Thread: Ukraine

Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as directly
through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at the
same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who wanted to
graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant as
the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that it
reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a lot
more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original T2K,
but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of T2K.

With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the "quantity"
T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which died
out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate Russians,
even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also expect).

Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda Gap
scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance to
make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
decently?

Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away their
advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
ineptitude.

As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than anything
from my perspective.

- Sent from my SM-N900T
On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:

>
>
> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as directly
> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at the
> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who wanted to
> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant as
> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that it
> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a lot
> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original T2K,
> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of T2K.
>
>
>

Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different level
of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.

A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need our
help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
involved, instead of just domino-wise.

> With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the "quantity&quot;
> T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
> died
> out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate Russians,
> even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also expect).
>
> Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
> given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda Gap
> scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance to
> make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
> decently?
>
> Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
> backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away their
> advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
> ineptitude.
>
> As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than anything
> from my perspective.
>
> - Sent from my SM-N900T
> On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
>> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
>> directly
>> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at the
>> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
>> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who wanted
>> to
>> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant as
>> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that it
>> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a lot
>> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original T2K,
>> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of T2K.
>>
>>
>>
>

the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989 demolishing of the Wall. 
First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles. 
Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops, munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and perhaps more so.  Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with little/no opposition from us.  Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us.  It'd be worse for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range and you-name it.  Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft.  If the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?) fighter fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious.  More than the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had with Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..." 
If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the long view?  Americans in particular have a very short attention span both for history, and for the future.  So, what are or what have we been missing?  (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
Tim

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, "" <> wrote:

 
>
>Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
>detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
>supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
>continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different level
>of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
>not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
>
>A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
>Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
>from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
>then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need our
>help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
>involved, instead of just domino-wise.
>
>> With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the "quantity&quot;
>> T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
>> died
>> out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate Russians,
>> even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also expect).
>>
>> Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
>> given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda Gap
>> scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance to
>> make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
>> decently?
>>
>> Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
>> backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away their
>> advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
>> ineptitude.
>>
>> As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than anything
>> from my perspective.
>>
>> - Sent from my SM-N900T
>> On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
>>> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
>>> directly
>>> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at the
>>> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
>>> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who wanted
>>> to
>>> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant as
>>> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that it
>>> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a lot
>>> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original T2K,
>>> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of T2K.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question asked by US leaders...”where are the carrier’s..?”
Why a Group isn’t forward deployed to the Black Sea, particularly given the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of “Western Will”, as lead by the US, than any other action.

The challenges of such a ‘forward’ deployment are huge, as is the risk, but the consequences of action against the Group, even more so. An interesting gaming model, I’m thinking...

From: Tim O'Reilly
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:14 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine

the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989 demolishing of the Wall.
First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles.
Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops, munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and perhaps more so. Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with little/no opposition from us. Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us. It'd be worse for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range and you-name it. Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft. If the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?) fighter fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious. More than the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had with Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..."
If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the long view? Americans in particular have a very short attention span both for history, and for the future. So, what are or what have we been missing? (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
Tim

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, "" <> wrote:

Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different level
of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.

A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need our
help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
involved, instead of just domino-wise.

> With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the "quantity&quot;
> T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
> died
> out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate Russians,
> even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also expect).
>
> Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
> given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda Gap
> scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance to
> make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
> decently?
>
> Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
> backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away their
> advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
> ineptitude.
>
> As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than anything
> from my perspective.
>
> - Sent from my SM-N900T
> On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
>> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
>> directly
>> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at the
>> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
>> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who wanted
>> to
>> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant as
>> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that it
>> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a lot
>> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original T2K,
>> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of T2K.
>>
>>
>>
>

US will is a tricky (myopic) thing. Republicans veer back and forth
between "it's not our problem, pull the troops back and make them pay for
their own defense" isolationism and "we're number one, the world runs the
way we tell them to" American exceptionalism depending on who's in the
Oval Office, and Democrats do the same but on the opposite cycle,
substituting terms like "internationalism" and "paying for our problems at
home." Which is great so long as the goal is keeping your party in power,
less so if it is a longer view.

The Bear is after power, influence, relevance, the usual. And since their
leaders have the luxury of keeping themselves in power indefinitely, they
have a deeper shaping ability.

> the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some
> things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989
> demolishing of the Wall. 
> First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER
> possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles. 
> Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops,
> munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and perhaps
> more so.  Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with
> little/no opposition from us.  Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I
> expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us.  It'd be worse
> for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range and
> you-name it.  Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft. 
> If the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?)
> fighter fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
> The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious.  More than
> the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had with
> Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something
> along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..." 
> If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study
> logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the
> long view?  Americans in particular have a very short attention span both
> for history, and for the future.  So, what are or what have we been
> missing?  (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between
> Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, ""
> <> wrote:
>
>  
>>
>>Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
>>detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
>>supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
>>continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different
>> level
>>of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
>>not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
>>
>>A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
>>Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
>>from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
>>then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need our
>>help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
>>involved, instead of just domino-wise.
>>
>>> With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the
>>> "quantity&quot;
>>> T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
>>> died
>>> out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate
>>> Russians,
>>> even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also
>>> expect).
>>>
>>> Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would
>>> have
>>> given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda
>>> Gap
>>> scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance
>>> to
>>> make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
>>> decently?
>>>
>>> Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
>>> backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away
>>> their
>>> advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
>>> ineptitude.
>>>
>>> As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than
>>> anything
>>> from my perspective.
>>>
>>> - Sent from my SM-N900T
>>> On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
>>>> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
>>>> directly
>>>> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at
>>>> the
>>>> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
>>>> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who
>>>> wanted
>>>> to
>>>> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant
>>>> as
>>>> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that it
>>>> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a
>>>> lot
>>>> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original
>>>> T2K,
>>>> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of T2K.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Claude Murdoch <> wrote:

>
>
> Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question asked
> by US leaders..."where are the carrier's..?"
> Why a Group isn't forward deployed to the Black Sea, particularly given
> the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of "Western
> Will", as lead by the US, than any other action.
>

Well not really is is more about complying with our treaty obligations, as
Turkey allows a limited amount of Foreign Military ship tonnage into the
Black Sea, and for that matter Turkey and other key allies are right there
in the region, why put a CAG a risk? I would think and a Amphibious unit or
special operations unit would be more likely.

