The Reserve, Reserves, and Reservists of the IN

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by rancke:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
YOu are the Commodore in charge of a heavy task force consisting of 1 BatRon (Battlerider), 1 BatRon, 4 CruRon, 1 CruRon (Carrier) and associated escorts and auxillaries.

Ohm I think you'd be at least a rear admiral, probably a vice admiral, possibly even and admiral to command such a task force. But that by the way... </font>[/QUOTE]I thought that too, until I dragged out LBB5 and the MT Players manual. Rank structure above Captain is Commodore (O7), Fleet Admiral (O8), Sector Admiral (O9), Grand Admiral (O10). The Task Force may be heavy but it isn't a Fleet. (And Fleet is rather specifically defined.) I wasn't going to get into the lack of levels at this part of the rank structure. The Naval Rank Structure is too tightly defined for proper command and control at the top end of the Structure.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />[The Duchess of Glisten and the Grand Admiral of the Marches both order you about].

Now if these orders arrive simultaneously, which do you follow?

The Sector Admiral's of course. (There is no Grand Admiral of the Marches and there hasn't been for 500 years). </font>[/QUOTE]There isn't? Rank Structure and command structure seems to indicate there would be. Each Sector has two Sector Admirals. One in charge of the Active Imperial Fleet and one for the reserve fleet. It would follow that there would be an Admiral above them both in charge of both and coordinating the overall Sector resources.

But I would agree that the Military chain of command would have primacy in this case. (And in my mind there was no doubt about it I was illustrating the problem with multiple commanders.)

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If they don't arrive simultaneously do you stop following one to follow the other?

If the Sector Admiral's order arrived first, you keep following them. If the Duchess' 'request' arrived first, you stop following that and start following the sector admiral's when you get those.

Do you split your forces and therefore disobey both?

No.

Do you follow the Duke's orders and chase pirates and possibly lose a Subsector, potentially the war, or do you go into position at Strouden, ignore the Duke's and according to the "Duke is the local representative of the Emperor" thoughts, commit treason?

It's not treason. The Sector Admiral's authority outweighs that of the Duchess. </font>[/QUOTE]One would think it would but the comments were that the local Duke speaks with the voice of the Emperor. Therefore disobeying the Subsector Duke is disobeying the Emperor and mutiny or treason. Not that I agree with the concept, but that is what the quote says.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Remember Norris needed the Warant to assume command. Santanocheev was in command before Norris received the Warant.

That's because Santanocheev was the acting sector admiral[*], so he outranked Norris. You, OTOH, is a mere vice adimral, so the Duchess 'outrank' you.


[*] The 'acting' part is my interpretation, not canon.


Hans </font>[/QUOTE]So what is the "Rank" of a Duke? Or the "Rank" of a Count? They are outside the chain of command so they have no rank. But, as nobles, they speak for the Emperor so they out rank everyone in the military, unless the person in the military happens to have a higher noble rank.

Now to go back to the Honor Harrington Universe, where the rank structure and nobility and the relationship between them is well defined. Honor Harrington, in Ashes of Victory is a very Junior Admiral in the Royal Manticoran Navy. She is also an Admiral (Matter of fact the second most senior admiral) in the Grayson Space Navy (An allied force). She is a Manticoran Duchess and a Grayson Steadholder. (Steadholder being equivalent to Traveller Archduke) Yet she takes orders from a Fleet Admiral who is only an Earl. She outranks him in three ways yet there is only one way that matters. She is serving as a commander of a Manticoran Task Force as a Manticoran officer so therefore his Manticoran rank takes precedence. If it was a joint Task FOrce technically she would be the senior officer, and since it was a joint fleet, technically she should have been the senior officer. But while she is in one uniform she is one rank and in the other uniform another rank.

Politically she is 4 different people that happen to share the same body. (And it is rather confusing.) But not half as confusing as the situation described above. She, at least, knows where she stands and who is in command. In the situation provided in the quote, any one of those members of the peerage can cut you orders at any time, will the full force of the "Emperor's Will" behind those orders.

To take it one step further, does the Domian Admiralty's orders take precedence over the Sector Duke? Does the Imperium High Command Take precedence over the Archduke?

I would think, that without specific authority, (usually in the form of a Warant) the Fleet answers to the Military Chain of Command, and while local Nobility might get to have a voice in the selection of Admirals, they wouldn't actually have the authority to direct those Admirals. That makes more military sense to me.

