_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lAnd the final
message from the old draft's folder...
Having been using the RAF Regiment (see older posts about "Rock Apes") put me
in mind of a random thought I had a while a go. It seems as if it is a natural
inclination of an armed force to gather some aspects of the other services.
(All examples are British circa 1985).
RAF Mainly aircraft but:
RAF Regiment - Ground forces, trained for airfield defence.
Air Sea rescue and Target towing launches - Light naval forces
Army Mainly ground forces but:
Army Air Corps - Light helicopters and fixed wing airborne AOP's.
Royal Corps of Transport (20 Maritime Regiment) - Sea going specialist
supply ships (ammunition carrier HMAV St George, and a couple of large tank
landing ships HMAV Ardennes, HMAV Arakan)
Navy Sea power but:
Fleet Air Arm - sea based airpower
Royal Marines - Ground Forces
So how to apply this to GZG games and does anyone care?
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lHonestly,
I have always seen the future of the military pretty much staying the same.
I'd like to say things would be shaken up or restructured substantially, but
each branch of the service is too entrenched in tradition and tactical
doctrine to let go of what it has entirely. I have a feeling that you'd see
the Navy and Marines doing the bulk of the work though with Air Force and Army
only really having a role or presence on larger, more established colonies or
being called into action during larger conflicts. I imagine that even
something resembling the Coast Guard would still clutch to its piece of the
pie, taking on the role of system patrol and defense on those same, larger,
established worlds, thus freeing up Naval assets for use elsewhere.
The one thing that we see in the military now days that seems to be a positive
trend is more coordination between the various branches of service, something
that would be even more important, I think, when you have your resources
strung out across the galaxy.
Eli
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lcoordination
between the various branches of service, something that would be even more
important, I think, when you have your resources strung out across the galaxy.
It would indeed however, due to your ships from the central
government/planet traveling under FTL, your colonies could be (to them)
isolated for many years.In effect causing them to develop into a different
people.....Could be interesting to say the least.
Don
> Navy
Different nations will have different solutions, of course, but ingeneral:
The Navy will have Marines for boarding actions but also for
special-forces type raids against planets, asteroids or bases. These
will be platoon to company sized actions; if you want a battalion, you need
the Army.
The Army and Navy will argue over who controls orbital defense bases and
orbital boombardment monitors.
Wealthy systems will have a separate Customs/Rescue naval force. Poor
nations will use their navy for that, and that's about all it will be good
for, but most of them will still call it "Navy" rather than whatever the
spacefaring equivalent of "Coast Guard" is.
Haven't gotten TOO deep into this, but I've not discounted the possibility of
even further delineations, of atmosphere, near planet, belt, interplanetary,
near system(Oort?), interstellar, etc.
A Traveller SDB could fit into several, of course, but I'd think it would run
to the first levels. Interoperability between levels would remain important
for possible crises, but each level could be necessary, possibly without
interacting for years.
Time lag of communications, which varies by background, would be important as
to how this worked out.
The_Beast
<laserlight@veriz
on.net>
Sent by: To
gzg-l-bounces@lis gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
ts.csua.berkeley. cc
edu
Subject Re: [GZG] Everyone's got a piece of
08/29/2006 10:00 the action
AM
Please respond to
gzg-l@lists.csua.
berkeley.edu
> Navy
Different nations will have different solutions, of course, but ingeneral:
The Navy will have Marines for boarding actions but also for
special-forces
type raids against planets, asteroids or bases. These will be platoon to
company sized actions; if you want a battalion, you need the Army.
The Army and Navy will argue over who controls orbital defense bases and
orbital boombardment monitors.
Wealthy systems will have a separate Customs/Rescue naval force. Poor
nations will use their navy for that, and that's about all it will be good
for, but most of them will still call it "Navy" rather than whatever the
spacefaring equivalent of "Coast Guard" is.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lI was thinking of
mainly using this for "fluff", as in, "those are not NAC Royal Marines, that
the Royal Aerospace Force Regiment's 2nd Space Assault Group" or "the ships in
the convoy are from the ESU Army 433rd Ordnance space tranportation regiment".
Chris
--
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/
> From: ~On Behalf Of Christopher Downes-Ward
> It seems as if it is a natural inclination of an armed force
<snip examples from UK army, navy & air force>
The examples you cite all exist for specific reasons and can't really be taken
as examples of a service encroaching in the same way that certain other
nations' military and security forces seem to. (Someone back me up here and
make the case for the RAF Regiment!)
> So how to apply this to GZG games and does anyone care?
Who says there will still be three never mind four services
around? After the advent of endo-atmospheric fighters and
fighter-bombers capable of making orbit there isn't going to
be much of a case (or much of a budget) for a separate air force.
If the nascent space force draws primarily from the air force then the latter
survives (UK readers think Dan Dare). In all other cases it devolves into
specialised corps of the army.
What happens to the navy is even trickier. Surface warships are probably
obsolete as soon as it's possible for one side to hold orbital superiority and
drop a significant weight of weapons on any target that can't hide. A navy
isn't even needed if there is no surface traffic to protect or harry.
If submarines are still around (because there is enemy traffic to attack but
it's too dangerous to surface) then the best way to hunt then will be from
orbit with a chain of observation &
communication satellites and a few fighter-bombers with ASW
packages. Once a sub gives away its general position, a
detachment swoop down and drop high-speed robot sonar torps
to track down and eliminate the intruder.
So you have only two services left, an army and a space force. Assuming the
army takes responsibility for the overall defence of a planet then there is
more encroachment than ever as it
probably operates space-capable interceptors and missile
batteries, whilst the (spacegoing) navy has "marine" troops for boarding and
bridgeheads, and possibly even submarines that it can drop for raiding and
intelligence work. However, I can't see an aquatic navy or a purely
atmospheric air force surviving as a separate service in this era.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn 8/30/06, CS
> Renegade <njg@csrenegade.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Wasn't the RAF Regiment created for airfield security? I haven't bothered
looking them up, but assuming that's the case, it seems like a specific reason
rather than encroachment to me.
<snip interesting speculation on what GZGverse-like future tech might do
to military service setups>
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lyup, basically
they're there to defend airfields and forward deployments of the harrier and
stuff like that.
Wasn't the RAF Regiment created for airfield security? I haven't bothered
looking them up, but assuming that's the case, it seems like a specific reason
rather than encroachment to me.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lAt the start of WW2
doctrine was to rely on nearby Army units for airfield defence, the trouble
was that there wasn't always a nearby unit and they kept getting borrowed for
other things so the RAF Regiment was formed to provide airfield defence
against ground and air attack.
[quoted original message omitted]
> From: ~ On Behalf Of Chris Downes-Ward
> At the start of WW2 doctrine was to rely on nearby Army units
Ta, that's it, Chris; operational priorities - the aircraft
are more important than anything else.
> --- gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu wrote:
> Send Gzg-l mailing list submissions to
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> At the start of WW2 doctrine was to rely on nearby
At Ross & Heroics (now Navwar) ther was a vehicle called a "Beaverette" that I
could not find a reference for. I bought a package and they were a ad hoc
armored car. Later I found a reference that the Beaverette was made for
airfield defence.
I suspect the greatest fear was that a small unit of paratroopers or fast
moving ground forces (a German version of the Long Range Desert Patrol or SAS)
would take out isolated airfields.