MGT Only: Planetary invasion ships

[mike wightman]

To a certain point they are the same. The important distinction is that a robot can operate without human control, while a drone generally needs a human (or hiver, etc) remotely operating it.

Which makes drones useless without autonomous control since all you have to do is scramble the signal.

It is also worth pointing out that in Traveller drone brains are autonomous, at least that's how they were described in Striker

At advanced tech levels, semi-intelligent drones may be produced, equipped with
sophisticated guidance systems which allow them to seek out and attack targets
without the necessity for direct human control.

T5 now gives us the option of installing wafer personalities as operating systems too.

 

[McPerth]

It's all moot anyway since the meson guns kill everything .

Yes, all this thread (and any discussion about planetary invasions, for what's worth) is moot if you are willing to use meson bombing or nukes to nuke the planet until it glows, but we assume that you want to capture the planet with minimal loss of civilian life, and so you decide to invade it instead of turning it barren.

And so, we asume that nukes are, at most, in limited use, as are mesons.

The defender may, off course, attack the invaders with meson sleds, but the likely response will be meson bombing by the fleet in orbit (as we assume the attacker has obtained orbital supremacy, not just superiority), and only the most suicidal parties would do that (maybe the K'Kree against meat eaters).

See that not such events are in the whole Traveller canon history until the Black War in the Rebellion. The closer case (at least that I am aware of) was the Imperial punishemnt of Illelesh when it revolted, but then it only affected a part of the planet (its equatorial zone), and it was after it was conquered, as a punishment, and even then, it was done after population has been evacuated from the zone.

 

[McPerth]

NOTE: the quotes are from another thread, but I guess we'd better keep the discusión on those ships here.

I'm thinking your transport would hold closer to one of today's Battalion Landing Teams. The Marines aren't going to land just a rifle battalion. They'd have an attached artillery battery, tank, LAV, AAV, and engineer platoons, air defense and electronic warfare sections, and an MP squad. Plus whatever logistics units are attached.

If it's just a troop transport for follow-on troops, they could fit two TL 15 battalions with room to spare. But, if it's an actual assault ship, the battalions would be task-organized.

I don't believe they are the equivalent to those Battalion Landing Teams, as, as Timerover rightly points, the transports are not able to land the troops by thmselves, but they need the Command and Support ship.

About not landing just infantry, I'm not really sure about the Marine battalion TOE in the Imperium. As said before in this same thread, I just took the numbers given in CT:LBB4 for battalion and reinforced battalion (452 and 635 men, respectively), and assumed reinforced ones, and, again as said earlier, I guess most this reinforcment will be in engineering and infantry troops, but probably, as you point, some MP, EW and other specialized toops will be among them.

As for artillery, the fighters in the Command and Support ship and ortillery from supporting ships are assumed to take most of this role (remember, I always assumed orbital supremacy to begin the invasion, and that probably means intelligence and electronic support from supporting fleet too, and probably the reduction or neutralization of defending air assets by it too).

See that the fighters are likely to be quite good too against enemy armor (that uses personal scale weaponry and armor, against the ship scale from the fighters) too...

Your transport needs to have the landers carried by it, not another ship. The US tried that in the Torch invasion, admittedly in World War 2, and discovered that getting landing craft to the right ship was a bit of a nightmare. How many men can the landers carry? Multiple trips with the transport in orbit are going to be a problem, or is the transport essentially hovering in one spot with contragravity lift?

This may be a valid point, but I guess this will be more true for ships designed to act more alone. In this case, those are highly specialized ships never assumed to work alone, but in task forces and as part of an invasion fleet.

As for the problems you talk about in operation Torch, I assume that maneuvering (and docking) in space is easier than in sea, as you don't have to care about waves, tides and so on, and so that docking the landers to the transport ships for troops transfers will be easier than for the landing ships the wet navy may use.

As said in the post presenting the Lander (#4) they can carry up to over a full such battalions (670 men, at 3 men/ton) in a cramped way with no accomodations. As I said, they should be seen a the landing crafts seen in the first scenes of Saving Private Ryan film, with the troops cramped on them and ready to land as soon as they hit the ground (or even earlier, if they are grav equiped).

And yes, the trasnports are expected to be in orbit (and far one, to avoid fire from the planetary defenses), and the landers are expected to perform several round trips to land more troops, and even to also be used for supplies from other ships, as the LTVs did in Tarawa. They relly in their high speed and heavy armor to do that, though probably there will be losses and their numbers will be reduced along the trips.

Your cargo space is borderline for that number of troops. A commander is going to want as many supplies as possible landed with him, as additional supplies are going to have to come from another star system, with no guarantee of arrival. I would agree with LiNeNoiSe that you are going to have one battalion and supporting troops carried, and not two battalions.

