Machine Guns in Safehold

n7axw wrote:Again, the question comes down to allocation of resourses. You have to ask not only if the proposal is worth while. This one sounds great...eventually. But is it crucial for the alliance to do something like this in the midst of a war when every effort is being made and resourses strained to get weapons in the hands of the troops? Consider...rather than having the completely modern rifles, the RSA still is using about 2/3 muzzle loaders, many of them courtesy of defeated Desnairian, Dohlaran and AOG armies on the theory that some rifle is better than no rifle. Or again, consider the shortage of ironclads at a moment when everybody's shells are blowing holes through outdated galleons. Or remember that Hanth's troops have yet to be updated to the M96's or that the limits on standing up new regiments is not manpower, but weapons availability.

So the question about how crucial it is has to be spelled out in terms of mobility. And the reality is that allied armies are already vastly more mobil and agile than their opponents, the outstanding example of which would be BGV's winter march to Five Forks.

So, at least in my view, this idea is not crucial at this time, something to be put on the back burner until more urgent needs are met, something I don't see happening in this war.

Don
-

BobG wrote:

n7axw wrote:Again, the question comes down to allocation of resourses. You have to ask not only if the proposal is worth while. This one sounds great...eventually. But is it crucial for the alliance to do something like this in the midst of a war when every effort is being made and resourses strained to get weapons in the hands of the troops? Consider...rather than having the completely modern rifles, the RSA still is using about 2/3 muzzle loaders, many of them courtesy of defeated Desnairian, Dohlaran and AOG armies on the theory that some rifle is better than no rifle. Or again, consider the shortage of ironclads at a moment when everybody's shells are blowing holes through outdated galleons. Or remember that Hanth's troops have yet to be updated to the M96's or that the limits on standing up new regiments is not manpower, but weapons availability.

So the question about how crucial it is has to be spelled out in terms of mobility. And the reality is that allied armies are already vastly more mobil and agile than their opponents, the outstanding example of which would be BGV's winter march to Five Forks.

So, at least in my view, this idea is not crucial at this time, something to be put on the back burner until more urgent needs are met, something I don't see happening in this war.

Don
-

Hi, Don

While I take your point about available resources, I will point out that in addition to logistics, traction engines could provide a significant use. Consider a traction engine with treads. In the winter, it could traverse snow and ice. Near the battlefield, it could pull heavy angle guns or missile launchers thru snow, ice, mud and such. Probably faster than dragons or snow lizards. It could also plow thru snow, leaving a path for others to follow.

-- Bob G

Annachie wrote:The point about locomotives competing with stationary plants for steam engines is accurate.
Well to the point of them will need basically the same components.

Annachie wrote:Boilers. Pistons. Fire boxes. Guages.
Not to mention everything else that would be made by the same engineers/production lines.

Heavy engineering is heavy engineering.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Louis R wrote:Gauges, maybe. None of the rest will use common tooling, and the stuff that's small enough to use the same lines is also small enough that production rates for those parts can be several x the rate for the entire machine. IOW, the only competition is for the attention of the guy scheduling the line. Assuming, that is, that production for all these devices is colocated - which I would probably consider seriously for certain types of parts but not for the full products.

Heavy-engineering lines are purpose-built for the product being manufactured - and rebuilt whenever the design changes. "steam engine" sounds like a nice generic product; they aren't. Even at this stage Howsmyn's people have probably already figured out that they don't particularly want to waste time with 'one size fits all'

JeffEngel wrote:

Louis R wrote:Gauges, maybe. None of the rest will use common tooling, and the stuff that's small enough to use the same lines is also small enough that production rates for those parts can be several x the rate for the entire machine. IOW, the only competition is for the attention of the guy scheduling the line. Assuming, that is, that production for all these devices is colocated - which I would probably consider seriously for certain types of parts but not for the full products.

Heavy-engineering lines are purpose-built for the product being manufactured - and rebuilt whenever the design changes. "steam engine" sounds like a nice generic product; they aren't. Even at this stage Howsmyn's people have probably already figured out that they don't particularly want to waste time with 'one size fits all'

Wouldn't they be tapping the same skilled labor pool at this stage? Later, of course, they'd specialize more. Now, I'd imagine they are the same guys and the same guys to train other guys. (Or gals, not that that makes a relevant difference.)

evilauthor wrote:

enutt wrote:This has been bothering me for the last two books. With the advent of cartridge-based munitions and breach loading and repeating rifles, why haven't the Charisians developed the first iterations of machine guns?

It's been discussed elsewhere, but here's a quick rundown:

1) Logistics - It's been stated that cartridge production for existing firearms is barely keeping up with demand even when Charis had yet to fight any major battles with single shot and bolt action rifles yet. There's no way cartridge production would be able to continuously supply generally deployed full auto weapons.

2) Doctrine - There's been no need for full auto weapons yet and no one outside the Inner Circle has even conceived of it yet. Even those inside the Inner Circle are still thinking in terms of individually aimed shots. And the reason they think that is...

3) They aren't needed - Historically and in Safehold, the biggest killer of massed infantry HASN'T been fully automatic weapons. It's been artillery. And Charis and her allies are lavishly equipped with artillery and mortars firing explosive shells which has been doing most of the killing and breaking of enemy held positions.