The problem with that is he is too out of touch as it takes orders months to go back and forth, not saying I don't like the idea of Sanchoneev being bushwhacked by sword worlders as he rushes to issue instructions to the Lanth Fleet.
Regards
David
Subsector Fleet make-up in 1105
- Thread starter Chuck Anumia
- Start date
The problem with that is he is too out of touch as it takes orders months to go back and forth, not saying I don't like the idea of Sanchoneev being bushwhacked by sword worlders as he rushes to issue instructions to the Lanth Fleet.
Regards
David
This was created here on COTI, IMO, from input based on many refs, players, Hunter and others. From Grand Fleet to Sector Fleet. It is perfectly acceptable canon. By ignoring it your creating a Ranckeverse which is your right in YTU. But lets not get into a canon debate.
Not at all. And one is more important. Depots are not like fuel depots in a WWII scenario. However, I've stated many times i believe there must be more than one type of depot. When I added that comment with reasoning to wiki non-canon it was deleted.
Yes, he would. His role is not interfacing with sector capital nobles daily. Each Depot also has a noble or two. Imperium admiralty, however, would need more access at Capital. I can see an annual trip to sector capital during asset and budget debates.
I don't think that's right, but it's moot because the reason why it's not acceptable canon isn't its antecedents but the facft that it doesn't work, for reasons I've explained at length before.
By ignoring it I'm trying to keep a setting that works worse from replacing a setting that works better.
OK, let's not.
No, they are primarily R&D facilities in peacetime that get pressed into service as emergency repair and construction facilities in wartime.
You will have to ask Thomas why he did that.
No, but it is his role to be available to interface with the sector duke. Admiralties have historically been located in national capitals and admirals stationed in provincial capitals for a reason. A reason that would still apply in any Traveller universe: The desire for political control of the military.
Hans
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I can't help but to agree with Hans.
A sector admiral is a political appointment to interface with the sector duke - technically a sub sector duke could order a sector admiral around "in the Emperor's name".
There is also the fact that local fleet admirals are going to have to make their own minds up in how to deal with an emergency - it could take up to 3 to 4 weeks to get a courier to the sector admiralty, and a similar delay for orders. In that time 6-8 weeks of conflict have occurred.
And as to a yearly trip to Capital, forget it. It is a year to get there and back. You would be doing nothing but shuttling backwards and forwards to Capital.
A sector admiral is a political appointment to interface with the sector duke - technically a sub sector duke could order a sector admiral around "in the Emperor's name".
There is also the fact that local fleet admirals are going to have to make their own minds up in how to deal with an emergency - it could take up to 3 to 4 weeks to get a courier to the sector admiralty, and a similar delay for orders. In that time 6-8 weeks of conflict have occurred.
And as to a yearly trip to Capital, forget it. It is a year to get there and back. You would be doing nothing but shuttling backwards and forwards to Capital.
Last edited:
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Candidates for high command are probably identified and sent to one or more specially established command academies, where they get vetted.
Of course you do. :rofl: No suprise there...
I completely disagree with both of you. There is plenty of canon documentation stating the opposite. You both can refute it to your heart's content.
I agree with the canon. The Admiralty has nobles that interface with sector officials on a regular basis. Marc has re-iterated it by putting knights in depots. Having the sector admiral at capital is a personal choice for an individuals TU but not canon.
The independence of the Admiralty is supported by the Emperor who also served in the navy and is now a Grand Admiral of the navy.
Enough said.
Possibly. Also, through success in service.
I gotta go with Hans as well on this. A sector admiral is responsible for the entire sector. He may not be in the thick of things, but his responsibility in terms of making sure fleets are where they're supposed to be and supplies, reinforcements, replacements and personnel get acquired when they need to get acquired and go where they need to go is just as vital. The job of administering an entire sector is a huge one. A squadron of battle-ready ships idling in port while the sector admiral does his job serves no one, and a sector admiral haring off with his squadron against some opposing fleet while the commands only he can issue are postponed or passed on to lessers is not doing the job he was hired for.
Giving a squadron to the Sector Admiral's like giving a division to the U.S. Army Chief of Staff - it wouldn't do anything but distract him from his job.
Giving a squadron to the Sector Admiral's like giving a division to the U.S. Army Chief of Staff - it wouldn't do anything but distract him from his job.
