with no prior experience. Look at carriers. Even if Norway wanted one, and they had the pieces, I'd expect it to be pretty bad as they have no experience with carriers. Pretty much all carriers come from France, the US, or Britain as far as designs go, all of who have experience with carrier operations going way back. A new ship would likely be like the Soviet carriers, which were not terribly successful, due to lack of experience. You view that as a logistical/tactical issue, while I see it also on the design level. For example, the West long ago learned that arming carriers is redundant, but the Soviets did it anyway.Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-65642999088486868952010-07-18T17:20:48.777-07:002010-07-18T17:20:48.777-07:00There's a good argument that 'neocolonial&...There's a good argument that 'neocolonial' relations with colonies would be far cheaper and more effective than outright colonial rule in the classic sense. But it is sort of a plot killer, because you can rebel against a colonial occupier, whether successfully or otherwise, but it is hard to rebel against neocolonial exploitation.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-50078341313304208632010-07-18T16:10:54.137-07:002010-07-18T16:10:54.137-07:00A bit of clarification here. When I said that nati...A bit of clarification here. When I said that nations like Korea and Norway had the potential to build aircraft carriers, I meant the<i>real thing</i>, with high strength marging steel, compartmentalization etc. South Korea has a pretty extensive military and arms industry and builds nuclear reactors, a South Korean CVN's sophisticated electronics could be built "in house", while Norway would have t get their milspec gear from Sweden.<br /><br />Just because they have the potential does not mean they have the military need, or the will to do so. Even nations which feel the need and have the will, like the former USSR, found it difficult to bring the project to fruition due to the lack of the associated skill sets required to actually run the thing in an efficient manner. The Soviets made a decision that it was easier to build weapons to kill carriers than to project power using carriers, hence most Soviet era warships were bristling with pods of antiship missiles right on the deck in order to fire mass salvos at carrier battle groups.<br /><br />The point here is that building massive space fleets for our future histories isn't impossible, just the manning, staffing and logistics of such fleets is many orders of magnitude larger than most people consider. Future revolutionaries take note....Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-12202075484944633892010-07-18T05:59:43.873-07:002010-07-18T05:59:43.873-07:00...And a battleship (45,000 ton +) with massive pd......And a battleship (45,000 ton +) with massive pds and many cruise missile cells might one day be the bane of the carrier (the CG(x) cruiser come to mind). <br /><br />Old technology, new uses. <br /><br />Furthermore, new forms of armour, such as chobham, ballenite and electric armour, allowing defence against such weaposns are being developed. Wooden "armour" on ships was made obselete by exlosive shells, then along came steel plating, then the armour piercing bomb. All technology is cyclicle- I think we are nearing the phase where armour will become important again on naval craft.Geoffrey S Hnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-22007098978491055272010-07-17T15:03:29.556-07:002010-07-17T15:03:29.556-07:00Albert, warships and civilian ships are not the sa...Albert, warships and civilian ships are not the same. While you claim that armor won't help, that has been proved wrong several times. The British lost several ships during the Falklands War due to insufficient damage control and protection, while the USS Stark survived two hits by the same sort of missiles that sank the HMS Sheffield, and was returned to service. And I'm not merely speaking about slabs of steel, either. I'm talking compartmentalization, damage control features, and the sort of gear you describe. An oil tanker fitted with a flight deck and some electronics would be dead meat to a real carrier. There are all sorts of tricks to designing warships. Just because a country can build a utility helicopter (say a UH-1) doesn't mean they can also make an attack helicopter of the same size (such as an AH-64).Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-64864191914843181212010-07-17T13:59:53.054-07:002010-07-17T13:59:53.054-07:00Also, just being able to build a cruise liner does...<i>Also, just being able to build a cruise liner doesn't mean you can build any sort of warship, much less an aircraft carrier.</i><br /><br />I think you are still talking in WWII terms.<br />Armor is mostly useless (in both navy and space environments, btw).<br />Aircraft carriers aren't really fast anyway. I mean, they cannot evade missiles nor air attack.<br />And I really dubt anyone will even try to attack them with battleships or smaller ships.