Are fleets too Large in Traveller

[far-trader]

Kinda sorta like the (new) Battlestar Gallactica fleet?

Yep, kinda sorta, but less rag-tag civilian and obsolete combatants

I figure the Strip Fleet (I'm sorta liking that tag thanks timerover51 ) will be decommissioned and refitted naval vessels. So they'll have familiar systems, fleet speed, and armour and armaments of value. Ships with large areas that can be easily stripped (there's that word again ) and repurposed such as spinal weapons, hanger bays, and bay weapons.

 

[rancke]

I take it we're no longer discussing the original point of contention, namely whether being posted to an Imperial fleet for a year invariably meant being away from your friends and relations for the whole year and consequently suffering enough emotional distress and mental anguish to make such a proposition quite unthinkable.

Hans - if you don't see the relevance of geopolitical theory - namely, that terrain considerations make visible projection of force the primary political tool - then there's no point in discussing ANY of this with you.

Wil, if you can't see that there may be quite a difference between both the terrain and the politics of a balkanized world on the one hand and a chunk of interstellar space filled with worlds belonging to the same political organization on the other, maybe I'm the one that should give up on you. (But I'm not going to yet, because that's the kind of guy I am. )

And if you can't actually explain why there is no significant difference, then maybe there is one after all.

Fleets are NOT tools of defense. They're tools of politics. Defense is merely one of the methods of maintaining power. Projection of force, especially visible projection of force, is FAR more important to an empire.

Nice generality. Could you put that into the specific context of an Imperial fleet stationed in an Imperial duchy?

If you have a routine of keeping major assets ported, and a border that's relatively porous to mercantile traffic (the latter being pretty explicit in canon), then mercantile assets can be used to ascertain a general deployment pattern. (Ships can't be readily hidden.)

You have to present to such shipping a visible presence that is sufficiently large and insufficiently predictable that an aggressor can't plot defeat in detail and can't ensure they'll find the major assets for outnumbered set-piece battles. Why? Because that merchant shipping is the major source of naval intelligence.

Wil, the French kept their ships where the British knew exactly where to find them for years without getting defeated in detail. Indeed, it was only when they sallied forth to give battle that they were defeated. Elements of the 193rd Fleet were besieged at Efate for a couple of years during the 5FW. Given the right conditions, a fleet can huddle under the guns of the shore batteries and tie down huge chunks of the enemy's forces just by existing.

Further, you have to show the border worlds that their tax monies ARE working to protect them from agression from across the border - otherwise, the guys across the border may begin to look like a better deal; it's almost always cheaper to surrender than to fight, and border populations are quite likely to have strong sympathies and antipathies. Showing the flag to them is as much a "we'll squish you if you defect as a polity" as it is "See, bad guys, we have ships THIS big and bad-ass!"

What guys across what border will look better to any world in the Duchy of Rhylanor, for example?

But assuming that there is a nearby border and a world across that border that needs reminding of the might of the Imperium, it's probably not going to take an entire fleet to do that, in which case I already covered that in my previous post:

I stick to my assertation that the admiral commanding an Imperial numbered fleet will stay in his planetside HQ most of the time. He may dispactch parts of his ships and squadrons on patrols and maneuvers and deployments, but he'll retain other parts of his ships and squadrons in orbit so that he has assets available to respond to arising problems. I'm not saying some fleet admirals won't go along for the ride when the big exercises are organized, but I am saying that it's not really his job; he'll have lesser flag officers to do the grunt work.

(Emphasis added).

In other words, yes, sometimes squadrons are sent away on tasks. But the Fleet Admiral doesn't go along. Or at least it's not his job to go along.

(If said world do need a fleet or more to remind it, it becomes a task for the sector admiral to collect a temporary named fleet to do the job).


Hans

 

[rancke]

Agreed. In fact, if he would read Mahan, he would realize that. However, I think he prefers being obtuse.

Well, I have been known to be a bit blunt on occasion. However, I shall refrain from being blunt today.


Hans

 

[aramis]

Geopolitics, Hans, is what Mahan is about. That it's couched in seapower terms has more to do with his being a naval officer.