However it would be important for the local nobility, especially the multi-system nobility (generally Count or higher) to have military forces at their disposal. Hence the Colonial Squadrons, Fleets, Navies. These can be Imperialized in times of need. It would also be important for the Imperial Navy to have a reserve pool of ships under its command. Now we also have a use for the "old but still useful" ships.

This solves the Duchy Navy (or lack thereof) and County Navy situation. It solves the "Nobility needs military force to back up its edicts" problems and it doesn't step on the viability of a military force at the same time.

I have yet to see anything in canon that says both can't coexist. I have seen one referenced without the other, and before TA7 I haven't seen both referenced together, however lack of referencing them together doesn't neccessarily mean they don't both exist. And since TA7 does mention both, that appears to be the OTU solution.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by The Oz:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
But the Zhodani, with their unified command structure, would be better equipped to take advantage of this view of a confused command structure of the Imperial Navy.

Why would the Zhodani have a more unified command structure? I seem to remember that STRIKER set things up so that Zho officers were no more likely to be experienced than their enlisted men (you couldn't just assign all the "veteran" and "elite" quality men to officers, as you could with Imperial troops). Of course this is at a very tactical scale and things might be different at higher levels, but from what I remember of Zho culture the nobles have even more power and control than their Imperial equivalents.

After all, the Zhodani Governor is also an admiral in the FFW game, isn't he? </font>[/QUOTE]While I don't have FFW. That is what I am talking about. The Command structure of the Zhodani Navy is Nobility so they follow one chain of command. They don't have or need a bunch of civilians poking their noses in and disrupting the chain of command which is the problem that I am trying to show with the "I am a Noble therefore I can command the Naval Forces in my domain" (not to be confused with "Domain") concept." The Zhodani Government is also more centralized than the Imperium, though that may just be my impression.

 

[The Oz]

I need to look this up when I get home. I don't remember how the Zhodani government (councils of nobles at all levels, from local to planetary to subsector to sector to Consulate) connects to the Zhodani military. Does anyone have one of the Zho manuals handy?

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by rancke:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
According to that paradign. The Marquis Mille Falcs would exert Control of the TF while it was assigned there.

No, he would have the authority to assume command if he felt that the situation warranted it. In practice he would know better than to interfere.

So would Count Mertactor, assuming there is such a thing, which since there is no Duke 268, it makes sense, while it is in his County.

He would have the authority to assume command, but he wouldn't be there, would he?

As would the Duke of Glisten, the Duke of the Spinward Marches, The Arch Duke of Deneb, the Emperor and the Military Chain of Command. How do you organize and mobilize active duty sector resources in such a mess?

Those who don't know what is going on are careful not to get involved.


Hans </font>[/QUOTE]Actually the Count Mertactor would be there, or at least be responsible for Mille Falcs. (One would think.) Granted that isn't anywhere in Canon but since it is in District 268 and a Count is responsible for a small cluster of worlds one would think that there would be a Count incharge of Mertactor and Mille Falcs.) That Count is of course hypothetical, as there is no mention, in any canon source that I have seen, of the nobility structure in District 268.

It has been my experience and my read of history, that people in power, especially political power, like to believe they know what is going on, especially if they don't. In general they want to get involved whether they know what is going on or not. They have to add their input so they can take credit later if it goes right, or so they can shift blame later if it goes wrong. (I tried to fix it but they didn't go far enough. Or I helped get them headed in the right direction.) People in power hate to admit ignorance. So they are going to want to step in anyway. Now granted that is a generality, and I hate making general assumptions. (Because we all know what happens when we assume and when you hang Stars on it, then it quickly becomes a much bigger.....<Ahem.> ...Aaaah, situation.

)

Big fish in small ponds, like to think about their pond not about the Ocean.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by rancke:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
Back in the age of sail, before instant communications, (and actually instant reliable communications is fairly recent) the local commanders still only had one chain of command. (At least the successful ones.) In some cases that included a local Govenor, but in those cases the local military did not also answer to the high command back in the home country.

