• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Regimental Headquarters & Whatever Company?

Remember that anything in orbit keeps moving, it does not sit over one place unless in geosynchronous orbit. How many weapons do you plan to have in orbit, aside from the time lag involved in getting something from orbit to the target area, along with this problems of re-entry.

As for other side of the planet, how long is your time lag from request for fire support to impact, along with how accurate is your ICBM, and then there is this minor item called, HOW MUCH DOES THIS THING COST FOR ONE SHOT?

As you will still be using radio-based communications, I fail to see why any improvement should be anticipated.

See that keeping a geosynchronus orbit with gravitics is quite easy, and will be no problem if so needed to support ground troops, and this same support can be in form of missiles, that are, as you said, expensive, or in form of beam weapons, whose use is nearly free in economic/logistical terms. Most starships have spare laser batteries (those same used for anti-fighter or anti-missile role) to use in ground support role.

Plasma/fusion weapons are also quite effective in this role, if you can afford any nuclear effect they will have (I guess some local radiation, but no fallout)

Just one weapon. Meason support artillery. Either planetside or aboard ship. Time lag should only be minutes if you have orbital superiority and comm sats deployed. Military comms should be able to process and prioritize firemission requests, matching the available units to the type and location of the target.

See my previous post about such a free use of meson weaponry (and more so about spinals, that is the most likely you'll have in orbit.

This said I mostly agree with te rest of your post
 
I thought he was referring to the Mongoose rule that HEW's dump rads every time you shoot them (a bit of "hard science" and a way to limit PC use) - and was referencing the other rule(s) which note the rad protection that vacc suits/combat armor/etc. give you.

See this thread about the implications I think that can have in OTU...
 
You didn't read what I wrote: like air mobile operations. At high TLs that means Grav Mobile operations

Canon says grav vehicles are affected by high winds true, but mountai, forest or jungle shouldn't present undue obstacles to movement. Sensors at high TLs should be able to cope with adverse weather or hostile environments.

Just one weapon. Meason support artillery. Either planetside or aboard ship. Time lag should only be minutes if you have orbital superiority and comm sats deployed. Military comms should be able to process and prioritize firemission requests, matching the available units to the type and location of the target.

And I'm not using radio based comms exclusively, I'm using a comms network for voice and data over cell, radio, laser, maser and meson moderated by smart software but you're assumptions won out and made you leave the discussion so this reply is for the open minded readers.

I also think that grav vehicles, since they are not dependent on "lift" for flight are far less vulnerable to winds, low air pressure, and alternately either the need for runway space or catching rotors on trees.

Even if we disallow meson ortillery, the relatively "dumb" ADM's of various sorts provide smaller indirect support fire, while relatively smart tac or MRL missiles can provide more powerful indirect supporting fire. Similarly, while meson fire might be disallowed by the Rules of War (I actually really like that idea), the idea that whatever ship brought the regiment to the system is in orbit really to provide the supporting fire via ships missiles (cruise missiles) is pretty reasonable from a doctrinal and structural POV. It is undoubtedly a somewhat limited supply, but still.

And yes, I can't see why there wouldn't be a multiple, likely redundant, set of data streams being utilized. Possibly with a handful of reusable mini- or microsats in orbit, plus drones. Lots of looking down, all of it mediated and organized by expert systems or AI.

Again, this is all predicated on the "average planet" - I would expect that as you increase in population and certainly as you increase in tech two things occur. One, you get more and more autonomy to do as you please assuming that you aren't in open rebellion or mucking with the starport or an important trade resource. Two, the more likely that who intervenes is the IMC - who come down like the Hammer of G-d equipped to TL15 and make an example of what happens to those who flout the might of the Imperium - because you really can't let those high tech/high population planets get it into their heads that they *can* rebel because then you practically do have to nuke the side from orbit and then repopulate when it's stopped glowing...

Thanks for replying!

D.
 
See my previous post about such a free use of meson weaponry (and more so about spinals, that is the most likely you'll have in orbit.

This said I mostly agree with te rest of your post

Quick question: is there a canon reference or background piece that says Meson weapons have radiation effects? I remember reading that the produced a gamma radiation burst somewhere. But are there lasting radiation effects?

Reading CT Striker the effects sound like a very heavy artillery bombardments or carpet bombing.

So far, for me meson guns fall outside my definition of WMD. But thats purely IMTU.

Theres an (in game) political thing here too, Meson guns are high technology, the main users of meson guns seem to be the Imperial Navy and Imperial Marines. The Imperial Marines especially seem to find it a useful tool and they are often used in police actions or are first responders. So do you give a hostage to the media by classifying one of your own most useful weapons as WMD?
 