And no, defense is NOT a fleet's purpose, Hans. Any fleet that focuses on defense of a specific area has already lost all initiative, and is wasted. It's the same for airpower: SAC and TAC don't train for local defense - they train for taking the fight across the borders. the local defense role is basically driven by pork-barrel politics and training center needs.

The same is true of space warfare. It's far cheaper to defend a place with shore-batteries than with ships. In the historical context, about an order of magnitude cheaper during Mahan's day, and almost 2 orders during WWII. It's now not so good, as the cost now is the weapons themselves more than the ships.

Given that the cost of the jump drive is often more than a third of the cost of a ship in Traveller...

Let's take a 10KTd ship as example... J4 Fleet Speed is 500 Tons, and GCr2. The hull itself is GCr1.2 or less. The spinal is GCr0.6-3.0. The M-Drives of at least 4G another 1100td and GCr0.5. the PP is going to be 450-1250 Td, and GCr1.35-3.75...

And knowing the radiator needs envisioned (thanks to FF&S), shoreside fusion plants can use those radiators to recapture more of the energy than can ships - by turning water to steam. Even closed cycle, the fusion plants can be more efficient because steam plants are relatively cheap, and traveller fusion is very inefficient.

A fixed orbital spinal is not an order of magnitude less, but it is still considerably less. And a fixed subsurface Meson has only the weapon and power costs; putting it into a gimbal is still probably far cheaper than putting it into a hull. Again, not orders of magnitude cheaper, but still, a Jump drive is a large fraction of the total cost of a major ship. And the fusion PP dirtside is likely to be 2x-3x the efficiency, if not 10x, simply due to the ability to make use of what is waste heat in space.

Geopolitics as a subdiscipline also says that a nation which can't visibly project force is a nation that has no bargaining power. The purpose of a fleet is to have mobile firepower. That's axiomatic. But the reason for having mobile firepower is political, not defensive - you don't need mobile firepower to defend fixed points, just big guns. You need mobile firepower to threaten others.

Fundamentally, international politics is all about threat - while Mahan stresses this, so does Niccolo Machiavelli. And to be effective at shaping others behaviors, that threat must be visible, mobile, and credible. The trick is in being enough of a threat that they don't want you dead, and not so much that they decide to gang up to kill you before you absorb or kill them.

For example, the Darrian Star Trigger is a sham, canonically. AM 8 makes a big point about how the Darrians keep talking up the Star Trigger, and how it's the Zhodani reading of the Darrian Belief that it works that's the actual deterrent factor. Now, the adventure in the back does lead to a WORKING star trigger. But in any case, the threat is (1) mobile, (2) quite visible (because of being talked up), and (3) credible (because the only method the Zho's really trust to verify it does in fact test belief in it more than the science behind it.

CT is filled with geopolitical language and theory - and Mahan will help you understand it better.

By the way, it's old enough to be out of copyright... and on Gutenberg. AT Mahan, The Influence of Seapower Upon History, http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/13529

 

[Carlobrand]

I take it we're no longer discussing the original point of contention, namely whether being posted to an Imperial fleet for a year invariably meant being away from your friends and relations for the whole year and consequently suffering enough emotional distress and mental anguish to make such a proposition quite unthinkable.

I understood the submarine crews spent big chunks of time away from home - not a year, but still a lot.

Wil, if you can't see that there may be quite a difference between both the terrain and the politics of a balkanized world on the one hand and a chunk of interstellar space filled with worlds belonging to the same political organization on the other, maybe I'm the one that should give up on you. (But I'm not going to yet, because that's the kind of guy I am. )

Actually, there's not as much difference as you'd think. It's like physics: momentum is momentum whether you're applying the word to a knight on a horse, a hurtling car, or a spacecraft zooming through vacuum. There are some differences - a spacecraft doesn't have to deal with friction, and the game universe deals in three dimensions instead of two, and with aliens of differing motivation and psychological make-up, and with other factors that have to be added to the equation. Still, he's distilling the factors down to the point where they can be seen as broad forces rather than ships and fleets in an ocean.

Nice generality. Could you put that into the specific context of an Imperial fleet stationed in an Imperial duchy?