Not as far as I know. Please back that claim up with canon quotes or admit that you're spouting unsupported opinion.
It's not canon, true. It's simply the logical ramification of what a sector admiral's job would be. But neither is your interpretation canon. The fact is that nowhere in canon is it stated where sector admirals have their HQs. So in the absence of a positive statement either way, I (and Mike) simply go with common sense (and historical precedence).
Please back that up with canon quotes or admit that you're spouting unsupported opinion.The independence of the Admiralty is supported by the Emperor who also served in the navy and is now a Grand Admiral of the navy.
Not quite. Some quotes that support your position would be nice.
Hans
I think you've missed the point. Pardon if i was rushed and the explanation is brief.
The sector admiral is in the thick of operations at the depot not at the sector capital. However, I do believe the Imperium Admiralty is located at 3I "Capital" and not Core depot (where the sector admiral would be). It is not a cushy job. There are noble liasons to deal with nobles and governments.
Each sector depot has its own security fleet and military assets. I would assume (it is not documented) that an sector admiral can move any assets he needs. If this admiral is going to leave the depot I believe they can utilize whatever asset is appropriate. During peacetime this SA may use a capital ship and during war, they may use a squadron or lead the sector fleet, as is documented in 5th frontier war history, against an adversaries.
Also note your example may not fit well. Eisenhower used an airplane not an entire fleet or squadron. He had a fighter escort.
That's what you believe, but you do not appear to have a shred of evidence to support it. Unless Sector Fleet states that the sector fleet is stationed at the sector depot and the Sector Admiral has his HQ there?
If there really were a separate sector fleet, it would presumably be commanded by a junior sector admiral (the rank, not the position) and the Sector Admiral (the position) would still stay in his HQ at the sector capital most of the time.
Hans
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
The Yamamoto Raid makes this a questionable option anywhere near the frontline during wartime. Kitchener may have just been unlucky.
Let's not strain the analogy beyond what it was meant to illustrate, namely that commanders-in-chief do not usually command subdivisions of their forces directly, though I'm sure there are examples to the contrary. But usually commanders-in-chief command everything through subordinates. And that's whether they take to the field or stay in their ministerial department (e.g. the British Admiralty in London, the Pentagon in Washington). What they don't do is set up their headquarters in Portsmouth or Clyde or San Diego or anywhere else away from their respective national capitals.
Hans
Pyotr Alexseivich Romanov did so. Napoleon I did so. Napoleon III, as well.
In fact, so also did most pre-modern commanders-in-chief. Historically, the oddity is the CIC not being present in the field.
Hans, I understand you don't want to purchase Grand Fleet and Sector Fleet. Respectfully, it is not my position to quote from it so you don't need them. That is your choice, please, don't undermine products you don't have.
The only thing we agreed on in the other thread is that more admiralty positions than mentioned in Sector Fleet and Grand Fleet. Rear Admirals...etc. Please, stop trying to drive out other viewpoints that have historical basis.
Those are all rulers. How many commanders-in-chief set up their peacetime headquarters away from their ruler?
Peacetime deployment? Because I've already acknowledged that a sector admiral can take to the field if a large portion of his units go to war. Santanocheev did it.
And what about modern commanders-in-chiefs? How many first lords of the Admiralty and chiefs of naval operations have led their country's forces in the field?
Hans
That's a very noble and admirable attude you're displaying there. Despite the fact that these books back your otherwise unsupported claims to the hilt, you're still willing to assume the odium of being unable to back up your words, just to avoid undermining the financial position of the author and the publisher of Sector Fleet.
But, you know, I just can't allow you to make that sacrifice. So I'll tell you what, provide me with the relevant quotes, and I give you my solemn word that I will go down to my FLGS and order a copy of Sector Fleet.
If you feel that you can't in good concience quote Grand Fleet in a public forum, just e-mail me the quotes. I'll be sure to post here acknowledging that you've done so.
BTW, I take it you have the same attitude towards quoting from any other Traveller book that is commercially available at the moment, right? So I have to tell you that in that case you've made a few mistakes in some of your previous posts. No doubt you failed to notice them at the time, but you should really go through them all and excise any references of that kind. Just to ward off unworthy suspicions about your motives in this particular case.
You are really pushing me towards incivility here, you know. Please stop doing that.