Quick question: is there a canon reference or background piece that says Meson weapons have radiation effects? I remember reading that the produced a gamma radiation burst somewhere. But are there lasting radiation effects?

Reading CT Striker the effects sound like a very heavy artillery bombardments or carpet bombing.

So far, for me meson guns fall outside my definition of WMD. But thats purely IMTU.

Theres an (in game) political thing here too, Meson guns are high technology, the main users of meson guns seem to be the Imperial Navy and Imperial Marines. The Imperial Marines especially seem to find it a useful tool and they are often used in police actions or are first responders. So do you give a hostage to the media by classifying one of your own most useful weapons as WMD?


starship scale weapons are stated to give off a rad effect in MgT, where both Bay and spinal mounts cause rad hits on the crew. however, I can't remember if the "field" meson gun in the MgT CSC has a radiation effect.
 
Quick question: is there a canon reference or background piece that says Meson weapons have radiation effects? I remember reading that the produced a gamma radiation burst somewhere. But are there lasting radiation effects?

Reading CT Striker the effects sound like a very heavy artillery bombardments or carpet bombing.

starship scale weapons are stated to give off a rad effect in MgT, where both Bay and spinal mounts cause rad hits on the crew. however, I can't remember if the "field" meson gun in the MgT CSC has a radiation effect.

Rule-mechanics aside, if meson weapons function the way they have historically been pictured as functioning in canon, they will have a radiation-burst affect as the mesons decay into muons and then to beta rays, with gamma rays as a by-product, but they will not produce long-term radioisotope fallout.

Perhaps a (rough) modern analogy would be a low-yield neutron bomb, with beta and gamma rays substituted for neutron radiation.
 
There is immediate radiation damage but no radioactive fallout is mentioned anywhere.

Not that it would matter much since by the time you are calling in fire support from your meson bay armed bombardment cruiser in orbit nuclear damper technology has advanced to the point where you can neutralise all radioactive fallout anyway.

Speaking of which - 50t and 100t meson bays make great ortillery :)
 
Rule-mechanics aside, if meson weapons function the way they have historically been pictured as functioning in canon, they will have a radiation-burst affect as the mesons decay into muons and then to beta rays, with gamma rays as a by-product, but they will not produce long-term radioisotope fallout.

Perhaps a modern analogy would be a low-yield neutron bomb, with beta and gamma rays substituted for neutron radiation.

my (non physicist) understanding of fallout was that it was caused by the nuclear material (ie the plutonium) being fused with dust kicked up by the blast wave.

as their is no radioactive elements in either meson fire, it shouldn't create fallout, just irradiate the area alongside the heat and blast effects.
 
Quick question: is there a canon reference or background piece that says Meson weapons have radiation effects? I remember reading that the produced a gamma radiation burst somewhere. But are there lasting radiation effects?

See that in CT, MT and MgT (the versions I know the best) the damage from meson guns is both for internal explosion and radiation, same as nukes.

Reading CT Striker the effects sound like a very heavy artillery bombardments or carpet bombing.

So far, for me meson guns fall outside my definition of WMD. But thats purely IMTU.

Theres an (in game) political thing here too, Meson guns are high technology, the main users of meson guns seem to be the Imperial Navy and Imperial Marines. The Imperial Marines especially seem to find it a useful tool and they are often used in police actions or are first responders. So do you give a hostage to the media by classifying one of your own most useful weapons as WMD?

IIRC the Ilelish's equatorial zone was blasted barren with meson fire by the IN after Ilelish revolt.

And the effects of its blast as described in MT are kills all life in its danger space, destroys all vehicles, collapses all ground and any smooth ground surface becomes uneven ground.

I guess that qualifies as using WMD.

And ITTR an article (maybe a TD) about starmercs where the restrictions given by the Imperium to them were no Meson weapons, no PA's with a factor over 7 (so no spinals) and no nukes. My take on this is that those forbiden weapons are what Imperiun consideres MDW (but that's just my take...).
 
my (non physicist) understanding of fallout was that it was caused by the nuclear material (ie the plutonium) being fused with dust kicked up by the blast wave.

Either un-reacted Plutonium or Uranium, along with any radioisotope fission-products or byproducts from the reaction, but yes.

as their is no radioactive elements in either meson fire, it shouldn't create fallout, just irradiate the area alongside the heat and blast effects.
Essentially correct.
 
Either un-reacted Plutonium or Uranium, along with any radioisotope fission-products or byproducts from the reaction, but yes.

Even without its radioactive effects, breathing this dust is all but healthy...
 
