Disabling the Hahskyn-Varna Canal? (HFQ Spoilers)

Actually i was thinking of the Canal in Ottawa when I typed that comment. Gates require hinges ,if they move at all, so disabling the hinges will stop operations for a period of time.

Hellmer wrote:

n7axw wrote:It's really a pretty good question. We know that in matters of surveilence and spying, Merlin uses TF tech pretty freely. But otherwise, he exercises restraint, with a few rather notable exceptions.

Some of it is probably to avoid giving the Temple any more proof than possible that he is a demon. Sometimes he would be trying to avoid bringing the Temple's wrath down on the people in the area surrounding an act of unexplained sabatoge.

But mostly, he wants his allies to solve their problems with only an occasional hint or nudge from him...although to be fair, he has been pretty liberal with nudges and hints. But still, he usually avoids being the silver bullet for every issue that comes up which is wise because he doesn't want to be promoting dependency. That, in turn, means that his allies still face the risks of war based on the realities confronting them.

Don

-

Assuming the mechanics allowed it, I can't see the response from the Temple being of a factor. If it couldn't be disguised as a accident, natural disaster or the result of poor maintenance, I would think it could easily be made to look like the work of ICN Marines, given the close proximity of the ICN raiding force.

Regarding your other point, that line of reasoning isn't really in-character for Merlin. Letting things "play out" is one thing, but given the extraordinary inconvenience that led to this event, and the possible loss of life resulting from inaction, and the insignificant risk it posed to himself or his goals, I can't see him sitting this one out, if he had the opportunity.

From the Inquisition's point of view, there are no accidents. Somebody is always to blame. Remember Sarkyn with that powder explosion...

As for having the opportunity, he certainly could have used the skimmer to take out those locks now that he has it set up to use laser guided bombs. Or at least he could have rendered them inoperable long enough to significantly delay the screw galleys. Or he could have taken out the screw galleys themselves or, for that matter, Rohsil's entire fleet.

Merlin had the means. But he didn't do it. Why? The rational I offered in my previous post still seems to me to be cogent. I don't see Merlin offering a silver bullet, sometimes even when that puts his allies at risk...

Don

-

chickladoria wrote:Actually i was thinking of the Canal in Ottawa when I typed that comment. Gates require hinges ,if they move at all, so disabling the hinges will stop operations for a period of time.

Speaking again about the Maimi-Erie, the bottom of the wall-side timber of the door was fitted into in a socket in the stone bottom of the lock and the top was held securely with a metal lash. A relatively simple system which could be repaired temporarily by a rope or leather lash, and permanently by a blacksmith.

When the gates were closed, their chevron shape caused the water pressure against the gates to push the gates against the sidewalls, not so much the hinge points, allowing for the simple system.

The Rideau - which is the canal Chickladoria is referring to -was built the same way. Not surprising, since it's roughly contemporary with the Erie system. In fact, the couple of modern lock gates I've had a chance to look at are also hinged this way

Theemile wrote:

chickladoria wrote:Actually i was thinking of the Canal in Ottawa when I typed that comment. Gates require hinges ,if they move at all, so disabling the hinges will stop operations for a period of time.

Speaking again about the Maimi-Erie, the bottom of the wall-side timber of the door was fitted into in a socket in the stone bottom of the lock and the top was held securely with a metal lash. A relatively simple system which could be repaired temporarily by a rope or leather lash, and permanently by a blacksmith.

When the gates were closed, their chevron shape caused the water pressure against the gates to push the gates against the sidewalls, not so much the hinge points, allowing for the simple system.

Louis R wrote:The Rideau - which is the canal Chickladoria is referring to -was built the same way. Not surprising, since it's roughly contemporary with the Erie system. In fact, the couple of modern lock gates I've had a chance to look at are also hinged this way

quote="Theemile" quote="chickladoria" Actually i was thinking of the Canal in Ottawa when I typed that comment. Gates require hinges ,if they move at all, so disabling the hinges will stop operations for a period of time./quote

Speaking again about the Maimi-Erie, the bottom of the wall-side timber of the door was fitted into in a socket in the stone bottom of the lock and the top was held securely with a metal lash. A relatively simple system which could be repaired temporarily by a rope or leather lash, and permanently by a blacksmith.

When the gates were closed, their chevron shape caused the water pressure against the gates to push the gates against the sidewalls, not so much the hinge points, allowing for the simple system. /quote

the Miter gates (the proper name for that chevrom format) have worked well since being invented by Leonardo Da Vinci in the 15th Century.