That's just not true. Orders from home could always supercede orders from the local authority.</font>[/QUOTE]True but in general there was one chain of command. Orders from home would go to the guy in charge, usually the Govenor, unless those orders were to remove the Govenor.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Usually you had Military Govenors, who were in charge of both the civilian aspects of teh situation but also fitted nicely within the chain of command. (Spanish conquest of most of Latin America being the easiest example to research.)

What you will find if you research the Spanish administration of Latin America after the conquest is that all colonies had both a viceroy/governor and a captain-general. Sometimes the same person held both positions, but certainly not always.
</font>[/QUOTE]Granted. But in the cases where they weren't the same people the two of them worked closely together and any orders from home generally went to the Govenor.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Each had a fleet, even though Cortez burned his ships, soldiers and civilians they were responsible for. The chain of command was clear.

Cortes usurped the authority of the appointed governor and used much of the first gold he gathered to buy the King's forgiveness...
</font>[/QUOTE]Well I was trying to imply that Cortez was a bit, shall we say, unorthodox.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />...the same has to be true of the Imperial Navy or the resulting conflicts and confusion would have caused the Imperium to collapse long before the 1100s.

I disagree with the opinion you've expressed here.


Hans </font>[/QUOTE]You are of course welcome to disagree. But in reality without a clear cut chain of command, either through the Noble Channels or the Military Channels a military can't function. And if it is to be through the local nobility then large scale military operations can't function. If you are going to use one chain of command for peace and a different one for war then you run into a whole different problem. Your force will fight the way it trains. If it trains as a bunch of small units then it can't turn and fight a s a large coheesive force. If they are generally policemen and chasing pirates then they can't go out and fight an organized Navy. Since the Imperial Navy has to be able to do both, then it makes more sense to me to have two seperate structures and have them train together on a regular basis. (One the Imperial Navy, with its own Reserves to call on to deal with the main forces of any enemies, and the other, Colonial Navy, to deal with local situations and to support the Imperial Navy in a war.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by The Oz:
I need to look this up when I get home. I don't remember how the Zhodani government (councils of nobles at all levels, from local to planetary to subsector to sector to Consulate) connects to the Zhodani military. Does anyone have one of the Zho manuals handy?

I will admit it has been a while since I read it. It may be more of an Impression I got. But I will now go look and see if I am right or wrong. (And I do usually admit when I am wrong.

)

 

[Hal]

Hi Bhoins,
The person who explained the chain of command issues involved was an officer of the 10th Mountain Division during the time period of Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The way he explained it to me was that ALL officers within the United States were to be accorded certain priveledges and courtesies regardless of what service they are in. An Air Force captain is still accorded a salute from enlisted personnel whether such personnel are Navy, Army, or Marines. He can give them legitimate orders providing they do not conflict with the orders of their superiors and violate their or his area of operations.

Example: Suppose you have a Lieutenant tasked by his captain to set up and hold Hill 925. A Captain from Logistics from the same unit shows up (where the Lieutenant is part of the first Rifle Battalion, Company D, platoon A - a totally fictious pulled out of my ass identification). This new captain says he needs the Lieutenant to provide escort for a supply convoy to the nearest town. Since these new orders conflict with the Lieutentant's original orders, and the Captain is not only not in his specific chain of command (ie, not his specific captain), the Captain isn't even part of this area of operations (or task). So he tells the captain "Sir, I'm sorry sir, but you need to clear that with my captain." The Lieutenant is totally covered in his refusal to obey the Logistical captain's orders. So lets say the Logistical Captain goes to the company captain and lays out his request. That captain must now weigh the request with the orders HIS superior gave him. If he thinks that the request is part of the operations and intentions of his superior, he might accept the mission - but he might also clear it with his superior.

How to put this in perspective using Modern Military examples?

Lets say, you have the New York State National Guard. They are stationed all over New York State - in just about every city there is. Then you have the Seneca Depot as well as the Fort Drum 10th Mountain Division stationed outside of Watertown. The Tenth is equivalent to the Imperial forces. The New York State National Guard is like the Lunion Subsector Military. New York State Governor, hearing that the Anti-abortion faction intends to hold a rally in Buffalo New York. The Pro-abortion faction also intends to protest in Buffalo New York that day. Fearing for riots, he orders the New York State National Guard to deploy in a protective stance to preserve the peace in Buffalo. The President of the United States may not order the Governor to stand his National Guard down. The President may not suddenly declare an emergency and mobilize the National Guard units so as to deprive the Governor of his right to use them as he sees fit. Yet, the Governor has as his superior not one, but two entities. One is the President of the United States. The other is the people of New York. A National Guard officer is inside the Governor's chain of command. A 10th Mountain Division Officer is inside the President's chain of command. The President can "federalize" the National Guard and once the National Guard is federalized, the National Guard officer is inside the Federal Military chain of command, and the Federal Officer is inside the National Guard unit's chain of command. Until then, they are separate entities.