Yes, the space is quite at premium, and troops will travel cramped on the ships, but I believe the 2 battalions/ship are posible in such barracks. They are not expected to stay in the ship for long time, just for the transport to target system (be it the one to invade, to garrisson, etc), not to stay there for long time as ship's troops.

About supplies, again remember those ships are not expected to act alone, but to be with a larger fleet where supply ships (and probably second wave troops, incluiding most non infantry ones) are. supplies and more troops can be carried by any cargo ship, where the landers may also dock to take them to the "skybridge" if landing them by other means is not safe enough.

 

[Condottiere]

The most dangerous part of the operation is an opposed landing.

The landing craft will be too small for the deep meson sites to bother with, but hidden disposable ship sized missiles can target them during re entry, when manoeuvring tends to be predictable and constrained.

 

[McPerth]

The most dangerous part of the operation is an opposed landing.

True, as in any landing...

The landing craft will be too small for the deep meson sites to bother with, but hidden disposable ship sized missiles can target them during re entry, when manoeuvring tends to be predictable and constrained.

And that's what lasers and heavy armor are for.

 

[Timerover51]

McPerth, I would rather not get into a long discussion on your ships. Just remember two things.

First, no battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy.

Second, an operation that assumes everything will go perfectly with no hitches is going to fail.

 

[McPerth]

McPerth, I would rather not get into a long discussion on your ships. Just remember two things.

Sad to know, as your hindsight in the lesser visible and known aspects of such opperations (logistics) would have been helpful...

First, no battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy.

Second, an operation that assumes everything will go perfectly with no hitches is going to fail.

Yes, I know. Thats what Clausewitz called friction, isn't it?

And yet a plan is needed, and specialized equipment too, even if it might have to be used in ocasion for something not its specialty...

I guess is when friction affects that Tactics skill comes handy, to recognize its effects and have the flexibility to react, as well as to recoginze when it is affecting the enemy and take profit of it.

And you forgot a third quote: amateurs talk about tactics, profesionals talk about logistics. So, I'll keep talking about tactics and listening to (or reading) what others, more wise than myself on it (no offense intended, just stating a fact), say about logistics .

 

[Condottiere]

That's because professionals know that they have to keep the amateurs fed.

 

[Carlobrand]

I'm a bit lost on this, sorry. The discussion is about an opposed landing. Are we assuming the defender's SDBs have been neutralized?

I tend to share Timerover's opinion that separating landers from troopships could invite trouble. If something happens to a ship with integral landers, whether enemy action or technical difficulty or some meddling fleet admiral deciding to reallocate to serve a need on some other front, whatever, only that ship is taken out of the line-up. If something happens to a dedicated lander ship, or a dedicated troop ship, that ship is out of the line up and the ship it was supposed to serve is neutralized as well. I can see your fleet getting ready to launch only to be told a couple of lander ships are being tasked off to another fleet to replace ships lost in an encounter elsewhere.

 

[McPerth]

I'm a bit lost on this, sorry. The discussion is about an opposed landing. Are we assuming the defender's SDBs have been neutralized?

Yes, the entire enemy spatial opposition must be neutralized before any landing opperations begin. That's what I mean when I say that orbital supremacy is a must.

I tend to share Timerover's opinion that separating landers from troopships could invite trouble. If something happens to a ship with integral landers, whether enemy action or technical difficulty or some meddling fleet admiral deciding to reallocate to serve a need on some other front, whatever, only that ship is taken out of the line-up. If something happens to a dedicated lander ship, or a dedicated troop ship, that ship is out of the line up and the ship it was supposed to serve is neutralized as well. I can see your fleet getting ready to launch only to be told a couple of lander ships are being tasked off to another fleet to replace ships lost in an encounter elsewhere.

Good points, but that's an accepted risk in order to have the troop transports not exclusively able to be used for invasión, but for troop transport among friendly systems too, so keeping their full transport capacity for troops, and relying in the command and support ships for interface in hostile landings.

I understand the possibility for the Comand and Support ship to be taken out of action due to enemy action (though, as said several times, they must be escorted, as they are not thought to act independently) or due to techincal problems (though, if they are well maintained, that would be a relly unexpected event), but I would not understand any aldmiral distracting them from the action if the invasion is going to be carried on.

Sending the troop transports without the landers is like sending ammunition without the rifles, as those ships have only one function. So I don't see any reason for an aldmiral to separate it form the troops, nor to send the troop transports to an invasión without them.

Of course, ressources dedicated to an invasión would depend o nexpected opposition, but, as said, a task force of 5 transports an a Command and Support ship would be able to send 10 reinforced battalions and landing them in 2 round trips (if no loses are accrued, more probably 3 round trips), and that is a respectable forces to any medium pop planet (more so if you have TL advantage), at least to establish a "spacehead" for other troops and supplies to be landed by other means (or by the remaining landers). And this will by only a 6 ship and 30 kdt task force. Several of those TFs should be used if more troops are expected to be needed (for higher Pop or TL planets)

Of course, again, this TF cannot act alone. It needs fleet elements for escort and support, but I assume this to be a must for any planetary invasion, even for moderate pop planets.