<br /><br />A relatively simple antiship missile can sink about any ship, (military or not) if said ship does not shoot it down before impact.<br /><br />A modern destroyer hull must be lightweight to be fast and low-profile to avoid detection, and that's it. They have no real armor.<br /><br />What really drives up the costs are the expensive equipment you install in the ship.<br />Radars, missile racks, comm equipment, hardened computers, whatever.<br /><br />All in all, what I said applies to spacecraft as well.<br /><br /><i>My point is that rebellions won't be won by force of arms alone, on either side.</i><br />Yes, and I just added that the main nation may not really care if they become indipendent if they continue to sell whatever they were selling when they were a colony.<br />History demonstrated that such system is much more profitable than managing the area as your colony.<br />Some colonies may even "buy their freedom" by signing a treaty that forces them to sell at a lower price than before.<br /><br />-AlbertAlbertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-54135184184646494782010-07-16T18:42:55.659-07:002010-07-16T18:42:55.659-07:00We can debate cartels separately, as that gets int...We can debate cartels separately, as that gets into game theory. My point is that rebellions won't be won by force of arms alone, on either side.<br />Also, just being able to build a cruise liner doesn't mean you can build any sort of warship, much less an aircraft carrier. I suppose you could make one, but it would be slow and vulnerable. A cruise liner doesn't have to worry about random holes in it's hull, which can't be said of a warship.<br />What we're getting into is interplanetary geopolitics which is interesting, but sort of groping in the dark. What we need is a universe to work these things out in. The Rocketpunkverse, if you will. Examples are so much easier if you have something concrete.Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-45858535533982822972010-07-16T12:59:52.837-07:002010-07-16T12:59:52.837-07:00If the asteroid miners decide to revolt, and I sen...<i>If the asteroid miners decide to revolt, and I send troops, I can make them work, but that takes a lot of troops there forever.</i><br /><br />True, but what actually bothers the home nation is the loss of profits from exploiting the colony's resources. <br />The change of flag isn't a problem by itself. In most situations is even better.<br /><br />The vast majority of the ex-european colonies are theoretically indipendent, but their economies still depend <b>greatly</b> from Europe and First World countries. Some still say they have a colony-like economy.<br /><br />Those that export rare metals, diamonds, radioactives, bananas, ananas and whatever have you, need a buyer.<br /><br />The same happens to a space colony.<br />They were established to produce something and all their infrastructure revolves around this product.<br /><br />If you are the only buyer they can rebel all times they want but they will still want to sell the Space Stuff to you. And you can keep it pouring in at a relatively good price without bothering too much if the colonists live in inhuman working conditions or kill each other to control the mines.<br />I mean, usually that's a good riddance.<br /><br />If you aren't the only buyer, you will have a little more problems. Because the other buyer(s) will probably offer better prices than yours, giving the colonists good reasons to rebel.<br />But anyway I wouldn't count that much on it. Imho you can expect cartels or accords between all the major corporations to keep the prices at about the same level.<br />Usually this is good for all the companies in the cartel.<br /><br />-AlbertAlbertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-86656436429706424892010-07-16T09:03:18.533-07:002010-07-16T09:03:18.533-07:00Peer competitors will have similar military techno...Peer competitors will have similar military technology (a Venitian galley and an Ottoman galley were quite similar, and indeed the Ottoman empire paid a lot for renegades to bring examples of the latest tech from the Arsenal. Of course the Genoese and Spanish also had similar equipment as well...)<br /><br />The difference lies more with the concepts and doctrine being used and the level of skill and experience backing the use of the kit. The Napoleonic Spanish and French navies outgunned the Royal Navy, but the RN had a history of success going back almost 200 years (to the Elizabethan sea dogs) by that point. The French had more and better (in terms of gun power and protection) tanks than the Germans in 1940, but the Germans had a far better doctrine and organizational model to employ tanks. Building aircraft carriers is actually a trivial exercise in ship building (various sorts of container ships, oil tankers and cruis ships approach the dimensions of an aircraft carrier), but despite the fact that Norway or South Korea have shipyards that *could* build these ships, they do not have the background or experience to use them effectively. Most navies can only use "pocket" aircraft carriers, and most only have a small handfull at most, reducing effectiveness even further.