A captain of the New York National Guard may not order a Lieutenant of the 10th Mountain Division with any hopes that the Lieutenant must obey him. The Lieuteant of the 10th Mountain Division may not be ordered by the Governor of New York because the Governor is not in his chain of command.

The problem of chain of command confusion for the Imperium exists because of the fact (or so it seems to me) the Sector Duke occupies the Military chain of command for the Imperial forces, while he ALSO holds a position as the Superior of the Subsector Dukes.

Suppose a Captain in the Imperial Navy manages to offend a Subsector Duke. He knows that the Subsector Duke can complain directly to the Sector Duke. The Sector Duke *IS* in the Captain's chain of command whereas the subsector Duke is not. If he obeys the subsector Duke's request, and it annoys his superior officer, the Captain is going to be hurting. If the captain doesn't accede to the request of the Subsector Duke, and the Subsector Duke lodges a complaint to the Sector Duke - chances are good that the chain of command defense will defend him. Then again, maybe not. It won't be a court marshallable offense, but it might be a career stopper. Politics being an ugly thing as far as military officers are concerned, it does have an effect much like a wind might affect a tree. It won't blow it down, but it might make it bend and shake loose a few Lieu, er, Leaves off the branches and let them fall to the ground, useless to the tree.

 

[Hal]

For what it is worth? GURPS NOBLES discusses MANDATES and such, but it points out that a noble owes his fealty not to his social superior, but to his Emperor. He owes his duty however, to his social superior. What makes it ugly is that if there is only one noble on the spot at a given moment when there is a crisis, he is expected to handle it. Clearly, such a structure needs rules as to when a Noble can or can not usurp control. For instance, if a Noble has information about the start of the Fifth Frontier War and needs to get it the Sector Duke post haste - if he requisitions a Naval gunboat to take him to the nearest concentration of Naval forces - said officer of the ship must make a professional judgement as to whether or not the Noble merits the commandering of his vessel. But in the olden days, independent commands had a lot of lattidude in dealing with their orders and they were expected to do their Duty to their Monarchs. I don't see this as any different in the Imperium. The key here is that every situation has rules to abide by. Nobles may not abuse the rules at a whim, nor may officers ignore the rules without peril.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rancke:
Oh, I think you'd be at least a rear admiral, probably a vice admiral, possibly even and admiral to command such a task force. But that by the way...

I thought that too, until I dragged out LBB5 and the MT Players manual. Rank structure above Captain is Commodore (O7), Fleet Admiral (O8), Sector Admiral (O9), Grand Admiral (O10).</font>[/QUOTE]This is another of the numerous canon conflicts that exists. On the one hand we have a character generation system that claims that the Imperial Navy only has ten officer ranks, explicitly not including rear and vice admiral. On the other hand we have half a dozen specific references to rear and vice admirals. One or the other must be wrong (The examples we have preclude the possibility that rear admiral is an alternate version of fleet admiral and vice admiral an alternate version of sector admiral).

My preferred choice is that the CGS is wrong and the examples are right. Others disagree with me .

The Task Force may be heavy but it isn't a Fleet. (And Fleet is rather specifically defined.)

Vice Admiral Elphinstone had a task force of one BatRon and several CruRons during the 5FW.

I wasn't going to get into the lack of levels at this part of the rank structure. The Naval Rank Structure is too tightly defined for proper command and control at the top end of the Structure.

Actually, you can use one rank to cover several command levels; there are quite a few historical examples. But I agree with you. I would suggest that the IN has at least three more ranks, 'pushing' Grand Admirals up to O13.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />(There is no Grand Admiral of the Marches and there hasn't been for 500 years).

There isn't? Rank Structure and command structure seems to indicate there would be. Each Sector has two Sector Admirals. One in charge of the Active Imperial Fleet and one for the reserve fleet. It would follow that there would be an Admiral above them both in charge of both and coordinating the overall Sector resources. </font>[/QUOTE](Can we use the word 'armada' for named fleets? It cuts down on opportunities to confuse named and numbered fleets.)