Needless to say, on a large ship universe, those ships are out of league in very large opperations (as OTU invasion of Earth), but, as said in the OP, the baasis I took for those ships is the small ship universe presented by Brandon C in several threads.

Even so, I guess those ships would also be useful in a large ship universe for medium to small invasion opperations (mostly worlds with Pop in the 6-7 range, even 8, if used to establish the "skyhead" and reinforced by other troops) and with TL superiority. Remember, that those are quite common worlds, and you can expect most such opperations be in such a planet, while the invasion of a HiPop HiTech world being an exceptional case.

Neither are those ships thought for very small opperations requiring only 1 battalion or less to be accomplished. Those are left for cruisers, whose ship troops are probably enough for them, or for other, probably smaller, ships.

 

[Condottiere]

You manoeuvre assault carriers close enough to launch helicopters over the horizon, and schedule air transports to land as airfields are captured and the surrounding areas are cleared.

 

[mike wightman]

Some thoughts.

Special forces smuggled in via merchant shipping.

Jump troop capsules do not need to be fired from orbit - sedate the troopers if necessary if they are going to be in space for a long time.

Q-ships with extensive EW suites to spoof defences prior to the full on invasion.

Best bet remains overwhelming space superiority and then play the medieval drop the rock game until the world surrenders.

 

[aramis]

Best bet remains overwhelming space superiority and then play the medieval drop the rock game until the world surrenders.

Drop-the-rock and other mass destruction approaches have huge issues with one's own forces' morale, and with social backpressure.

Plus the issue of "anything worth invading a planet for is going to get smashed taking out the defenders"...

 

[mike wightman]

What do you want from the world you are invading?

It isn't mineral wealth because if you have the tech to launch the invasion you have the tech to exploit the resources of entire systems.

Is it to subject the population as a workforce?

Nope, because once again you have other options due to 'technology'.

The Vilani scrubbed whole worlds that wouldn't roll over and submit to its political ideology - which is the only reason I can see for such conflict. It could be religious issues, but Traveller - and MWM dictat - wisely stays away from such stuff.

The early 3I threatened some worlds and pocket empires and managed to win the bluff - if it was a bluff.

The wars between the Imperium and Zhodani and the Imperium and the Solomani are far too 'civilized' - ever wonder what the Jullians threatened that made the Imperium back down?

What is the big difference between the civil war era and the rebellion era?

 

[Carlobrand]

Me, I'd draft the civilian fleet for transport between friendly worlds and build something dedicated to combat landings rather than try to make a Jack-of-all-trades ship, but to each his own.

How are you making sure the SDBs are out of the picture? Canonically, those things are hiding in deep ocean or in deep land-based bunkers. They're going to be hella difficult to find with their drives off and with an entire world to search by densitometer, and they're likely to be held back specifically to deal with landing attempts. Not as much of an issue for smaller or lower tech worlds, but then invasion of a smaller/lower tech world is easier all around. Where there's significant SDB opposition, dealing with them is likely to make for a very long and tedious seige, which may be okay or may be a problem if you're opposing a multi-stellar polity or have to worry about public opinion shifts. Circumstances may require you to take some chances and accept some losses in order to get the troops on the ground and get the matter decided before some external event removes your opportunity.

 

[Carlobrand]

What do you want from the world you are invading?

It isn't mineral wealth because if you have the tech to launch the invasion you have the tech to exploit the resources of entire systems.

Is it to subject the population as a workforce?

Nope, because once again you have other options due to 'technology'.

The Vilani scrubbed whole worlds that wouldn't roll over and submit to its political ideology - which is the only reason I can see for such conflict. It could be religious issues, but Traveller - and MWM dictat - wisely stays away from such stuff.

The early 3I threatened some worlds and pocket empires and managed to win the bluff - if it was a bluff.

The wars between the Imperium and Zhodani and the Imperium and the Solomani are far too 'civilized' - ever wonder what the Jullians threatened that made the Imperium back down?

What is the big difference between the civil war era and the rebellion era?

Mora rebels. You scrub Mora. Half the Marches economies suffer economic effects.

Maybe it was needed, an abject lesson. Or maybe a more surgical approach could have achieved the end without hurting your loyal worlds.

 

[McPerth]

What do you want from the world you are invading?

It isn't mineral wealth because if you have the tech to launch the invasion you have the tech to exploit the resources of entire systems.

Is it to subject the population as a workforce?

Nope, because once again you have other options due to 'technology'.