Rule-mechanics aside, if meson weapons function the way they have historically been pictured as functioning in canon, they will have a radiation-burst affect as the mesons decay into muons and then to beta rays, with gamma rays as a by-product, but they will not produce long-term radioisotope fallout.

See that in CT, MT and MgT (the versions I know the best) the damage from meson guns is both for internal explosion and radiation, same as nukes.

-snip-

And the effects of its blast as described in MT are kills all life in its danger space, destroys all vehicles, collapses all ground and any smooth ground surface becomes uneven ground.

I guess that qualifies as using WMD.

And ITTR an article (maybe a TD) about starmercs where the restrictions given by the Imperium to them were no Meson weapons, no PA's with a factor over 7 (so no spinals) and no nukes. My take on this is that those forbiden weapons are what Imperiun consideres MDW (but that's just my take...).

Thanks for clarifying the meson guns and radiation question everybody.

On the subject of WMD I suppose the real world definition "a nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon able to cause widespread devastation and loss of life." makes it a little difficult to classify particle weapons, but if we look at scale of destruction starship weapons of these types (PA, meson, and more exotic) would qualify.

To return it to the subject of this thread it makes it interesting to observe what kind of weapons might be preclude from or restricted in the TO&Es of the Imperial Army or local planetary forces under Imperial rules of war and WMD restrictions.
 
...

And yes, I can't see why there wouldn't be a multiple, likely redundant, set of data streams being utilized. Possibly with a handful of reusable mini- or microsats in orbit, plus drones. Lots of looking down, all of it mediated and organized by expert systems or AI.

...

That's how I imagine it and largely what the intelligence/electronic warfare elements in my regimental org were about - creating that look down battle grid.
 
Thank you all for the links and discussion RE Rads & WMD, that was a really nice bit of discussion and I hope worthwhile for everyone.

The more that I have thought about this the more I'm questioning the need for some discrete elements - or at the very least their size and place on the TOE.

Engineering Units: So, the need for bridging (for example) is moot, Grav Mobile. The need for Wreckers? I think that some sort of grav module or grav pod would work just as well or better. EOD? That makes sense. Fortification - sure, still needed. General construction, still needed. But how much of this can be done via robot and expert system? This starts to look like an ideal thing to be an organic element at the company HQ level on up - or a split-out Battalion element like the Medical teams, with an additional unit at the regimental HQ level.

Thoughts?

D.
 
Thank you all for the links and discussion RE Rads & WMD, that was a really nice bit of discussion and I hope worthwhile for everyone.

The more that I have thought about this the more I'm questioning the need for some discrete elements - or at the very least their size and place on the TOE.

Engineering Units: So, the need for bridging (for example) is moot, Grav Mobile. The need for Wreckers? I think that some sort of grav module or grav pod would work just as well or better. EOD? That makes sense. Fortification - sure, still needed. General construction, still needed. But how much of this can be done via robot and expert system? This starts to look like an ideal thing to be an organic element at the company HQ level on up - or a split-out Battalion element like the Medical teams, with an additional unit at the regimental HQ level.

Thoughts?

D.

Of the elements I had in the earlier list I'm least sure of the
- separate engineers and recon
- platoon indirect fire element
- supply&repair integrated at multiple levels

As you say a lot of the standard engineer functions today might not be relevant in a grav context.

Of the HQ elements I'd be most sure of in a Traveller context the first would be commands&comms (c&c) obviously enough but the second would probably be electronics&intelligence (e&i) (there's probably a better word for this) by which I mean connecting all the elements in the unit to an electronic battle grid. This e&i element seems like it ought to be significant at each tier and if all the info from all the combat vehicles is feeding into the grid there's less need for dedicated recon element (or rather it becomes the recon).

I'd also wonder about the platoon indirect fire team in the context of the battle grid idea as with the grid in effect indirect support can come from higher up very easily.

Lastly I had the idea originally that with so many different weapon systems and equipment in the combat platoon that supply&repair might be a bigger issue than today but comments on the thread made me change my mind a bit on that.

so looking at the previous list I'd maybe switch it to a more streamlined and consistent

Platoon HQ
- squad size
- 1 x command&comms team
- 1 x e&i team

Company HQ
- platoon size
- 1 x command&comms squad
- 1 x e&i squad
- 1 x medical team
- 1 x indirect fire squad

Battalion HQ
- company size
- 1 x c&c platoon
- 1 x e&i platoon
- 1 x medical squad
- 1 x indirect fire platoon
- 1 x supply&repair platoon

Regimental HQ
- battalion size
- 1 x c&c company
- 1 x e&i company
- 1 x medical platoon
- 1 x indirect fire company
- 1 x supply&repair company

(with team ~ 4, squad ~ 8, platoon ~ 30+, company ~ 120+ guys)

The things I can think of that might suit having separate recon and engineer elements would be if they were hitech spin offs from their original roles i.e. recon as some kind of stealth suited grav belt infiltration unit (more special forces than standard recon) and engineers as a power armor heavy assault unit for bunker clearance.