--
Evyn

Is anyone truly surprised that this event followed immediately on the Heels
of our erstwhile leaders decision to effectively mothball US forces as an
effective deterrent force? Our army to be reduced to pre WW2 levels after
the Marines and Air Force have already been downsized. And now our Navy to
be Gutted? Cut down from 600+ ships to ~300? And Obama was quoted in
conversation with Medvedev in 2012 as saying "..... I will have more
flexibility on that AFTER I am re-elected." Sort of goes hand in hand with
our missle reductions too doesn't it.
But oh well, this isn't the real forum for political debate, unless of
course, we use these real world observations and apply them to scenarios we
can play out 8-)
Reminds me of a 'high level' traveler episode I ran where
traveller political realities were the actual topics of the game. some
sessions had to stop when everyone began realizing that current events
where such fertile grounds for Imperial(ism) expansion.
Imagine a navy Baron/Knight in charge of an exploration ship encountering a
space level tech society who is expansionist in its own right. what is the
Moral Philosophy of the people vs the motivations of the leadership? in
this campaign the people were friendly, open and tolerant. The Leadership
came off that way too. but after being in system for a couple months, the
PCs began to realize that the Leaders of the system were effectively
leading the populace on for personal gain.
which lead me to a surprising revelation, the more open the civilization,
the more easily it can be 'lead'. an overwhelmed/oppressed society, is
naturally more paranoid, resentful and suspicious of all things leaders
represent.

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

There's never been a US CVBG* forward deployed or deployed to the Black
Sea, based on acceptance of interpretations of the Montreux Convention
(see, "capital ship," "tonnage," "aircraft carrier," "Black Sea vs.
Non-Black-Sea Power," etc.), as well as the fact that it would be neither
a fun nor a useful place for a non-Russian carrier to be, which is why
we've never tried to challenge the interpretation (except, perhaps, to
keep theirs stuck inside). The only carriers in there are ones that are
built there, and then the Soviets/Russians have to re-classify them to get
them out.

The real problem is when the Navy lost medium attack aviation. It is only
sheer dumb luck that precision ordnance reached the effectiveness it did
when all we had left were Hornets.

*I retain the term from the "almost 600-ship" heyday.

> Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question asked by
> US leaders...”where are the carrier’s..?”
> Why a Group isn’t forward deployed to the Black Sea, particularly given
> the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of
> “Western Will”, as lead by the US, than any other action.
>
> The challenges of such a ‘forward’ deployment are huge, as is the
> risk, but the consequences of action against the Group, even more so. An
> interesting gaming model, I’m thinking...
>
> From: Tim O'Reilly
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:14 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
>
>
>
> the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some
> things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989
> demolishing of the Wall.
> First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER
> possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles.
> Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops,
> munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and perhaps
> more so. Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with
> little/no opposition from us. Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I
> expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us. It'd be worse
> for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range and
> you-name it. Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft. If
> the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?) fighter
> fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
> The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious. More than
> the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had with
> Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something
> along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..."
> If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study
> logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the
> long view? Americans in particular have a very short attention span both
> for history, and for the future. So, what are or what have we been
> missing? (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between
> Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, ""
> <> wrote:
>
>
> Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
> detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
> supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
> continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different
> level
> of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
> not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
>
> A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
> Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
> from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
> then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need
> our
> help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
> involved, instead of just domino-wise.
>
> > With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the
> "quantity&quot;
> > T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
> > died
> > out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate
> Russians,
> > even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also
> expect).
> >
> > Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
> > given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda
> Gap
> > scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance
> to
> > make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
> > decently?
> >
> > Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
> > backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away
> their
> > advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
> > ineptitude.
> >
> > As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than
> anything
> > from my perspective.
> >
> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
> > On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
> >> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
> >> directly
> >> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at
> the
> >> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
> >> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who
> wanted
> >> to
> >> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant
> as
> >> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that
> it
> >> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a
> lot
> >> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original
> T2K,
> >> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of
> T2K.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

> But oh well, this isn't the real forum for political debate, unless of
> course, we use these real world observations and apply them to scenarios
> we can play out 8-)

Wise words, my friend. I transgressed their spirit a bit by using a couple
of capitalized nouns, with the intent of then beating a prudent
withdrawal, which I will now observe.

Navy (I see no need to specify whose, there is only one, plus the eternal
RN) never reached 600, has been below 400 since 1993, and below 300 since
2003. (Note that counting "battle force" ships is a bit of a game, but
statistics always wander around). It's money, the continued unending
spiral of dollars per pound of aircraft, ships, and lifetime costs of
personnel. There was a short story in Analog magazine when I was in high
school, something like "The Short History of World War 78." The idea is
that by then each nation can only afford one weapons system, and "world
wars" are fought out medieval champion style between each nation's sole
weapon to resolve disputes. At the time I thought it was a joke. Now I am
convinced that it is going to be true.

> Is anyone truly surprised that this event followed immediately on the
> Heels
> of our erstwhile leaders decision to effectively mothball US forces as an
> effective deterrent force? Our army to be reduced to pre WW2 levels after
> the Marines and Air Force have already been downsized. And now our Navy to
> be Gutted? Cut down from 600+ ships to ~300? And Obama was quoted in
> conversation with Medvedev in 2012 as saying "..... I will have more
> flexibility on that AFTER I am re-elected." Sort of goes hand in hand
> with
> our missle reductions too doesn't it.
> But oh well, this isn't the real forum for political debate, unless of
> course, we use these real world observations and apply them to scenarios
> we
> can play out 8-)
> Reminds me of a 'high level' traveler episode I ran where
> traveller political realities were the actual topics of the game. some
> sessions had to stop when everyone began realizing that current events
> where such fertile grounds for Imperial(ism) expansion.
> Imagine a navy Baron/Knight in charge of an exploration ship encountering
> a
> space level tech society who is expansionist in its own right. what is the
> Moral Philosophy of the people vs the motivations of the leadership? in
> this campaign the people were friendly, open and tolerant. The Leadership
> came off that way too. but after being in system for a couple months, the
> PCs began to realize that the Leaders of the system were effectively
> leading the populace on for personal gain.
> which lead me to a surprising revelation, the more open the civilization,
> the more easily it can be 'lead'. an overwhelmed/oppressed society, is
> naturally more paranoid, resentful and suspicious of all things leaders
> represent.
>
> --
> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
> for
> it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
> kids pay for it."
>

Actually, I need to clarify. When I say "never reached 600" I mean during
Lehman's "600-Ship Fleet" era. It had been above 600 before that, but not
since the Vietnam era.