The Vilani scrubbed whole worlds that wouldn't roll over and submit to its political ideology - which is the only reason I can see for such conflict. It could be religious issues, but Traveller - and MWM dictat - wisely stays away from such stuff.

The early 3I threatened some worlds and pocket empires and managed to win the bluff - if it was a bluff.

The wars between the Imperium and Zhodani and the Imperium and the Solomani are far too 'civilized' - ever wonder what the Jullians threatened that made the Imperium back down?

What is the big difference between the civil war era and the rebellion era?

All of those are good questions, but, if you're invading that world, just submiting it by bombing is not an option, be it for political reasons, because enemy may retaliate on your own worlds, or whatever.

There may be many reasons because you want to invade that world. Maybe you need its base to keep your offensive going, maybe you want to deny it to your enemies to secure your communication lines, maybe you just want to end a rebellion, or whatever reason, but, mainly, it's a game, and planetary invasions are more interesting than just bombings, so, we're talking about invasions, whatever be the reson behind it and behind bombing being not an option.

And yes, the Vilani did such things, but they didn't face any enemy with retaliation capability (the main reason not to do it, IMHO), and their views of the war are diferent form the Solomani and the Imperium, that would probably considere them true war criminals.

About the difference among the Civil War and the Rebellion, it's made quite clear in MT:

Civil War was a series of coups, but didn't really rally the population behind the factions, it was mostly a Navy infighting.

The rebellion, OTOH, pitched the imperial regions agains each other, and invovled the full populatoin on those regions. This, coupled with a mad emperor being in the Imperial Throne, that alieniated further the peripherical regions, made it more deadly and ruleless a war than ever in Imperial history.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

What do you want from the world you are invading?

It isn't mineral wealth because if you have the tech to launch the invasion you have the tech to exploit the resources of entire systems.

Is it to subject the population as a workforce?

Nope, because once again you have other options due to 'technology'.

The basic concept of TCS, GT:FT, PE, and the Imperium itself is that more systems and hence more population gives the government increased economic muscles.

 

[McPerth]

Me, I'd draft the civilian fleet for transport between friendly worlds and build something dedicated to combat landings rather than try to make a Jack-of-all-trades ship, but to each his own.

Well, I'd not call those specialized ships Jack-of-all-trades ones...

Civilian ships are less efficient in transporting troops, as they cannot use the barracks, and few of them are able to transport 1300 men at once. While not represented in the rules, I give some importance to unit integrity, and I like to carry the battalions toguether, so sthat their members know well each, hoping for better cohesion.

How are you making sure the SDBs are out of the picture? Canonically, those things are hiding in deep ocean or in deep land-based bunkers. They're going to be hella difficult to find with their drives off and with an entire world to search by densitometer, and they're likely to be held back specifically to deal with landing attempts. Not as much of an issue for smaller or lower tech worlds, but then invasion of a smaller/lower tech world is easier all around. Where there's significant SDB opposition, dealing with them is likely to make for a very long and tedious seige, which may be okay or may be a problem if you're opposing a multi-stellar polity or have to worry about public opinion shifts. Circumstances may require you to take some chances and accept some losses in order to get the troops on the ground and get the matter decided before some external event removes your opportunity.

As you say, you cannot be sure. So, the standard procedure is, once you have achieved orbital supremacy, dealt with any detected defenses and established a net of survey and GPS satellites arround the target world, you begin interface opperations (bombings and landings).

All along this opperation, the transport and Command and Survey ships must stay off range of the planet, giving time to the overwatch position fleet to deal with any SDBs appearing before they treathen them. Only the landers and their supporting fighters are to (obviously) close the planet, while the main ships must remain stand-off.

If the planet you're invading is an Imperial world in rebellion, things may be a litle easier, as you're expected to know their SDBs numbers and hiding places, as well as the position of its Deep Meson Guns (if any), so being able to neutralize them with meson fire (that in this case is unlikely to produce heavy collateral damages). I don't expect the Imperium to allow member planets to build such kind of facilities without their knowledge (and probably technical support), and I guess any atempt to do so will be seen, at least, with suspiction, and probably as an open act of rebellion.

 

[Quint]

All of those are good questions, but, if you're invading that world, just submiting it by bombing is not an option, be it for political reasons, because enemy may retaliate on your own worlds, or whatever.

...

The rebellion, OTOH, pitched the imperial regions agains each other, and invovled the full populatoin on those regions. This, coupled with a mad emperor being in the Imperial Throne, that alieniated further the peripherical regions, made it more deadly and ruleless a war than ever in Imperial history.

Yes, and looking at Hard Times, when the intensity level of fighting increases to the higher levels it is likely that systems are just going to utterly trashed. Black War zones are just swaths of dead and failing worlds pretty much...

D.