How about a sector instead? Spinward Marches.

Wil, the French kept their ships where the British knew exactly where to find them for years without getting defeated in detail. ...

So did the Spanish. Didn't serve them too well in the Spanish-American War. Their crews weren't as well-trained as the Americans. Dewey sailed past the shore batteries, navigated the mines, and defeated the fleet in port at Manilla. At Santiago de Cuba, the Spanish fleet hid in port until American ground forces were on the verge of taking the city itself, at which point it was forced to sail or find itself cut off from supply and at threat of attack from the land.

Might also point out that the Brits didn't win their empire by keeping THEIR ships in port.

 

[rancke]

Geopolitics, Hans, is what Mahan is about.

That doesn't tell me much. It especially does not tell me how it applies to an Imperial duchy. You're remarakbly reluctant to come down to specifics on that subject.

And no, defense is NOT a fleet's purpose, Hans.

Not only are you wrong about that, you're completely missing the point that I am talking about peacetime deployment (Something I've only pointed out several times in previous posts). There are plenty of historical examples. You never did respond to my example of Age of Sail fleets on foreign stations. Why is that?

Any fleet that focuses on defense of a specific area has already lost all initiative, and is wasted.

I guess that's why the British Channel Fleet failed to keep the French from invading England.

I deleted a long screed that completely missed the point of keeping a fleet at its station until it needs to act. The thing about peacetime is that there's a lot less for a fleet to act against than in wartime.

Geopolitics as a subdiscipline also says that a nation which can't visibly project force is a nation that has no bargaining power. The purpose of a fleet is to have mobile firepower. That's axiomatic.

Is it also axiomatic that squadrons stationed in a port are invisble? Of course not. What you say sounds perfectly sensible -- even, as you say, axiomatic -- but you seem to have the bizarre notion that if a ships is in port, it's not an implied threat. That's pure nonsense.

But the reason for having mobile firepower is political, not defensive - you don't need mobile firepower to defend fixed points, just big guns. You need mobile firepower to threaten others.

And one of those effects is that the others have to spread out their units to anticipate that threat, thus lessening their own ability to threaten you, an indisputably defensive effect.

Fundamentally, international politics is all about threat - while Mahan stresses this, so does Niccolo Machiavelli. And to be effective at shaping others behaviors, that threat must be visible, mobile, and credible. The trick is in being enough of a threat that they don't want you dead, and not so much that they decide to gang up to kill you before you absorb or kill them.

And again I have to ask why squadrons stationed at a subsector capital are not a threat?

For a long time the Danish Navy maintained a number of ships that were never even commisioned. They were built, maintained in a state that meant they could be rigged and manned in a fairly short time if needed, and replaced whenever they grew too old. They represented a threat just by existing.

(In the end, this policy failed, but it worked for generations).

A mothballed ship is a threat. A commisioned ship is a much more effective threat even if it is orbiting a subsector capital.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

Is it also axiomatic that squadrons stationed in a port are invisble? Of course not. What you say sounds perfectly sensible -- even, as you say, axiomatic -- but you seem to have the bizarre notion that if a ships is in port, it's not an implied threat. That's pure nonsense.

The concept of the "fleet in being": a fleet influences the enemy's behavior by existing, even from the relative safety of port. The enemy is forced to plan as if the fleet were about to sally out at any moment. An effective defensive strategy if you're not sure of the outcome of a potential engagement: you tie up enemy forces. What it can not do is project power. An army in a fortress is a threat to any force within march of the army, but the farther from the fortress, the more time the enemy has to prepare and respond if he emerges, and the weaker the threat. He has to go out if he wants to intimidate people away from the fortress.

If the enemy is stronger and on offensive, he has to plan around your fleet and you're tying up his strength and altering his plans, but it does not stop an enemy from acting. For example, a fleet-in-being at Jewell forces the Zhodani to deal with that fleet or have an enemy fleet threaten their supply line as they penetrate deeper into Imperial space. However, a fleet-in-being does not stop the Vargr from raiding and then running off when the Imperials sally forth - making the Imperial fleet seem ineffective to those who endure the raids. Nor does a fleet at Rhylanor make the Sword Worlders concerned for the safety of their frontiers.