>> But oh well, this isn't the real forum for political debate, unless of
>> course, we use these real world observations and apply them to scenarios
>> we can play out 8-)
>
> Wise words, my friend. I transgressed their spirit a bit by using a couple
> of capitalized nouns, with the intent of then beating a prudent
> withdrawal, which I will now observe.
>
> Navy (I see no need to specify whose, there is only one, plus the eternal
> RN) never reached 600, has been below 400 since 1993, and below 300 since
> 2003. (Note that counting "battle force" ships is a bit of a game, but
> statistics always wander around). It's money, the continued unending
> spiral of dollars per pound of aircraft, ships, and lifetime costs of
> personnel. There was a short story in Analog magazine when I was in high
> school, something like "The Short History of World War 78." The idea is
> that by then each nation can only afford one weapons system, and "world
> wars" are fought out medieval champion style between each nation's sole
> weapon to resolve disputes. At the time I thought it was a joke. Now I am
> convinced that it is going to be true.
>
>> Is anyone truly surprised that this event followed immediately on the
>> Heels
>> of our erstwhile leaders decision to effectively mothball US forces as
>> an
>> effective deterrent force? Our army to be reduced to pre WW2 levels
>> after
>> the Marines and Air Force have already been downsized. And now our Navy
>> to
>> be Gutted? Cut down from 600+ ships to ~300? And Obama was quoted in
>> conversation with Medvedev in 2012 as saying "..... I will have more
>> flexibility on that AFTER I am re-elected." Sort of goes hand in hand
>> with
>> our missle reductions too doesn't it.
>> But oh well, this isn't the real forum for political debate, unless of
>> course, we use these real world observations and apply them to scenarios
>> we
>> can play out 8-)
>> Reminds me of a 'high level' traveler episode I ran where
>> traveller political realities were the actual topics of the game. some
>> sessions had to stop when everyone began realizing that current events
>> where such fertile grounds for Imperial(ism) expansion.
>> Imagine a navy Baron/Knight in charge of an exploration ship
>> encountering
>> a
>> space level tech society who is expansionist in its own right. what is
>> the
>> Moral Philosophy of the people vs the motivations of the leadership? in
>> this campaign the people were friendly, open and tolerant. The
>> Leadership
>> came off that way too. but after being in system for a couple months,
>> the
>> PCs began to realize that the Leaders of the system were effectively
>> leading the populace on for personal gain.
>> which lead me to a surprising revelation, the more open the
>> civilization,
>> the more easily it can be 'lead'. an overwhelmed/oppressed society, is
>> naturally more paranoid, resentful and suspicious of all things leaders
>> represent.
>>
>> --
>> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
>> for
>> it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and
>> their
>> kids pay for it."
>>
>
>

That is absolutely true; the intent is to ‘challenge’ the status quo, as is being done by the ‘great red oppressor’, now that the Com Bloc is gone. Interesting, on a lot of different levels.
I’ve done my time, starring at the Bear, over a line, as well as other, ‘bears’. Wouldn’t wish it on anyone, for the end game doesn’t usually end well.

You’re correct, IRT the demise of naval medium air; the replacement, SF and long range air, has a lot of hair and logistics/politics associated w/ a deployment, but is still achievable, pending development of the required political will.

Ports well, to a ‘Virus’ scenario...”I’m SURE Virus won’t go any further, if we just give them this system...”

On a side note, I wonder if Kerry will take an umbrella with him, on his trip to Kiev...??
From:
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 5:23 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine

There's never been a US CVBG* forward deployed or deployed to the Black
Sea, based on acceptance of interpretations of the Montreux Convention
(see, "capital ship," "tonnage," "aircraft carrier," "Black Sea vs.
Non-Black-Sea Power," etc.), as well as the fact that it would be neither
a fun nor a useful place for a non-Russian carrier to be, which is why
we've never tried to challenge the interpretation (except, perhaps, to
keep theirs stuck inside). The only carriers in there are ones that are
built there, and then the Soviets/Russians have to re-classify them to get
them out.

The real problem is when the Navy lost medium attack aviation. It is only
sheer dumb luck that precision ordnance reached the effectiveness it did
when all we had left were Hornets.

*I retain the term from the "almost 600-ship" heyday.

> Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question asked by
> US leaders...”where are the carrier’s..?”
> Why a Group isn’t forward deployed to the Black Sea, particularly given
> the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of
> “Western Will”, as lead by the US, than any other action.
>
> The challenges of such a ‘forward’ deployment are huge, as is the
> risk, but the consequences of action against the Group, even more so. An
> interesting gaming model, I’m thinking...
>
> From: Tim O'Reilly
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:14 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
>
>
>
> the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some
> things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989
> demolishing of the Wall.
> First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER
> possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles.
> Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops,
> munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and perhaps
> more so. Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with
> little/no opposition from us. Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I
> expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us. It'd be worse
> for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range and
> you-name it. Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft. If
> the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?) fighter
> fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
> The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious. More than
> the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had with
> Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something
> along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..."
> If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study
> logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the
> long view? Americans in particular have a very short attention span both
> for history, and for the future. So, what are or what have we been
> missing? (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between
> Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, ""
> <> wrote:
>
>
> Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
> detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
> supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
> continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different
> level
> of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
> not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
>
> A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
> Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
> from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
> then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need
> our
> help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
> involved, instead of just domino-wise.
>
> > With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the
> "quantity&quot;
> > T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
> > died
> > out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate
> Russians,
> > even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also
> expect).
> >
> > Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
> > given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda
> Gap
> > scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance
> to
> > make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
> > decently?
> >
> > Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
> > backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away
> their
> > advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
> > ineptitude.
> >
> > As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than
> anything
> > from my perspective.
> >
> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
> > On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
> >> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
> >> directly
> >> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at
> the
> >> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
> >> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who
> wanted
> >> to
> >> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant
> as
> >> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that
> it
> >> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a
> lot
> >> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original
> T2K,
> >> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of
> T2K.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks for the clarification, the problem with trying to
understand HISTORY, is that we sometimes get caught by surprise with
"current" events! 8-)

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

It's a shame we can't just call in Ashtabula and sort the TED's out on Earth.