The most common arrangement, usually called miter gates, was invented by Leonardo da Vinci, sometime around the late 15th century.[12When closed, a pair meet at an angle like a chevron pointing upstream and only a very small difference in water-level is necessary to squeeze the closed gates securely together.

Edited for spelling of Miter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock_(water_transport)#Gates

Louis R wrote:To answer your actual question, since everyone has ignored it:

you have to either drain the canal or disable the locks.

Well it's usually more work that either, but you can also block the canal bed with debris. There might be places where the canal was cut through cliffs where you could use explosives to fill it with rocks -- or areas where you could start a mudslide into the canal.

Depending on the depth of the canal you might even be able to create a more temporary blockage by sinking a few barges as blockships. But of course the more material you drop into the canal the longer it'll take to remove.

(Or you can plant occasional bottom miles to disrupt traffic and force minesweeping - but Charis has very good reasons not to start the Church thinking in the direction of mines or torpedoes)



But destroying locks is probably the most straightforward way to disable a canal - and the one that least relies on special terrain (elevated canal sections to blow out, or surrounding hills or cuts to blow down)

Jonathan_S wrote:(Or you can plant occasional bottom miles to disrupt traffic and force minesweeping - but Charis has very good reasons not to start the Church thinking in the direction of mines or torpedoes)

They do, but if that cat isn't out of the bag yet, it's sniffing at the opening. There are the spar torpedoes for the screw galleys on the one hand, and the fire rafts the Dohlarans used on the canals to try to slow the ironclads down. And they are very well aware of the variety of mines Charis has used on land, even if they haven't - yet - built their own. So the Church isn't lacking for naval mine ideas - it's got a whole lot of hits straddling the concept in idea-space, and in some cases those hits are things they've built and used themselves already.

Still - if you don't want to give them any new ideas at all, there would still be the possibility of various mines on the tow paths instead of inside the canals. Blow up the oxen or dragons towing a barge and it's stalled. Depending on where you do it, that may block the canal itself. Fear of that may make towing slow going, which isn't nearly as much as blocking a canal but it does reduce its utility. If a barge suddenly loses towing on one side, it may drift to the other - and in a suitably constricted channel, that may let mines placed on the inside of the canal (still above water, even) damage the barge when it hits. (Granted, that would take either a lot of mines, a lot of luck, or very specific circumstances with a lot of skill to pull off.) And a damaged barge itself becomes an obstruction.

If you can keep scout-snipers (or suitably trained and equipped dragoon raiders) in an area near the canal, they can replace mines at night, so there's no assurance that the places that were safe on the tow path yesterday still are today. And if they can transport a mortar into the area, they can do a whole lot better job converting Church barges into Allied block ships.

chickladoria wrote:Actually i was thinking of the Canal in Ottawa when I typed that comment. Gates require hinges ,if they move at all, so disabling the hinges will stop operations for a period of time.

RFC already described destroying a set of locks like the Rideau's steps down to the river in Ottawa in the Great Canal Raid. Blow up a hole at the top on the side for the water to undermine and collapse the walls by erosion.

Always better to let Nature do the heavy lifting if at all possible when destroying things as she has far more power than any amount of explosives you care to name. Note implosions use this same principle: No one blows a building up unless you shell/bomb it for a while and still parts often stand. Far more economical is to undermine it's support structure and let Nature take its course.

n7axw wrote:As for having the opportunity, he certainly could have used the skimmer to take out those locks now that he has it set up to use laser guided bombs. Or at least he could have rendered them inoperable long enough to significantly delay the screw galleys. Or he could have taken out the screw galleys themselves or, for that matter, Rohsil's entire fleet.

Merlin had the means. But he didn't do it. Why? The rational I offered in my previous post still seems to me to be cogent. I don't see Merlin offering a silver bullet, sometimes even when that puts his allies at risk...

Don

-

No. He can't drop laser-guided bombs on land--that will leave bits of the guidance unit that might be found. He can only hit targets at sea.

Loren Pechtel wrote:
No. He can't drop laser-guided bombs on land--that will leave bits of the guidance unit that might be found. He can only hit targets at sea.

Maybe. But I would think that the guidance unit would be rather thoroughly blown up. Would there be anything left that would be comprehensible to any Safeholden who examined it? I find myself doubting that....in fact I doubt that anyone on Safehold outside the inner circle could identify and make sense of a guidance unit even if they happened across one intact.

Don

-