...And again I have to ask why squadrons stationed at a subsector capital are not a threat?

They're a defensive threat, not an offensive threat.

 

[rancke]

The concept of the "fleet in being": a fleet influences the enemy's behavior by existing, even from the relative safety of port. The enemy is forced to plan as if the fleet were about to sally out at any moment. An effective defensive strategy if you're not sure of the outcome of a potential engagement: you tie up enemy forces. What it can not do is project power. An army in a fortress is a threat to any force within march of the army, but the farther from the fortress, the more time the enemy has to prepare and respond if he emerges, and the weaker the threat. He has to go out if he wants to intimidate people away from the fortress.

You (and Wil) appear to me to be mistaking the concept of a fleet whose major elements tend to stay at their base until they have a specific task to perform with the concept of a fleet whose elements are unwilling to leave their base at all.

A fleet that sits quietly[*] at its base in peacetime is very much able to project force. It's just not doing it at the particular moment. Peacetime, remember.

[*] These are the major units I'm talking about. Ships-of-the-Line in the historical examples I've given, BatRons in the case of Imperial fleets. Frigates and sloops/escorts and patrol ships will be out and about. CruRons may well be stationed at other bases in the subsector than the one at the capital.​

[...] However, a fleet-in-being does not stop the Vargr from raiding and then running off when the Imperials sally forth - making the Imperial fleet seem ineffective to those who endure the raids.

A fleet at Jewell can leave its battleships and cruisers in port and still use its escorts to patrol the border worlds against Vargr corsairs. It's not a dichotomy. Having the heavy elements mostly stay in port is not the same thing as not having any elements out defending (let's not overlook that those anti-Corsair patrols are defending too, not assualting corsair bases (Oddly enough -- one has to wonder why the Imperium tolerates corsair bases just across the border.))

Nor does a fleet at Rhylanor make the Sword Worlders concerned for the safety of their frontiers.

Perhaps not, but that would be because the Sword Worlders didn't think it over. A fleet at Rhylanor is a very real threat to the safety of the Confederation border. Not as much of a threat as the fleets in Glisten, Lunion, Lanth, and Vilis, but still a threat.

They're a defensive threat, not an offensive threat.

I don't understand the distinction because 'defensive threat' sound like an oxymoron to me. "You'd better behave yourself or we'll go on the defensive!"


Hans

 

[robject]

And in fact we know that the Rhylanor fleet reinforced fleets on the line of battle -- so while the Sword Worlders may only be concerned with the fleets pressing their borders, they are smart enough to at least understand that Rhylanor's fleet is a real part of that threat.

 

[mike wightman]

Yep, kinda sorta, but less rag-tag civilian and obsolete combatants

I figure the Strip Fleet (I'm sorta liking that tag thanks timerover51 ) will be decommissioned and refitted naval vessels. So they'll have familiar systems, fleet speed, and armour and armaments of value. Ships with large areas that can be easily stripped (there's that word again ) and repurposed such as spinal weapons, hanger bays, and bay weapons.

I really like the term as well (another vote of thanks from me timerover) and I love this idea of a "civilian" fleet shadowing the battle fleet.

Want to know why I like it?

It is high tech, it suggests a cultural development otherwise absent from a lot of Traveler material.

You have a TL15 battle fleet, why not have an entire world's worth of dependants and support service industries (entertainment, recreation, training etc, etc.) in a ship based settlement. It amounts to a mobile world following the battle fleet from port to port.

It's different and it may well explain were all the Imperial Citizens really spend their time, since member world populations aren't necessarily treated as Imperial citizens.

 

[robject]

In peace, various Tigresses are often scattered throughout a region on peacekeeping missions, or to show the flag. Several individual Tigresses have been deployed among the worlds of the Five Sisters subsector to enforce the amber zone blockade of Candory and Andor.

Hang on - are these Tigresses from the 212th, based out of Rhylanor, or are they local to the Five Sisters?