;)

Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 2, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Another Carpenter <> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the clarification, the problem with trying to understand HISTORY, is that we sometimes get caught by surprise with "current" events! 8-)
>
> --
> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their kids pay for it."
>

> On a side note, I wonder if Kerry will take an umbrella with him, on his
> trip to Kiev...??

Just so long as he doesn't return with a slip of paper...

> From:
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 5:23 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
>
>
> There's never been a US CVBG* forward deployed or deployed to the Black
> Sea, based on acceptance of interpretations of the Montreux Convention
> (see, "capital ship," "tonnage," "aircraft carrier," "Black Sea vs.
> Non-Black-Sea Power," etc.), as well as the fact that it would be neither
> a fun nor a useful place for a non-Russian carrier to be, which is why
> we've never tried to challenge the interpretation (except, perhaps, to
> keep theirs stuck inside). The only carriers in there are ones that are
> built there, and then the Soviets/Russians have to re-classify them to get
> them out.
>
> The real problem is when the Navy lost medium attack aviation. It is only
> sheer dumb luck that precision ordnance reached the effectiveness it did
> when all we had left were Hornets.
>
> *I retain the term from the "almost 600-ship" heyday.
>
>> Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question asked
>> by
>> US leaders...”where are the carrier’s..?”
>> Why a Group isn’t forward deployed to the Black Sea, particularly
>> given
>> the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of
>> “Western Will”, as lead by the US, than any other action.
>>
>> The challenges of such a ‘forward’ deployment are huge, as is
>> the
>> risk, but the consequences of action against the Group, even more so. An
>> interesting gaming model, I’m thinking...
>>
>> From: Tim O'Reilly
>> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:14 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
>>
>>
>>
>> the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some
>> things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989
>> demolishing of the Wall.
>> First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER
>> possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles.
>> Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops,
>> munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and
>> perhaps
>> more so. Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with
>> little/no opposition from us. Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I
>> expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us. It'd be worse
>> for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range
>> and
>> you-name it. Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft. If
>> the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?)
>> fighter
>> fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
>> The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious. More than
>> the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had
>> with
>> Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something
>> along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..."
>> If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study
>> logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the
>> long view? Americans in particular have a very short attention span both
>> for history, and for the future. So, what are or what have we been
>> missing? (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between
>> Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, ""
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
>> detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
>> supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
>> continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different
>> level
>> of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
>> not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
>>
>> A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
>> Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
>> from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
>> then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need
>> our
>> help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
>> involved, instead of just domino-wise.
>>
>> > With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the
>> "quantity&quot;
>> > T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
>> > died
>> > out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate
>> Russians,
>> > even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also
>> expect).
>> >
>> > Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
>> > given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda
>> Gap
>> > scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance
>> to
>> > make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
>> > decently?
>> >
>> > Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
>> > backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away
>> their
>> > advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
>> > ineptitude.
>> >
>> > As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than
>> anything
>> > from my perspective.
>> >
>> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
>> > On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
>> >> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
>> >> directly
>> >> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at
>> the
>> >> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
>> >> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who
>> wanted
>> >> to
>> >> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant
>> as
>> >> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that
>> it
>> >> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a
>> lot
>> >> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original
>> T2K,
>> >> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of
>> T2K.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

Won't he require a top hat as well?

Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPhone...

> On Mar 2, 2014, at 17:59, wrote:
>
> > On a side note, I wonder if Kerry will take an umbrella with him, on his
> > trip to Kiev...??
>
> Just so long as he doesn't return with a slip of paper...
>
> > From:
> > Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 5:23 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
> >
> >
> > There's never been a US CVBG* forward deployed or deployed to the Black
> > Sea, based on acceptance of interpretations of the Montreux Convention
> > (see, "capital ship," "tonnage," "aircraft carrier," "Black Sea vs.
> > Non-Black-Sea Power," etc.), as well as the fact that it would be neither
> > a fun nor a useful place for a non-Russian carrier to be, which is why
> > we've never tried to challenge the interpretation (except, perhaps, to
> > keep theirs stuck inside). The only carriers in there are ones that are
> > built there, and then the Soviets/Russians have to re-classify them to get
> > them out.
> >
> > The real problem is when the Navy lost medium attack aviation. It is only
> > sheer dumb luck that precision ordnance reached the effectiveness it did
> > when all we had left were Hornets.
> >
> > *I retain the term from the "almost 600-ship" heyday.
> >
> >> Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question asked
> >> by
> >> US leaders...”where are the carrier’s..?”
> >> Why a Group isn’t forward deployed to the Black Sea, particularly
> >> given
> >> the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of
> >> “Western Will”, as lead by the US, than any other action.
> >>
> >> The challenges of such a ‘forward’ deployment are huge, as is
> >> the
> >> risk, but the consequences of action against the Group, even more so. An
> >> interesting gaming model, I’m thinking...
> >>
> >> From: Tim O'Reilly
> >> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:14 PM
> >> To:
> >> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have some
> >> things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the 1989
> >> demolishing of the Wall.
> >> First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a REFORGER
> >> possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles.
> >> Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles, troops,
> >> munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and
> >> perhaps
> >> more so. Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days with
> >> little/no opposition from us. Yes our subs are capable, but finite and I
> >> expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us. It'd be worse
> >> for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on range
> >> and
> >> you-name it. Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft. If
> >> the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?)
> >> fighter
> >> fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
> >> The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious. More than
> >> the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had
> >> with
> >> Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said something
> >> along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election first..."
> >> If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study
> >> logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying the
> >> long view? Americans in particular have a very short attention span both
> >> for history, and for the future. So, what are or what have we been
> >> missing? (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war between
> >> Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, ""
> >> <> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all about
> >> detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
> >> supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in a
> >> continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different
> >> level
> >> of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue would
> >> not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
> >>
> >> A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention, "ethnic
> >> Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic strip
> >> from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing, and
> >> then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they need
> >> our
> >> help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port directly
> >> involved, instead of just domino-wise.
> >>
> >> > With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the
> >> "quantity&quot;
> >> > T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80 which
> >> > died
> >> > out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate
> >> Russians,
> >> > even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also
> >> expect).
> >> >
> >> > Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would have
> >> > given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a Fulda
> >> Gap
> >> > scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air dominance
> >> to
> >> > make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
> >> > decently?
> >> >
> >> > Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western political
> >> > backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away
> >> their
> >> > advantage first, but most war games don't assume political/strategic
> >> > ineptitude.
> >> >
> >> > As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than
> >> anything
> >> > from my perspective.
> >> >
> >> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
> >> > On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
> >> >> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
> >> >> directly
> >> >> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them at
> >> the
> >> >> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation as a
> >> >> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who
> >> wanted
> >> >> to
> >> >> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly relevant
> >> as
> >> >> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough that
> >> it
> >> >> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up a
> >> lot
> >> >> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of original
> >> T2K,
> >> >> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of
> >> T2K.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

I will say this for Kerry: He is the guy going there, he is the guy
attempting to do "something," and he is the guy, on his return, who will
be vilified by 51%+ of those with pens, voices, and keyboards.