There's no evidence that the reserve armada even exists. The chart on p. 28 of RebS only shows one armada per sector and the reserve fleets are part of it. But even if it exists there's no reason why the sector admiral of the regular armada can't simply be senior to the sector admiral of the reserve armada. Or there could be a third sector admiral senior to both in charge.

So what is the "Rank" of a Duke?

Judging from the scanty evidence we have from the FFW boardgame it would seem to be a sector admiral without seniority. I.e. a subsector duke outranks all fleet admirals but is outranked by all sector admirals. From that one might conclude that a sector duke would outrank all sector admirals.

But all this presupposes a formal rank structure and it doesn't jibe too well with the concept that dukes represents the civilian authority.

How's this? Sector dukes have civilian oversight over the Imperial Navy. As such they can order sector admirals around as a function of their office. Under normal circumstances subsector dukes can only make polite requests of IN personnel. They can only issue legal orders to the IN if they are prepared to announce a state of emergency AND are out of touch with the sector duke.

Or the "Rank" of a Count?

Normally none, but they too can declare a state of emergency if they dare.

In the situation provided in the quote, any one of those members of the peerage can cut you orders at any time, will the full force of the "Emperor's Will" behind those orders.

Sure, but he'd better be prepare to justify it to the Emperor after the fact.

To take it one step further, does the Domain Admiralty's orders take precedence over the Sector Duke? Does the Imperium High Command Take precedence over the Archduke?

Yes.

I would think, that without specific authority, (usually in the form of a Warant) the Fleet answers to the Military Chain of Command,

The Imperial Mandate seems to be a sort of ex officio Imperial Warrant, but with the limitation that no noble can supercede the mandate of his overlord, nor that of other nobles outside his demesne. Thus Norris couldn't exercise his Imperial Mandate to override Delphine. For that he needed a warrant.


Hans

 

[flykiller]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If they don't arrive simultaneously do you stop following one to follow the other?

If the Sector Admiral's order arrived first, you keep following them. If the Duchess' 'request' arrived first, you stop following that and start following the sector admiral's when you get those.</font>[/QUOTE]any order will be weeks or months out of date. remote commanders can't do much more than set policy, and one would expect policy to have been set long before any engagement. within policy, a local commander will be almost entirely on his own.

 

[mike wightman]

This is how I see things.
Using the term chain of command is confusing things.
The military maintains a chain of command.
The nobility have a hierarchy.
The high nobles have superiority over the chain of command.
Only high nobles have the Imperial Mandate and can thus order around Imperial forces within their demesne. Unless those forces are already operating under the orders of a higher ranking noble.
Nobles are not part of the operational chain of command, they are the civilian authority that directs the use of the military.
A sector Duke can issue orders at the sector level to the sector Admiral. Those orders must be obeyed by everyone below the sector Admiral in the chain of command, and the orders can not be countermanded by a lesser noble rank (without a warrant).
So during wartime, when all a sector's forces are being directed from the sector level down, a local noble can not interfere.

During peacetime a squadron may be tasked with a patrol route bu the sector authirities. As that squadron enters a duchy, the Duke of that duchy may give orders to the squadron, providing they don't conflict with sector standing orders.

As the fleet jumps from planet to planet, the local Duke, Count, Viscount, or Marquis may give orders to the fleet. Providing those orders do not conflict with the Duchy orders or the sector orders.

Norris, as a subsector Duke must have used his Imperial authority to grant himself the rank of O8 Fleet Admiral (the sector Admiral was appointed by the sector Duke remember ) so that he could take command of fleets from within the chain of command.
He couldn't do anything about Santanocheev until he obtained the warrant and thus outrank Delphine.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rancke:
Orders from home could always supercede orders from the local authority.

True but in general there was one chain of command. Orders from home would go to the guy in charge, usually the Govenor, unless those orders were to remove the Govenor.

</font>[/QUOTE]As a matter of fact, there were numerous different chains of command getting tangled up. Let me give you an example:

England, Napoleonic Wars Era. There's a Royal Governor in Halifax. He has a lot of authority in his colony. Most of what goes on there runs according to his rules (which are formulated withing broad guidelines given to him by the central government). He is the analog of an Imperial duke.