Why do I have it in my head that the Spinward Marches Fleet has one Tigress BatRon, two Plankwell BatRons, and four Kokirrak BatRons? (I'm not including the Battle Rider squadrons or CruRons here). There are more BatRons in the Marches than that, right?

 

[mbrinkhues]

One question is: How much training cruises do 3I ships need? Unlike naval ships there isno need to get used to stormy weather, spotting at night etc. The ship environments are fully artificial with sensors, controlled gravity etc. 80+ percent of training can be done with ships safely moored and all run through computers. Chances are the bigger ships never leave Depot and rarely leave the mooring maybe just one or two test jumps and life fires per year at most

 

[robject]

One question is: How much training cruises do 3I ships need? Unlike naval ships there isno need to get used to stormy weather, spotting at night etc. The ship environments are fully artificial with sensors, controlled gravity etc. 80+ percent of training can be done with ships safely moored and all run through computers. Chances are the bigger ships never leave Depot and rarely leave the mooring maybe just one or two test jumps and life fires per year at most

Assuming the fleet has peacetime deployments, surely such training can be done on-board and/or locally.

 

[aramis]

One question is: How much training cruises do 3I ships need? Unlike naval ships there isno need to get used to stormy weather, spotting at night etc. The ship environments are fully artificial with sensors, controlled gravity etc. 80+ percent of training can be done with ships safely moored and all run through computers. Chances are the bigger ships never leave Depot and rarely leave the mooring maybe just one or two test jumps and life fires per year at most

Your engineers will never deal with the run up of the jump drives, nor learn the stresses of jump, if you don't actually jump. Certain aspects simply can not be simulated aboard safely. Likewise, if you rarely maneuver, you never learn the stresses the maneuver drive imposes.

But Training isn't the primary reason for patrols, even now. Intimidating the enemy and impressing the locals is. Plus, being where the action is most likely, and not being predictably in any given location.

 

[Carlobrand]

You (and Wil) appear to me to be mistaking the concept of a fleet whose major elements tend to stay at their base until they have a specific task to perform with the concept of a fleet whose elements are unwilling to leave their base at all.

A fleet that sits quietly[*] at its base in peacetime is very much able to project force. It's just not doing it at the particular moment. Peacetime, remember.

I can't speak for what ... Wil = Aramis? ... is arguing. From the reading, it sounds like the two of you are arguing extremes when the facts are likely somewhere in the middle.

A fleet that spends all its time in port in peacetime is no threat. No one expects it to emerge, and it lacks the practice to be really effective when it does so. It is not in fighting trim. I don't think you're trying to argue for that.

A fleet that spends all its time out of port is expensive and may also find itself out of fighting trim, its equipment more worn and its supplies more depleted than the fellow who emerges fresh from port when the ball drops. I don't think Aramis is trying to argue for that.

The "reality", if you'll pardon that use in relation to a game, is somewhere between the two. The fleet has to emerge for certain types of training exercises, perhaps for a couple months at a time in order to check its ability to coordinate with support ships and reveal any problems while there's time to solve them without getting shot at. Elements of the fleet - individual battlewagons and cruisers, with a couple of escorts and support ships - will also be off on specific show-the-flag missions; one major ship is more than enough for that kind of work, and cruisers are better for that role most of the time. A Fleet's admiral and his staff will certainly go out with his fleet on the fleet exercises; they're the ones giving the orders and trying to find out how effectively the fleet responds to them. Other stuff - probably not; there's plenty to do just keeping his fleet staffed and supplied.

However, sending battlewagons to do patrol is expensive and wasteful - it's like using your finest sword to butcher hogs. Sending whole fleets on goodwill tours isn't just wasteful - it's taxing on the ports asked to host those fleets. When not actively training, the backbone of the fleet is going to be spending its time making sure its systems are in tip-top shape, its gunners as well-trained as humanly possible, its damage control parties as responsive as possible, its engineers and bridge crew and so forth as sharp as possible - and most of that can be accomplished without leaving the system. A lot of it can be done in port on simulators.

A fleet at Rhylanor is a very real threat to the safety of the Confederation border. Not as much of a threat as the fleets in Glisten, Lunion, Lanth, and Vilis, but still a threat.