> Won't he require a top hat as well?
>
> Derek Stanley
> Sent from my iPhone...
>
>> On Mar 2, 2014, at 17:59, wrote:
>>
>> > On a side note, I wonder if Kerry will take an umbrella with him, on
>> his
>> > trip to Kiev...??
>>
>> Just so long as he doesn't return with a slip of paper...
>>
>> > From:
>> > Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 5:23 PM
>> > To:
>> > Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
>> >
>> >
>> > There's never been a US CVBG* forward deployed or deployed to the
>> Black
>> > Sea, based on acceptance of interpretations of the Montreux
>> Convention
>> > (see, "capital ship," "tonnage," "aircraft carrier," "Black Sea vs.
>> > Non-Black-Sea Power," etc.), as well as the fact that it would be
>> neither
>> > a fun nor a useful place for a non-Russian carrier to be, which is
>> why
>> > we've never tried to challenge the interpretation (except, perhaps,
>> to
>> > keep theirs stuck inside). The only carriers in there are ones that
>> are
>> > built there, and then the Soviets/Russians have to re-classify them to
>> get
>> > them out.
>> >
>> > The real problem is when the Navy lost medium attack aviation. It is
>> only
>> > sheer dumb luck that precision ordnance reached the effectiveness it
>> did
>> > when all we had left were Hornets.
>> >
>> > *I retain the term from the "almost 600-ship" heyday.
>> >
>> >> Which speaks back to the traditional (until recently..) question
>> asked
>> >> by
>> >> US leaders...”where are the carrier’s..?”
>> >> Why a Group isn’t forward deployed to the Black Sea,
>> particularly
>> >> given
>> >> the Georgia history lesson, says more about the current state of
>> >> “Western Will”, as lead by the US, than any other action.
>> >>
>> >> The challenges of such a ‘forward’ deployment are huge, as
>> is
>> >> the
>> >> risk, but the consequences of action against the Group, even more so.
>> An
>> >> interesting gaming model, I’m thinking...
>> >>
>> >> From: Tim O'Reilly
>> >> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:14 PM
>> >> To:
>> >> Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> the Abrams/Bradley/Apache are effective yes, but they have to have
>> some
>> >> things going for them which I think no longer exist from before the
>> 1989
>> >> demolishing of the Wall.
>> >> First, they are not on the ground in force there is no longer a
>> REFORGER
>> >> possibility with pre-positioned stocks and vehicles.
>> >> Second builds from that - the ability to deploy the vehicles,
>> troops,
>> >> munitions, etc. is now at least as vulnerable as it was then, and
>> >> perhaps
>> >> more so. Russian subs and long range bombers would have field days
>> with
>> >> little/no opposition from us. Yes our subs are capable, but finite
>> and I
>> >> expect Russian hunter-killers to make some inroads on us. It'd be
>> worse
>> >> for the USAF and Navy Air as they'd be stretched to the limit on
>> range
>> >> and
>> >> you-name it. Much as it pains me, we do not have front line aircraft.
>> If
>> >> the Russians have built up their what is it now 5th generation(?)
>> >> fighter
>> >> fleet, we'd be in a world of hurt.
>> >> The political situation, third, makes me even more cautious. More
>> than
>> >> the apparent incompetence of BHO, its the leaked conversation he had
>> >> with
>> >> Putin back before the last election where he reportedly said
>> something
>> >> along the lines of, "Not yet, I have to win the next election
>> first..."
>> >> If it is true that amateurs study tactics and professionals study
>> >> logistics, can something be said about politicians taking/studying
>> the
>> >> long view? Americans in particular have a very short attention span
>> both
>> >> for history, and for the future. So, what are or what have we been
>> >> missing? (Thinking back to August 2008 and the very short war
>> between
>> >> Georgia and Russia - what is the bear after this time?)
>> >> Tim
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sunday, March 2, 2014 4:04 PM, ""
>> >> <> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Where Striker II and Command Decision "fail" is that they are all
>> about
>> >> detailed equipment-centric ground engagements with air as abstract
>> >> supporting events, rather than air and ground operating together in
>> a
>> >> continuous tissue. In other words, they are a game about a different
>> >> level
>> >> of examination. A game that captured the whole operational tissue
>> would
>> >> not be about detailed vehicle design and performance.
>> >>
>> >> A few days ago when I first heard a report on Ukraine mention,
>> "ethnic
>> >> Russians," my mind immediately flashed to a National Lampoon comic
>> strip
>> >> from 1979/80. It's a picture of the Kremlin with the phone ringing,
>> and
>> >> then word bubbles: "What the? It's Afghanistan calling, and they
>> need
>> >> our
>> >> help!" Deja vu all over again, this time with a warm-water port
>> directly
>> >> involved, instead of just domino-wise.
>> >>
>> >> > With a decade of tanking, and knowing the T90 derived from the
>> >> "quantity&quot;
>> >> > T62-T72 lineage ad opposed to the "quality" lineage of T64 - T80
>> which
>> >> > died
>> >> > out due to economic reasons, I think US armor would annihilate
>> >> Russians,
>> >> > even without complete combined arms supremacy (which I would also
>> >> expect).
>> >> >
>> >> > Of course, before the Abrams/Bradley/Apache were fielded, I would
>> have
>> >> > given the edge to Warsaw Pact in retrospect, particularly in a
>> Fulda
>> >> Gap
>> >> > scenario, though NATO should have maintained naval and air
>> dominance
>> >> to
>> >> > make it really interesting. Do you think Striker II models pretty
>> >> > decently?
>> >> >
>> >> > Paranoid Soviet logistics would stink almost as bad Western
>> political
>> >> > backbone, though so interesting to see which side would throw away
>> >> their
>> >> > advantage first, but most war games don't assume
>> political/strategic
>> >> > ineptitude.
>> >> >
>> >> > As far as Ukraine, it echoes said political ineptitude more than
>> >> anything
>> >> > from my perspective.
>> >> >
>> >> > - Sent from my SM-N900T
>> >> > On Mar 2, 2014 2:36 PM, <> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Because of the way that TNE was always related to Twilight:2000,
>> >> >> indirectly through 2300, the one-time "New Traveller," as well as
>> >> >> directly
>> >> >> through the "House Rules," not to mention that we were doing them
>> at
>> >> the
>> >> >> same time, I can't help looking at the current Ukraine situation
>> as a
>> >> >> possible point of departure for the Twilight War for someone who
>> >> wanted
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> graft it onto more recent history. Obviously not as directly
>> relevant
>> >> as
>> >> >> the Yeltsin moment Frank chose for T2KV2.2, but similar enough
>> that
>> >> it
>> >> >> reminds me of it. This one would have to be dressed and fluffed up
>> a
>> >> lot
>> >> >> more, and would never approach the Reagan-era zeitgeist of
>> original
>> >> T2K,
>> >> >> but it is the first thing in a while that has even reminded me of
>> >> T2K.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Current events is surprise and mistakes in real time, History is surprise
and mistakes in past tense, with an ex post facto narrative stapled over
top of it.