<br /><br />So the real story between the 22nd century "Athens" and "Sparta" will be how they use their mass drivers, KKV's, laserstars etc. For that matter, they may have tools we havn't even considered. A spacegoing "Athens" might trunkline energy across the solar system via lasers to power spacecraft or provide cheap energy to client companies in deep space, undercutting the planetary "Sparta". Each side might use nanotechnology or "fire ant" warfare, resulting in military biological and technological "immune systems" to protect themselves from infestations.<br /><br />The implications are hard to imagine,mspeculate away.Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-49594429581701230672010-07-15T11:02:00.168-07:002010-07-15T11:02:00.168-07:00Kinetics will likely not be sold as units, but as ...Kinetics will likely not be sold as units, but as kits. You buy the parts you can't make, add armor and fuel, and off you go.<br />I think we're drawing too heavily on Greek analogies here. While the methods and causes of revolt will vary based on economy, the basic situation won't. Any colony will be isolated (except in planetary situation) and forced to revolt and fight in space. The possible exceptions are on bodies like Luna, where troops could be moved in without local space control. (That depends on the situation. Is it just one base in revolt, or all the Lunar colonies?)<br />However, all successful revolts will fall into one of two categories: they will either be won by force of arms in space, or by making it too expensive to suppress.<br />The fist is mostly what we've discussed, and it's feasibility depends on the situation with respect to warships. If there are Space Navies (or whatever) then they are likely doomed. Converted merchantmen can't stand against warships. Winning by force of arms on land (inside) is not a good idea, as any colony will be vulnerable to attack from space.<br />The second is what has happened in almost every successful revolt to date. The rebels outlasted the occupiers, and caused them to decide that it wasn't worth it. This applies to the American Revolution, and to the US in Vietnam for starters. The only example of being really thrown out I can think of is the French in Vietnam, and one could argue that they also decided to leave.<br />The point is that almost any successful revolt will come not because the rebels won on the battlefield (though that might be important) but because it would have been too hard to put it down.<br />If the asteroid miners decide to revolt, and I send troops, I can make them work, but that takes a lot of troops there forever. Also, they can portray me as evil to the world, meaning that there will be opposition at home. Maybe they work slower, and sabotage my air system. I can shoot them, but then I have to ship out new miners, and train them. Eventually, I'll either let them go or blow it up and be done. And the first is far more likely, as most people will frown on destroying capital and people.Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-5679812861447996062010-07-15T08:18:23.678-07:002010-07-15T08:18:23.678-07:00Although a laserstar is just a cargo ship with a l...Although a laserstar is just a cargo ship with a laser instead of cargo pods. (and kinetistar is the same)<br />That's a definite cost-cut.<br /><br />Colony A rebels? The liner ship (ship that carries humans, thus faster than average robot cargo ship) that was supposed to get there is hastily retrofitted with a weapon instead of some human carrying capacity and then takes off.<br /><br />Here the main point is weapon cost/availability and who has the cargo ships when the shooting starts.<br /><br />I don't see the average mining colony having powerful lasers. <br />The excavation lasers should be powerful but pretty short-ranged, unless they are excavating rocks at silly distances (big mirrors are pretty expensive), and they will probably lack the industrial capability to build decent-ranged mirrors/optics.<br /><br />Although they will have some kind of construction facilities to repair simple equipment, and the raw materials for kinetics aren't exactly hard to find if they are mining a space rock.<br /><br />Trade Nexuses instead, are wealthy and have (probably) lots of high-tech friends that can sell them what they need.<br />If you need lots of kinetics, you may end up throwing away too much money just to ship them from a producer to your nexus. While lasers cost a lot more but may weight less overall.<br />Here is more a cost issue, that is in turn linked to the tech issue: "how much kinetics to smoke a Laserstar" you discussed some time ago.<br /><br />Then there is the question: who has ships?<br />imho both can own a few, but probably a Nexus has much more than a mining colony.