In London we have the Postmaster General. He is a government bureaucrat, the analog of a minister on Capital (or maybe a department head on Capital). He decides to institute a packet service between England and Halifax. He contracts with a private shipowner to carry mail back and forth to Halifax. He also appoints a postmaster to manage the mail in Halifax.

Does the Governor of Halifax has the authority to interfere with the mail packet once it is in Halifax harbour? Say he desperately needs to send a message to Jamaica, can he commandeer the mail packet? No, he cannot. In fact, he is obliged to help the packet any way he can if it gets into trouble.

And can the govenor tell the Postmaster General that he prefers to hire a local ship to carry the mail between his colony and London, dammit, and the PG can go pee up a rope? No, he can't. Can he fire the Halifax Postmaster (the postmaster of his colony, dammit!) and appoint his cousin in his stead? No, he can't.

But what happens if the Halifax postmaster is caught spying for the Americans? Can the governor arrest him, try him, and hang him? Yes he can.
Can he appoint one of his cronies to run the post office temporarily? Yes he can. Permanently? No. Only until the PG appoints a successor.

Get it? _Parallel_ lines of authority getting tangled up with each other.

Likewise, the Admiralty appointed the admiral that is stationed in Halifax, decided what ships he got, and from time to time sent him orders that would supercede those of the governor if they happened to conflict. But within the framework of the Admiral's orders, he was expected to assist the Governor to the fullest extend of his command.

The picture you have of a single chain of command just isn't historically true. And guess what? Messed-up chains of command did cause some spectacular SNAFUs from time to time, but the British Empire somehow managed to survive them.


Hans

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by rancke:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
Corridor also has the 213th fleet in Subsector J. Bringing the total in that case to 21.

But Subsector F only has one regular fleet, the 59th. So it's 'only' 20.</font>[/QUOTE]So it does. I guess it is time for new glasses.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />BTW the "Named Fleets" are generally, though it does state clearly not always, named for the Sector. The numbered fleets each belong to a named fleet. Are you saying that there are two named fleets in Corridor sector?

Yep, and apparently they're both named Corridor fleet. The relevant quote is from p. 27 of Rebellion Sourcebook:

"The Imperial Corridor Fleet (appropriately stationed in Corridor sector) is composed of the Imperial 16th, 27th, 41st, and 70th Fleets."

Obviously the author got mixed up somehow.

</font>[/QUOTE]I hate it when that happens.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />As for chains of command. Miliatry chains of command branch from the top down. There can be no branching going from bottom to top. That way quickly leads to problems. When dealing with a military those can be very serious problems.

Think of the subsector dukes as hereditary governors. If you look at how the British organized their colonies, you'll find all sorts of special circumstances. True, often the governor had a military commision included in the appointment, but not always. Even if he didn't have a commision he had the authority to 'request' the admiral stationed there to go root out those pirates or assign a ship to patrol that strait or provide an escort for a convoy. I don't know if that counts as being in the chain of command, but it would be a remarkably stupid admiral who refused such a request, so the difference would be purely technical.

The thing is, even when the governor had a military commision too, the local admiral was still under dual lines of authority. The governor could request him to perform tasks within his 'area of operation', but he couldn't order him to, say, transfer a ship to another station. The Admiralty, OTOH, could order him to detach ships.

Unity of command is an admirable concept, but divided command is not as inconceivable as you think.

For example, in the United States, the Chain of command goes from the President, to the Secretary of Defense (Both, by Constitution, Civilians), to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (General or Admiral), to the Chief of Staff of the various branches, (Again General or Admiral. One each for Army, Navy and Airforce.) then down the chain of command through various commands, all the way down to the individual, Soldier, Sailor, Marine or Airman.

Are you saying that an Ambassador cannot tell the officer in charge of the Embassy guards what to do? (Note that I didn't say 'give him an order')

While there is a Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of the Air Force, they advise the Secretary of Defense and can occasionally speak for him/her, they are not actually in the chain of command.