#

edit: this is just me thinking aloud btw. i'm interested in this now as scenery e.g. players pass a parked up army convoy on their travels, or they need to retrieve something in the middle of a war zone so it's interesting to have an idea of what that might look like.
 
Lastly I had the idea originally that with so many different weapon systems and equipment in the combat platoon that supply&repair might be a bigger issue than today but comments on the thread made me change my mind a bit on that.

The more pieces and types of equipment, the larger the maintenance and supply requirements. Been there, done that.

Also, at division level, supply and transport are separate functions, with typically a battalion for each. At the regiment/brigade level, you may or may not have a separate supply and a separate transportation company.
 
Engineering Units: So, the need for bridging (for example) is moot, Grav Mobile. The need for Wreckers? I think that some sort of grav module or grav pod would work just as well or better. EOD? That makes sense. Fortification - sure, still needed. General construction, still needed. But how much of this can be done via robot and expert system? This starts to look like an ideal thing to be an organic element at the company HQ level on up - or a split-out Battalion element like the Medical teams, with an additional unit at the regimental HQ level.

Thoughts?

D.

Combat Engineering, here's my thoughts:

1. Yes "bridging" disappears for a grav vehicle formation, but those are the big vehicle bridges. One of the roles of the Engineers in the real world Irish Army Infantry battalions and brigades is to deploy the Infantry Assault Bridge. It weighs 460kg and takes just 6 minutes to assemble. Eighteen combat engineers carry it into position and deploy it. With the use of a pontoon it can bridge water gaps 40m wide and dry gaps 30m wide without. The point here is without grav belts or in situations where your grav vehicle can't drop you directly on an objective you still may need to "build a bridge and get over it". So the bridge described is probably about TL8 at most, at higher TLs you could print such a bridge or make one from quick hardening foam. Either way your engineers might retain the basic skill of building bridges and crossing gaps.

2. Wreckers, rescue and recovery. Having a grav vehicle on hand that can lift your biggest or most massive combat vehicle and carry it as a slung load is a good idea. After all it could also be used to carry cargo, pre fabricated strong-points, building materials and any number of other things that need brute power. Where you place such a vehicle might be up for question, is it an engineers function to retrieve wrecked vehicles or is this a maintenance function, or maybe its a logistics and supply function if wrecked vehicles require 3rd line maintenance.

3. EOD is still very necessary. The types of route and the forms of mines and IEDs will be different. You might be clearing landing zones or checking likely sites for weapons emplacements. The "mines" might be smart and might consist of autonomous or remote controlled weapons systems that fire missiles at your vehicles or troops. Search is a major component of EOD, you have to look for signs, identify potential devices and then call forward the best methods for disposal or neutralization. So theres definitely still a role for Engineers in EOD, but even today all branches are upskilling in this area.

Signals will have a role in detecting and jamming the smart and controlled weapons that EOD deals with. Active protection on vehicles will also be a major component in neutralizing mines and booby trap devices. I can imagine your better drones will also have the ability to recognize the signs of a mine or IED emplacement and flag them for EOD to look at.

EOD also has a huge role to play in peacekeeping and peace building by clearing dangerous munitions. Base security should also have EOD involvement, checking and clearing the perimeter and patrol routes around bases where hostile forces are known to operate.

You could combine the EOD role in units with the combat demolition role as both deal with the same explosive handling skills.

4. Fortification. Everybody should have a shovel. Digging in should always be one of the first things a soldier does. Actually I quite like the image of a soldier in battledress emerging from a shell scrape that just popped into my head.

At battalion level your engineer or pioneer units should be able to do things like tree blow downs, mouse holing walls, they should probably also have tools capable of digging trenches like a back-hoe, chainsaws or cutting devices capable of cutting wood or masonry. Stocks of sandbags or the future version of them (maybe armour in a can spray) should be held at this level.

At higher levels you can store prefabricated field fortifications. Sections of ballistically armoured wall or panel that can be used to construct field fortifications. Prefab pillboxes flown forward as an underslung load of your gravtank and dropped in a hole dug by your engineers or maybe remote weapons systems instead of the manned pillbox.