A fleet at Rhylanor can take up to two months to reach Sword World space depending on refueling arrangements, thereby signaling quite clearly that the Imperium doesn't have any immediate plans for that fleet vis-a-vis the Sword Worlds. That same fleet moving up to Lanth is a clear signal of more immediate intentions, and therefore of more immediate concern.

I don't understand the distinction because 'defensive threat' sound like an oxymoron to me.

A defensive threat is a threat to your offensive plans, if you have any. If you don't have offensive plans, not so much. A tank division in reserve a hundred miles back from the border, ready to block your thrust, is a defensive threat.
It's not well positioned to attack, though it could certainly switch roles and do so eventually, but it's well positioned to spoil your plans. A tank division on your border and ready to cross, that's an offensive threat.

The knight guarding a castled position in chess is no immediate threat to your king but threatens your plans to attack his king.

 

[Dragoner]

One question is: How much training cruises do 3I ships need? Unlike naval ships there isno need to get used to stormy weather, spotting at night etc. The ship environments are fully artificial with sensors, controlled gravity etc. 80+ percent of training can be done with ships safely moored and all run through computers. Chances are the bigger ships never leave Depot and rarely leave the mooring maybe just one or two test jumps and life fires per year at most

A flaw in the model becomes a weakness in the regimen. Nothing can replace the actual practice and nothing can replace veteran crew passing their knowledge on.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Your engineers will never deal with the run up of the jump drives, nor learn the stresses of jump, if you don't actually jump. Certain aspects simply can not be simulated aboard safely. Likewise, if you rarely maneuver, you never learn the stresses the maneuver drive imposes.

But Training isn't the primary reason for patrols, even now. Intimidating the enemy and impressing the locals is. Plus, being where the action is most likely, and not being predictably in any given location.

All that "stress experience" (if there is one in a gravitic society where JDrive etc. is "old technology") can be done "in system", even the jump since you can "Pogo" if you want. And with commo times measured in weeks I guess having the "big boys" in one concentrated place (aka Depot) is better than defeat in detail.

Some small(er) patrols crafts (<= 5000dton) may be seen on regular runs. Enough for pickets to warn the fleet, enough to terrorize any unruly border planet. Even more so since at least some of the smaller units can land and therefor can be seen. A Furball in orbit is invisible to most citizens. And if you have problems with the 3I equivalent of Uncle Ho or the Fidel that guy will definitly be in a place where he can not see your "poor man's deathstar".

It has the benefit of eating the cake (having a big fleet) and keeping it (that is normally NOT in position to mess with pirats/smugglers/players too much)

 

[mbrinkhues]

A flaw in the model becomes a weakness in the regimen. Nothing can replace the actual practice and nothing can replace veteran crew passing their knowledge on.

There is little "actual practice" since you can simulate a lot (Gravitic Society!) and perception is all sensors anyway. And the technology in Traveller is OLD! The 3I is TL12+ since more than a thousand years, TL15 since a century! This is a lot like building channels or coal mining - the models are old, refined and there are no "surprises". Even today we can build good simulators (and we do not have gravtech / fully controlled environments like a spaceship) A lot of the stuff modern "wet navy" training includes is "how does weather/time of day/temperature effect the routine and not so routine operations". A spaceship is a perfect simulator (and there is no weather in space) that controls everything. No need to move the ship. There is NO difference for the majority of training. For the few things that are, well a Depot is a whole solar system so there is plenty space for the yearly gunnery check.

Crew passing knowledge can be done in a simulated environment just as easily as in the "real thing" under this circumstances. Actually better since you can repeat the event over and over again until the recruit/trainee gets it. I imagine it is a lot like the second StarTrek movie with the recruits on the NCC1701 "No bloody A, B, C or D"

 

[aramis]

MBrinkhues:

You keep making the claim that there is no weather in space. That's not exactly true. There are variations in radiation and particle flows, and occasionally, magnetic fields.

 

[Dragoner]

Even today we can build good simulators

There would be simulators, it just makes no sense not to run maneuvers. Simulators are always limited and would be useless without maneuvers because that is what they model.