So when the Secretary of the Navy wants an admiral to do something, he invariable has to ask the Secretary of Defense to order the admiral to do it? He cannot speak directly to the admiral?</font>[/QUOTE]I didn't say that a British Govenor or an Ambassador couldn't make suggestions. And usually the Commander of the Marine Guard Force's Orders, would include a line like "assist the Ambassador to the best of your capability and without violating the ROE." I am sure the Admirals assigned to colonies had similar orders. The SecNav could talk to an Admiral but couldn't technically issue orders to said Admiral. Of course in all of the above cases if you displease the person giving those suggestions your career would be likely to go down in flames. Provided that the person making the suggestion has any pull with the Military High Command. In the SecNavs case that is probably a certainty. In other cases though it would epend on who you were not listening to. In the case where the CG of the Marine Corps, personally served as commander of the guard of an embassy and the Ambassador had pissed the General off then the Marine Commander might get a rather nice assignment out of it. You may say that there is no technical difference. Actually there is a very serious technical difference. If you ignore a suggestion of a Civilian in those cases you will, at worst, ride your career down in flames. If it is an Order that you are disobeying, then Court Martial, Jail Time and/or dishonorable discharge is the likely route.

The only role that the Dukes could play, unless you have Ducal Navies/Fleets, is in an advisory role to the Emperor and, if the Emperor allows it pass his orders to the local chain of command.

I disagree. Think of the Governor-General of India. He was authorized by Parliament to raise local troops, but he was also able to issue commands to those elements of the King's Army that were stationed in India (Or rather, he could ask the Captain-General to give the orders). Several Governors-General were their own Captains-General, though. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Which is exactly what I am proposing. That the Colonial Fleets/Navies (difference between Fleet and Navy in this case being terminology and size, mostly political.) are locally raised and controlled and under the control of the local Civilian Authority, but the Imperial Navy can only be requested, advised or asked by the local civilian authority.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I can see where the Dukes would be like the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Airforce.

Wrong analogy. They wouldn't be the equivalent of presidential/royal advisors, because they wouldn't be able to advise in a timely fashion. They are the equivalent of governors because the Emperor cannot transmit orders to their territories in a timely fashion.

but they wouldn't have direct control or authority over the Commands in their Duchy. The Chain of Command Chart in The Rebellion Sourcebook reflects that. It lists them as "Nobel Supervision."

Or as I like to call it 'Civilian oversight'. I don't mind assuming that Norris' naval authority in the FFW boardgame is a mistake, but I do think that a subsector governor would have some influence on what happens in his duchy.

Otherwise the orders from the Admirals above you are just that, orders and no matter how much the Duke, may or may not like those orders the Duke's opinion can't change those orders. The Duke might have enough political pull to have you cashiered or end your career, or might be able to have you transferred. However violating your actual orders could have much more dire consequences.

"Technically, only higher ranking naval officers can give orders; as a practical matter, nobles insinuate themselves into the channels of command. A good admiral knows when to follow which orders, and how to gracefully avoid the orders he shouldn't follow." [RS, p. 27]

In other words, there are times when an admiral can follow the orders of someone who is not technically in the chain of command without getting into trouble.

Basically I think the situation in the Imperium is simply a lot less clear-cut than in a modern 21st Century democracy.


Hans </font>[/QUOTE]I agree. But it shouldn't be as big a potential nightmare as others are stating. Where everyone and their brother can order a Taskforce around and frag up the defenses of an entire Sector. Even if unwittingly. (Or especially if unwittingly.)
They are big fish in little ponds so give them each their own boats but make them leave the stuff in the Ocean alone.

There are too many Nobles around the Imperium to give them all this much power. Even just giving it to 8-16 Dukes per sector, is too many.

 

[rancke]

Bhoins, don't you think it would be a good idea to trim your quotes a bit?

Originally posted by Bhoins:
...You may say that there is no technical difference. Actually there is a very serious technical difference. If you ignore a suggestion of a Civilian in those cases you will, at worst, ride your career down in flames. If it is an Order that you are disobeying, then Court Martial, Jail Time and/or dishonorable discharge is the likely route.

But you are unconciously assuming that Imperial military justice is identical to that of the US. I don't think that is a safe assumption. This is a state where you can be prosecuted for violating laws that aren't even written down (The Imperial Laws of War).

And I've just quoted you a bit of canon that specifically states that while technically (there's that word again only higher-ranking naval officers can give orders, in practice some nobles do insinuate themselves into the chain of command. We're not even talking about orders from the proper civilian authority to the armed forces of the land, we're talking about unauthorized snooty noblemen ordering military units about without any real authority.