> Thanks for the clarification, the problem with trying to
> understand HISTORY, is that we sometimes get caught by surprise with
> "current" events! 8-)
>
> --
> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
> for
> it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
> kids pay for it."
>

you'd have to be willing to write off (lose) the entire carrier group.  The only way in and out is the very narrow Bosporus strait and the sea of Mamara ... and the Black Sea is ... small, very small for a carrier group

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 7:13 PM, "" <> wrote:

 
>
>Current events is surprise and mistakes in real time, History is surprise
>and mistakes in past tense, with an ex post facto narrative stapled over
>top of it.
>
>> Thanks for the clarification, the problem with trying to
>> understand HISTORY, is that we sometimes get caught by surprise with
>> "current" events! 8-)
>>
>> --
>> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
>> for
>> it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
>> kids pay for it."
>>
>
>
>
>
>

actually, the entire black sea can be swept clear of ALL fleets, and the
coastal areas completely swept clean in under 1/2 hour with a single
missle. as long as said missle had a small/medium sized thermonuclear
warhead and was detonated at about the center of the black sea, at depth.
Every single thing afloat would be likely sunk or rendered useless, the
shore would be cleared inland probably for more than a few miles, except
where cliffs are prevalent.
The population loss would be devastating, as would the long term economic
and infrastructural damage.
In point of fact, in-water subsurface bursts would be the most devastating
form of a nuclear blast. Imagine the Russians 50kton monster detonated in
the middle of the Pacific ocean! It'd make the Tsunami inundation of
Indonesia in 2004 seem like kids playing in a puddle. The loss of life
would easily climb in to the 100's of millions, possibly over a billion
even, from a Tsunami that would literally wipe out the coastal regions
of five continents.
Hell, one in the Atlantic ocean at roughly the same time could wipe out in
excess of 3 billion human beings.

However, I for one, would like to believe that we as a race are a bit more
civilized than that.
But, I am sadly made aware on a daily basis that there are those in the
world whom are NOT so civilized.

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

More to the point, for exactly reasons like the one you cited, any
non-Russian CVBG in the Black Sea would be entirely preoccupied with
self-defense, and would be deployed there only as a very expensive
trip-wire, which a great many forward-deployed US forces in the Cold War
were described as anyway.

I come from the Pauline-Augustinian-Lutheran position that man is corrupt.
But every day that some of us don't do something like what you described
is a good sign. We've gone a lot longer since 1945 than a lot of people
expected.

> actually, the entire black sea can be swept clear of ALL fleets, and the
> coastal areas completely swept clean in under 1/2 hour with a single
> missle. as long as said missle had a small/medium sized thermonuclear
> warhead and was detonated at about the center of the black sea, at depth.
> Every single thing afloat would be likely sunk or rendered useless, the
> shore would be cleared inland probably for more than a few miles, except
> where cliffs are prevalent.
> The population loss would be devastating, as would the long term economic
> and infrastructural damage.
> In point of fact, in-water subsurface bursts would be the most devastating
> form of a nuclear blast. Imagine the Russians 50kton monster detonated in
> the middle of the Pacific ocean! It'd make the Tsunami inundation of
> Indonesia in 2004 seem like kids playing in a puddle. The loss of life
> would easily climb in to the 100's of millions, possibly over a billion
> even, from a Tsunami that would literally wipe out the coastal regions
> of five continents.
> Hell, one in the Atlantic ocean at roughly the same time could wipe out in
> excess of 3 billion human beings.
>
> However, I for one, would like to believe that we as a race are a bit more
> civilized than that.
> But, I am sadly made aware on a daily basis that there are those in the
> world whom are NOT so civilized.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
> for
> it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
> kids pay for it."
>

Dear Folks -

Dave wrote:
> A game that captured the whole operational tissue would not be about
detailed vehicle design and performance.

Harpoon?

Although that does have aspects of vehicle design & performance, it was
abstract enough for Larry & Tom to game out _Red Storm Rising_.

(FWIW, I thought the difference between _Striker_ and _Striker II_ was that
the latter is more like a traditional wargame, while in the former the
player only plays the commander - which, reportedly, fazed older wargaming
grognards. Unlike role-players, they were not used to the other characters
(i.e. "their" troops) operating as NPCs, with all that that entails...
----------------------------------------------------------
David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw                   
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"

I'm not sure that's practical, and it may not even be possible.

Earthquakes that spawn tsunamis do so using the surface energy (seismic waves) of the quake. The 2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami packed around 1.9×10^17 joules of surface energy. That's equivalent to around 45 Megatonnes - so we're talking about something equivalent to the Tsar Bomba.