<br /><br />Also, ships already orbiting/docked/nearby your colony can (and should) be "captured" during the rebellion. (unless it angries someone tougher than you)<br /><br />-AlbertAlbertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-59346331802375631832010-07-14T20:36:24.717-07:002010-07-14T20:36:24.717-07:00Great minds, and all that. I was mulling the idea ...Great minds, and all that. I was mulling the idea of trade nexus and mining center as different cultures with different political goals, different outlooks, and different military modes. Infantry cultures v cavalry cultures might be a very loose analogy.<br /><br />One possible spillover would be lasers v kinetics, assuming both are viable. Kinetics could be a natural fit for a trade nexus, because tossing loads through space at high speed is what they DO. And you could easily say that mining uses high power industrial lasers, so they are familiar with that tech. (Presumably, in this setting, laser boost is not a competitive shipping tech.)<br /><br />So each side builds forces around its strengths, and you could similarly work out the implications of their differing economic policies and grand strategies.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-2590664334244240652010-07-14T18:00:47.704-07:002010-07-14T18:00:47.704-07:00PErhaps the main difference between a 22nd century...PErhaps the main difference between a 22nd century "Athens" and "Sparta" is derived from where the wealth comes from. <br /><br />"Athens" is a trading power, importing and exporting all manners of goods and services. Because the source of wealth is trade, the polity attracts clever people who can see the possibilities in trade, and the economy is constantly bubbling with new products and services, as well as business failures.<br /><br />"Sparta" is a planetary power, whos primary source of wealth is the resources it can export (this includes moons which export various ices and volitile elements) When the resources run out, or are undercut by less expensive resource providers, things can turn ugly. Readers with longer memories have seen the suggestion by me that the Moon might become some sort of "rust belt" planet as cheaper and more abundent sources of Helium3 come on line and cut out the market for expensive 3He boiled out of rock.<br /><br />The analogy breaks down in the power projection phase, although the two waring leagues in the classical age had access to both armies and navies, each side tried for strategic reasons to play to their strengths and attack the enemy weakness. The 22nd Century Athenians might indeed have fleets of laserstars and constellations of KKV's to protect the trade lanes, the planetary organizing boycotts by the cycler fleets might be an unexpected avenue of approach.<br />.Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-50224113723104626612010-07-14T17:02:51.327-07:002010-07-14T17:02:51.327-07:00Spacehabs have much in common with city states, st...Spacehabs have much in common with city states, starting with size and population. I'd expect an intense localism, because you can walk the circumference of a mega hab in an afternoon, while going anywhere else requires <i>traveling through space.</i><br /><br />They are frightfully vulnerable to all out war, but the same is true of all cities in the postnuclear age - either the modality of conflict adjusts or you have no industrial civilization to write about, either on Earth or in space.<br /><br />One other big difference from terrestrial experience is a corollary of Byron's point. There's no equivalent to the contrast between land powers and sea powers. The only way to project power is through space forces, whatever form they take. They may not be much like navies, but they surely will be even less like armies.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-30695883068058697482010-07-13T19:09:05.104-07:002010-07-13T19:09:05.104-07:00Space polities are also vastly different from what...Space polities are also vastly different from what we are used to. The closest analogies seem to be company towns (at least initially), walled cities from the late middle ages in Europe (able to provide shelter and armed defiance to the merchant class from local warlords and minor kings) or classical Athens, which could abandon the hinterland of Attica during the Peloponnesian Wars and live exclusively on imports and export trade.<br /><br />Company towns may well develop robust internal democracies and "town halls", which the corporation might even encourage as a way to bleed off excess energy and encourage locals to spend resources on things like the dogcatcher and art gallery which the corporation would rather not spend it's own resources on. Eventually, a critical mass of population, economic activity and decision making might be reached, exceeding the corporation's own authority and resources (or willingness to do something about it). The break might be clean, or it could be messy (corporate lawyers and the Marshal arriving to reclaim corporation property and recover any outstanding loans, for example).<br /><br />Walled towns are a little harder to figure in a space setting, but suffice to say they can stand off any lesser Power, or even a Great Power which is unwilling to damage or destroy the valuable property and resources encompassed in the "walled city" polity.