Hans

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
But it shouldn't be as big a potential nightmare as others are stating. Where everyone and their brother can order a Taskforce around and frag up the defenses of an entire Sector.

Well, I think there are two different kinds of Imperial High Nobles: The dukes and everybody else. The duke have the authority to order IN forces about in certain limited ways that I'm too tired to list, so let me just say that they're analogous to the powers of an old European governor. The rest do not have any day to day authority.

All these high nobles, from dukes down to barons, have the authority to assume extraordinary command of IN forces in an emergency, the Imperial Mandate. This authority is limited by the extent of their demesnes and by the authority of high-ranking nobles. But the real limitation on the exercise of the Imperial Mandate is an automatic and unavoidable invitation to visit Capital and explain to the Emperor just why it was so all-fired necessary to use it.


Hans

 

[BetterThanLife]

Rancke,
The thing about military chain of command, in older history is more convulted but as things change it gets more streamlined. Both through history lessons learned and technology. The Technological changes may backslide because of the communication lags but the historical lessons learned from not having clear chains of command would not be lost on the future. Clear streamlined chains of command are important in the construction and operation of military forces. (And even if they had to be relearned, there has been plenty of time to relearn them.

)

While I have lived with US Military Justice, there doesn't seem too much difference between Current Military Justice and other past or current military justice. Further Imperium military ranks and (aside from this little discussion) organization and structure appears at, least on the surface, close to modern US Military organization, rank and structure. So why shouldn't Military Justice be similar?

 

[mike wightman]

But the noble system, which trumps the military, doesn't have a US paradigm to work from.
Chain of command is all well and good, but isn't much use if you are months away from the authority needed to utilize it.
Hence the need for nobles acting with the Imperial Mandate to authorise the use of the military.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I agree, Sigg. Also, Bhoins, I think you overestimate the power of "Lessons Learned". There are the innovators, yelling about "fighting the last war", but planning for a war that will never happen. Then there are the traditionalists, who are resisting all change (and really are "fighting the last war").

Given what we see in the 3I (OTU), I don't think human nature has changed any in 15000 years.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
But the noble system, which trumps the military, doesn't have a US paradigm to work from.
Chain of command is all well and good, but isn't much use if you are months away from the authority needed to utilize it.
Hence the need for nobles acting with the Imperial Mandate to authorise the use of the military.

And when one pulls one way and another pulls another way? You have a decentralized, disorganized mess not a coheesive fighting force.

And that may not even include deployments, simply training and tactics.

As an example, Hitler, an Austrian Corporal during WWI, absolutely prohibited the development of the worlds first true Assault Rifle, because "an Infantryman needs a rifle that can hit a target at 800m." (It was developed anyway but that is another story.)

One Duke insists that the CruRons in his Subsector deploy with the Escorts on the space side of the Squadron in order to stop missiles before they get to the Squadron. Another Duke orders that CruRons in his Subsector deploy with their Escorts on the planet side of the Squadron to stop any missiles that leak through the squadron from hitting the planets.

Something as simple as that can cause a real mess.

You now have two subsectors' Crurons that have trained differently so their fighting style is completely different. Merging them together in a third Subsector to deal with an approaching battlefleet the Comodore of one CruRon can't seem to figure out why all the other CruRons Escorts are so far out of position.

"What the hell are you doing?"
"Just what you said to do, deploying in the standard defensive formation. What do you think you are doing?"

Train as you fight, because you will fight as you train.

 

[mike wightman]

I think you're missunderstanding what the role of the noble is.
Training doctrine, tactical combat, logistics, etc. are the province of the Navy.
The nobility doesn't decide operational issues, no more than the President of the USA decides current SOP for any of the US armed forces.
Most nobles won't have served to a high enough level in the Navy to be able to make such decissions (Norris was career Navy until the death of his elder brother - he was staff college trained and therefore had the potential for higher rank than Commander) and wouldn't dream of telling the Navy how to do their job.
But if an Imperial squadron is visiting a planet during peacetime, and the local Marquis or above says "we have a piracy problem, please deal with it" then the squadron commander acts on those orders. Providing he isn't under orders from a higher noble to ignore lesser commandments due to a need to complete another mission.

The nobility don't tell the Navy how to do their job, they tell them where to do it.