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/3/14, Another Carpenter <> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
To:
Date: Monday, 3 March, 2014, 2:48

actually, the entire black sea
can be swept clear of ALL fleets, and the coastal areas
completely swept clean in under 1/2 hour with a single
missle. as long as said missle had a small/medium
sized thermonuclear warhead and was detonated at about the
center of the black sea, at depth. Every single thing afloat
would be likely sunk or rendered useless, the shore would be
cleared inland probably for more than a few miles, except
where cliffs are prevalent.
The population loss would be devastating, as would the
long term economic and infrastructural damage. In
point of fact, in-water subsurface bursts would be the most
devastating form of a nuclear blast. Imagine the Russians
50kton monster detonated in the middle of the Pacific ocean!
It'd make the Tsunami inundation of Indonesia in 2004
seem like kids playing in a puddle. The loss of life would
easily climb in to the 100's of millions, possibly over
a billion even, from a Tsunami that would literally wipe out
the coastal regions of five continents.
Hell, one in the Atlantic ocean at roughly the same
time could wipe out in excess of 3 billion human
beings.
However, I for one, would like to believe that we
as a race are a bit more civilized than that.
But, I am sadly made aware on a daily basis that there
are those in the world whom are NOT so
civilized.

So, from an orbital “kinetic kill” PoV, what does this look like..?

From: Eamon Watters
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:25 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine

I'm not sure that's practical, and it may not even be possible.

Earthquakes that spawn tsunamis do so using the surface energy (seismic waves) of the quake. The 2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami packed around 1.9×10^17 joules of surface energy. That's equivalent to around 45 Megatonnes - so we're talking about something equivalent to the Tsar Bomba.

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/3/14, Another Carpenter <> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
To:
Date: Monday, 3 March, 2014, 2:48

actually, the entire black sea
can be swept clear of ALL fleets, and the coastal areas
completely swept clean in under 1/2 hour with a single
missle. as long as said missle had a small/medium
sized thermonuclear warhead and was detonated at about the
center of the black sea, at depth. Every single thing afloat
would be likely sunk or rendered useless, the shore would be
cleared inland probably for more than a few miles, except
where cliffs are prevalent.
The population loss would be devastating, as would the
long term economic and infrastructural damage. In
point of fact, in-water subsurface bursts would be the most
devastating form of a nuclear blast. Imagine the Russians
50kton monster detonated in the middle of the Pacific ocean!
It'd make the Tsunami inundation of Indonesia in 2004
seem like kids playing in a puddle. The loss of life would
easily climb in to the 100's of millions, possibly over
a billion even, from a Tsunami that would literally wipe out
the coastal regions of five continents.
Hell, one in the Atlantic ocean at roughly the same
time could wipe out in excess of 3 billion human
beings.
However, I for one, would like to believe that we
as a race are a bit more civilized than that.
But, I am sadly made aware on a daily basis that there
are those in the world whom are NOT so
civilized.

I did a few rough calculations based on the meterorite over Russia last year, you're looking at a million ton rock at 18 m/s.

Wiki's page on Kinetic Bombardment gives a 0.3 x 6.1 m tungsten pole as impacting with approx 11.5 tons of TNT. Based on that you'd need just over 10,000,000,000,000,000 of such "Rods from God" to meet the surface energy level of the Tohoku Earthquake.

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/3/14, Claude Murdoch <> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
To:
Date: Monday, 3 March, 2014, 3:33


So, from an orbital “kinetic kill” PoV, what does
this look like..?
 

From: Eamon
Watters
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:25 PM
To:


Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE]
Ukraine
 
 


I'm not sure that's practical, and it may not
even be
possible.

Earthquakes that spawn tsunamis do so using the surface
energy
(seismic waves) of the quake. The 2011 Tohoku Earthquake and
Tsunami packed
around 1.9×10^17 joules of surface energy. That's
equivalent to around 45
Megatonnes - so we're talking about something equivalent
to the Tsar
Bomba.

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 3/3/14,
Another Carpenter <> wrote:

Subject: Re:
[Traveller_TNE] Ukraine
To:
Date: Monday, 3
March, 2014, 2:48

actually, the entire black sea
can be swept clear of
ALL fleets, and the coastal areas
completely swept clean in under 1/2 hour
with a single
missle. as long as said missle had a small/medium
sized
thermonuclear warhead and was detonated at about the
center of the black sea,
at depth. Every single thing afloat
would be likely sunk or rendered useless,
the shore would be
cleared inland probably for more than a few miles,
except
where cliffs are prevalent.
The population loss would be
devastating, as would the
long term economic and infrastructural damage.
In
point of fact, in-water subsurface bursts would be the most
devastating
form of a nuclear blast. Imagine the Russians
50kton monster detonated in the
middle of the Pacific ocean!
It'd make the Tsunami inundation of Indonesia in
2004
seem like kids playing in a puddle. The loss of life would
easily
climb in to the 100's of millions, possibly over
a billion even, from a
Tsunami that would literally wipe out
the coastal regions of five
continents.
Hell, one in the Atlantic ocean at roughly the same
time could
wipe out in excess of 3 billion human
beings.
However, I for one, would
like to believe that we
as a race are a bit more civilized than that.

But, I am sadly made aware on a daily basis that there
are those in the
world whom are NOT so
civilized.

Harpoon is a good point for naval-air, but when I made the remark I was
thinking of air-land, which Harpoon doesn't do.

Re: Striker and Striker II, you're right. Striker II was based on Command
Decision, which was a later evolutionary point in the process that
original Striker began. Of course, whether wargamers want to admit it or
not, their troops always have minds of their own. Frank would always say,
"Players don't like it that their troops have minds of their own? Tough!"

> Dear Folks -
>
> Dave wrote:
>> A game that captured the whole operational tissue would not be about
> detailed vehicle design and performance.
>
> Harpoon?
>
> Although that does have aspects of vehicle design & performance, it was
> abstract enough for Larry & Tom to game out _Red Storm Rising_.
>
> (FWIW, I thought the difference between _Striker_ and _Striker II_ was
> that
> the latter is more like a traditional wargame, while in the former the
> player only plays the commander - which, reportedly, fazed older wargaming
> grognards. Unlike role-players, they were not used to the other characters
> (i.e. "their" troops) operating as NPCs, with all that that entails...
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
> http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw                   
> "I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"
>
>

Dear Folks -

Dave wrote:
>I come from the Pauline-Augustinian-Lutheran position that man is corrupt.