At still higher levels you can have some stocks of construction materials and dedicated construction units, but here's an idea to play with. If you have an expeditionary force, either going to another planet or just another continent one of the things you should do is locate the enemy's stocks of strategically valuable material like construction materials and equipment (and fuel and spares), then you only have to bring a minimal amount with you. However you do have to secure these materials from the enemy and prevent him from destroying them, and you still have to bring your skilled crafts people or construction robots with you.

5. Water. In my country the Engineers are responsible for providing drinking water supplies. The lowest echelon this happens at is in the Engineer Company organic to the Brigade. Humans and other sophonts will still need drinking water, but when your army becomes fusion or fusion+ powered every vehicle and piece of equipment will also need water for fuel (you can get both hydrogen for fuel and oxygen for breathing from water too). I'd include a water gathering and refining unit somewhere around Regimental or Brigade level to make them somewhat autonomous for this resource. POL or petrol/oil/lubricants is one of the biggest logistics constraints on today's mechanized forces, after fusion comes in and perhaps with fuel cell powered armies, hydrogen and water will replace it, happily on a lot of planets you can extract water fairly easily from the ground, the seas or even the air.

In conclusion, combat engineering is something company commanders should have quick access to, so having a small pool of skilled combat engineers at battalion level is a good idea. They can always direct ordinary soldiers to assist them in carrying out tasks.

They in turn should be able to call down heavier plant and machinery from Regiment or Brigade pools. Heavy construction is a long term activity and investment so I'd make it a Corps and Army resource.

For EOD its everybody's task to spot and the specialists task to dispose, but the skills of EOD are common to a number of basic combat engineering tasks.

You can give a small unit of Engineers a big toolbox to work out of and accomplish many tasks.
 
And then another thought strikes....

One other task of the Army Engineer is construction of camps.

Now one of the basic things I've done with my Imperial Army is standardize logistics on the 3ton container found in T5.

So everything gets shipped in a 3ton container or one of its variants (5ton and 10ton) or on a smaller pallet or box.

So when camp arrives it arrives in and as containers. Some expand to become barracks. Some are toilet and shower blocks, there's a mess container a Signals container and an Ops room container.

Fusion+ mini plants and Atmosphere processing might also be added as needed using ship life-support design rules for hostile environments.

There's also the alternative of using the standard cutter modules in the same roles at bigger camps.

This is similar to the modular base concept but its broken down into smaller parts to make it easier to tailor to different units. And of course this doesn't stop troops using existing structures for accommodation.

The Engineers job would be to prepare the site, fortify it and provide sanitation, atmosphere and water. Delivery would probably be best left to the Navy with Cutter or other craft.
 
Engineering Units: So, the need for bridging (for example) is moot, Grav Mobile. The need for Wreckers? I think that some sort of grav module or grav pod would work just as well or better. EOD? That makes sense. Fortification - sure, still needed. General construction, still needed. But how much of this can be done via robot and expert system? This starts to look like an ideal thing to be an organic element at the company HQ level on up - or a split-out Battalion element like the Medical teams, with an additional unit at the regimental HQ level.

Thoughts?

D.

I see engineering units quite important regardless of all of this. Aside from what Reban has said:

- one of the tasks of engineers is also construction of bases and camps and reconstruction oftaken territories (incluiding civilian relief missions or actions, in post combat zones or in pacetime disasters).

- as for bridging, you must remember again that not only the military must be cared for. The taken zones are also likely to have civilian population, and I guess not all traffic is gravitic (even if for the walking people), so some bridging capability must be on them. And not all planets have a TL where gravitics are commonplace. Same about railroad or equivalents (be it maglev, airfilm, or whatever is used in the specific planet)

- as for wreckers, I guess there will be fewer vehicles to recover in a grav vehicle envirnoment, as most of the wrecks will have crash damage added to what left them off combat.

- another engineering task would probably be making power available, again both to your troops and to civilians in the area. This is likely to be easier once you can just bring a fusion powere module, but someone has to care for it and to set the network to distribute it (and that will probably be quite in bad shape after the combat)...

- Off course, in non friendly atmospheres or environments, all the tasks above are even more necessary, and there are lots of those planets in Traveller.

- and also, at least in Spanish army, communications are another engineers task (in fact, engineers are divided among construction and communications).
 
Squad Size

Going back to the TOE topic of the squad, someone mentioned 10 - 2 teams of 5 each. It is worth pointing out, that since the US Army, and I think British Army, have had their infantry carried in APCs, the squad size has been adjusted to the capacity of one APC. The modern squad is like 7 or 8 as that is the capacity of an M2 or M3.
 
Back
Top