<br /><br />"Athens" could grow naturally out of a port or transfer facility; the massive momentum tether that provides the "spine" of the structure and source of revenue is also big enough to eventually house hundreds or even thousands of modules along its length, as well as vastly more free flying modules and settlements in various orbits nearby. There is no direct analog to the "long walls", and planetary powers are not direct counterparts to Sparta (if Sparta had an effective navy at the start, the Peloponnesian wars would have turned out quite differently). "Athens" would take control of space very seriously indeed, and would probably field an effective space navy to protect its trade lifelines (the planetary powers don't start building laserstars and military constellations until after they realize "Athens" already has a fleet in being...).<br /><br />Three different starting points; three different seeds of conflict and revolution.Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-91805198706046436832010-07-13T13:13:51.331-07:002010-07-13T13:13:51.331-07:00I'm not sure about that. The problem is that ...I'm not sure about that. The problem is that space forces are fundamentally different from planetary forces. A more powerful power could stop a suppression campaign, but I can't see a "taking advantage of diverted forces" scenario between planetary powers. Unless each has extraplanetary colonies they have to defend, of course. Then it gets more complicated.<br />As for ground troops, the number required to subdue a colony is tiny compared to modern armies. If you control the air, you control everything, and that doesn't take many troops.Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-57374629036781985872010-07-13T12:52:29.414-07:002010-07-13T12:52:29.414-07:00Don't forget the "Thank God For the Frenc...Don't forget the "Thank God For the French" factor. A third power may help our wannabe rebels with arms and advice. The same third power may also keep the might of the first power otherwise occupied on earth in a cold war type senario.<br /><br />So Neo-Britannia could crush the revolt on Titan, but can't send it's full forces- seems that their main enemy, the South Asian Republic would take full advantage of this and invade.Mr. Bluenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-47780940585796442422010-07-13T09:15:34.861-07:002010-07-13T09:15:34.861-07:00There's one thing we haven't considered in...There's one thing we haven't considered in this revolt scenario: force levels. I personally think that any given colony will actually stand a good chance, as there won't be very many "warships" available to anyone early on.<br />I developed this for DOTB, but it's true in any universe. Any given earth country will, in the early days of colonization, spend only a tiny fraction of it's defense budget on space forces. This is for two reasons. First, the colony population will be very small compared to the earthbound population, and secondly, there will be a lack of demonstrated threat. Any early (pre-first war) warships will be designed for either customs or for meteor protection (for extraplanetary colonies).<br />Earth orbit can be dominated from the ground, as Rick said a while back, and thus it will make no sense to build ships to fight there, except for maybe "fighters". Neither side will have real power-projection warships until the first war starts. At that point, it becomes necessary to have them, and they will come. Even then, the colony will have an edge to partially offset the earth power's greater resources. First, they can spend their entire defense budget on their Navy, and secondly, the war is for their survival. There is no midfuture where a colony can realistically militarily threaten an Earth-based superpower. (Throwing rocks doesn't count.)<br />Thus, the first colony to revolt has a good chance of carrying it off. I'm not sure I'd bet on the second.Byronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07778896782683765138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-167217419688477552010-07-12T19:50:39.819-07:002010-07-12T19:50:39.819-07:00Blogger's comment function is still acting up,...Blogger's comment function is still acting up, so strangenesses may happen.<br /><br />A megacorp tease: As they take on political functions they will start to have political concerns, such as seeking to ensure the loyalty of their security forces, and cloak themselves in legitimacy. <br /><br />A polite request backed up by a .45 is good; a polite request backed up by a .45 and a badge is even better.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-8240855725704438742010-07-12T13:00:57.054-07:002010-07-12T13:00:57.054-07:00Phew! Firefox crashed wile sending but the comment...Phew! Firefox crashed wile sending but the comment seems to be ok.<br /><br />Btw, that's the 4th or 5th time it crashes firefox or gives absurd errors when commenting but everything goes well.<br /><br />-AlberAlbertnoreply@blogger.com