Amen, brother.
----------------------------------------------------------
David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"

> Amen, brother.

"And also with you." :-)

They say you can tell a Lutheran watching Star Wars by whenever they say,
"The Force Be With You," the Lutherans all respond, "And also with you."

> Dear Folks -
>
> Dave wrote:
>>I come from the Pauline-Augustinian-Lutheran position that man is
>> corrupt.
>
> Amen, brother.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson ..at.. Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
> http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw
> "I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"
>
>

Thank you Eamon, that was the monster I understated, the Russian 50 megaton
stratosphere bruiser.

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

Facebook is a disease that is infecting us all. I just succumbed about two
weeks ago, and now I find myself having to resist the temptation, "hey, I
should make myself a nice wallpaper," or whatever they call that new panel
at the top.

So, while I declared on this list a while back that I don't have a FB
page, that is now untrue. However, the page is devoted to maintaining
comms with people in Allegro Dance Theater and Heart Bandits American
Eskimo Rescue. I posted pictures of my Battleship Craft ships just to mix
things up, but there is nothing on it but ballet, me in a dress, dogs, and
BC ships. Mostly dogs.

> Facebook has me ruined, I was just trying to find the "like" button for
> that last one 8-)
>
> --
> "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
> for
> it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
> kids pay for it."
>

If it weren't for my kids, I wouldn't be on it either 8-)

--
"Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for
it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
kids pay for it."

My 7 year old is ... Pissed right off that Battleship Craft is no longer supported. He's trying desperately to craft himself something capable of going toe to toe with the yamato.

His builds are all big and slow and barely above water but with more guns than you can shake a stick at, the Yamato's just got longer range than anything he can afford.

Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 2, 2014, at 9:01 PM, wrote:
>
> Facebook is a disease that is infecting us all. I just succumbed about two
> weeks ago, and now I find myself having to resist the temptation, "hey, I
> should make myself a nice wallpaper," or whatever they call that new panel
> at the top.
>
> So, while I declared on this list a while back that I don't have a FB
> page, that is now untrue. However, the page is devoted to maintaining
> comms with people in Allegro Dance Theater and Heart Bandits American
> Eskimo Rescue. I posted pictures of my Battleship Craft ships just to mix
> things up, but there is nothing on it but ballet, me in a dress, dogs, and
> BC ships. Mostly dogs.
>
> > Facebook has me ruined, I was just trying to find the "like" button for
> > that last one 8-)
> >
> > --
> > "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay
> > for
> > it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and their
> > kids pay for it."
> >
>
>

Last time I checked, you can still play it online against other players in
Game Center (a couple weeks ago). But obviously you can't download it any
more, they're not making any additions, can't make in-game purchases.

I ran a Battleship Craft "tourney" (turned out to be more demos) at Kris'
Celesticon this year, and all the kids do what yours do, they build a hull
until they run out of patience, and then start loading as many guns on it
as they can afford or until they run out of deck space while the freeboard
gets lower and lower.

> My 7 year old is ... Pissed right off that Battleship Craft is no longer
> supported. He's trying desperately to craft himself something capable of
> going toe to toe with the yamato.
>
> His builds are all big and slow and barely above water but with more guns
> than you can shake a stick at, the Yamato's just got longer range than
> anything he can afford.
>
> Derek Stanley
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Mar 2, 2014, at 9:01 PM, wrote:
>>
>> Facebook is a disease that is infecting us all. I just succumbed about
>> two
>> weeks ago, and now I find myself having to resist the temptation, "hey,
>> I
>> should make myself a nice wallpaper," or whatever they call that new
>> panel
>> at the top.
>>
>> So, while I declared on this list a while back that I don't have a FB
>> page, that is now untrue. However, the page is devoted to maintaining
>> comms with people in Allegro Dance Theater and Heart Bandits American
>> Eskimo Rescue. I posted pictures of my Battleship Craft ships just to
>> mix
>> things up, but there is nothing on it but ballet, me in a dress, dogs,
>> and
>> BC ships. Mostly dogs.
>>
>> > Facebook has me ruined, I was just trying to find the "like" button
>> for
>> > that last one 8-)
>> >
>> > --
>> > "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults
>> pay
>> > for
>> > it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and
>> their
>> > kids pay for it."
>> >
>>
>>
>

Yep, Battleship Moleculous (I have no clue where he got that name) looked like a giant arrowhead bristling with weapons.



That's his current pet project.

Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 2, 2014, at 9:57 PM, wrote:
>
> Last time I checked, you can still play it online against other players in
> Game Center (a couple weeks ago). But obviously you can't download it any
> more, they're not making any additions, can't make in-game purchases.
>
> I ran a Battleship Craft "tourney" (turned out to be more demos) at Kris'
> Celesticon this year, and all the kids do what yours do, they build a hull
> until they run out of patience, and then start loading as many guns on it
> as they can afford or until they run out of deck space while the freeboard
> gets lower and lower.
>
> > My 7 year old is ... Pissed right off that Battleship Craft is no longer
> > supported. He's trying desperately to craft himself something capable of
> > going toe to toe with the yamato.
> >
> > His builds are all big and slow and barely above water but with more guns
> > than you can shake a stick at, the Yamato's just got longer range than
> > anything he can afford.
> >
> > Derek Stanley
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> >> On Mar 2, 2014, at 9:01 PM, wrote:
> >>
> >> Facebook is a disease that is infecting us all. I just succumbed about
> >> two
> >> weeks ago, and now I find myself having to resist the temptation, "hey,
> >> I
> >> should make myself a nice wallpaper," or whatever they call that new
> >> panel
> >> at the top.
> >>
> >> So, while I declared on this list a while back that I don't have a FB
> >> page, that is now untrue. However, the page is devoted to maintaining
> >> comms with people in Allegro Dance Theater and Heart Bandits American
> >> Eskimo Rescue. I posted pictures of my Battleship Craft ships just to
> >> mix
> >> things up, but there is nothing on it but ballet, me in a dress, dogs,
> >> and
> >> BC ships. Mostly dogs.
> >>
> >> > Facebook has me ruined, I was just trying to find the "like" button
> >> for
> >> > that last one 8-)
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > "Christmas is a time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults
> >> pay
> >> > for
> >> > it. Deficits are when adults tell the government what they want and
> >> their
> >> > kids pay for it."
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>