Hans
Actually, he frequently travelled via plane vs a fleet. Other generals and admirals did the same on all sides. One of my points was that the scale is too small in Earth history. We're talking star system that are weeks apart. Corridor is slightly different than most sector capitals and depots.
These two are within a 1 week jump. An Admiral can hop over and be back in less than a few weeks, if needed. Most will be weeks apart.
But be certain that this admiral would use a J6 approach unless he really needed a Tigress or battleship to show the flag.
Too small of a scale. A sector admiral is not a First Lord in the Imperium. That position is Grand Admiral. There are only 2 Grand Admirals and both are on Capital.
Let's clear up the "depot" bit first. The nearest depot serving the Spinward Marches is in Deneb sector, very far from the thick of operations. 21 parsecs from Rhylanor, in fact. I think canon mentions someplace the Marches keeps retired ships for activation as replacements in wartime, but I don't know of a depot per se in the Marches. Lots of naval bases, no naval depots that I know of. For the Marches, the most likely center of naval operations would be Rhylanor, far enough back to not be overwhelmed in the opening moves but close enough to provide coordination and administrative oversight.
Thus, while the sector admiral of Deneb might indeed be located at Depot/Deneb, the sector admiral of the Marches has no depot.
As for what a sector admiral does in war, I can't speak authoritatively for canon beyond CT and MT. I have no Mongoose - an omission I'm thinking about correcting - and I have only a few GURPS books, none being the right one for this issue. Spinward Marches Campaign and the various Journal news items speak of Santonocheev, and later Norris, in an organizational capacity, deciding grand strategy and issuing orders to entire fleets. I don't see anything there that speaks to their actual presence at any given battle, though there are a lot of Journal news items and I may have missed one. That is of course absence of evidence, not evidence of absence.
However, absent evidence, I fall back on MT's Rebellion Soucebook, which tells me, "At their lowest level, Imperial ships are organized into squadrons (from three to 10 similar ships). Squadrons are grouped into permanent numbered fleets (usually three to 10 squadrons per fleet), although squadrons or individual ships may also be detached into temporary task forces for specific missions. Numbered fleets (usually within a single Imperial sector) are grouped into named fleets." It goes on to say, "A numbered fleet is a group of several squadrons; a named fleet is an assembly of two or more numbered fleets."
This tells me operationally that a numbered fleet would have an admiral responsible for that fleet and the sector admiral would in turn have all those admirals answering to him. The sector admiral would not have a fleet of his own unless he was also admiral of one of the numbered fleets. While it can be dramatic to have the head of the sector in charge of one of the spears, operationally it's much like having the CEO of Wal-Mart being also responsible for the operation of one of their stores, or maybe one of their city branches. It draws that leader's attention away from his core responsibility, which is to coordinate all those subordinate executives, or admirals in this case, so they're all acting to the same overall game plan, and with communication lags of weeks or months, effective coordination is vital.
I don't know what Mongoose says, but if Mongoose says different, it's badly flawed canon. It is very poor organization to distract the head of a major organization by also making him responsible for one of the subsidiary branches. I do know that I can't find anything in CT that definitively puts a sector admiral at the head of a numbered fleet, not outside of civil war references, and that's - well, if you're going to cross the Rubicon, you're going to have to do things differently anyway or you'll be undercut by the loyalists in your own ranks.
There's enough wiggle room for some gamemaster to do things as he chooses, but this business of giving the sector admiral his own fleet - again, it just distracts him from the job he has. Even if he were co-located with a fleet, as with the depots, I'd put that fleet in the hands of a fleet admiral and make the fleet admiral responsible for managing it. He's got to obey the sector admiral's orders anyway. Only way I'd give the sector admiral his own fleet is if I suspected the potential for insurrection in the ranks and wanted the sector admiral to be able to battle one of his own subordinate admirals. And that's pretty much what it says: the sector admiral doesn't trust you, so he's taking vital war equipment out of the war effort and reserving it for his own use just in case he needs to use it on you. Up until Dulinor, there hadn't been any indication of that potential within the Navy for centuries.
I've considered a number of alternate examples, but they come from post-radio and don't really answer the issue of administration in the presence of significant communication lags. However, given that we're dealing with coordination of of a dozen or more fleets totalling a thousand ships scattered through a few hundred star systems, I would consider the duties of the office to be too demanding to let the sector admiral be distracted with the operations of a single numbered fleet.
Last edited:
