Commerce raiding

Relax wrote:Navy budget will be pinched. So, Vote buying is "jobs" --> Building new ships. But what gets cut? Training, Live fire exercises, Bonus pay, Maintenance, and ship upgrades. Right?

Well, we're told that the PRH's economy had a huge problem with unemployment because too many people lived on the Dole and did not want to work at all. Buying votes in the PRH wasn't about creating jobs, it was about keeping the jobless people happy. So this is worse than many of our current economies that can grow by massive boosts in infrastructure and construction projects (which can only be done so much, until you start to build bullet trains that connect Nowhereville to Northwest Nowhere).

However, even if this was a large proportion of the Havenite population (and worse in the older systems), even a small amount of working population could produce a lot. The PN did have 834 ships of the wall after all. So yes, I expect that the Harris administration did try to boost their economy with military expansion. It is, after all, the premise of the short, victorious war, in addition to the distraction to the population.

(Note: I wonder how many Google searches will find this forum starting next year if the US election next month goes the way of the Democrats...)

So, if you are deferring upgrades and maintenance what ships are MOST likely to have deffered maintenance and upgrades? An 100 year old design class that cannot stand in line of battle is what.
...
So are 50% of the BB's even available to start the war? Do they even have crews? No really? Do they? 300BB's sounds like a lot, and it is a LOT of a LOT, but we never see them until ~1910, 5 years later after war starts. Relegated to rear areas, and just worn out un upgraded junk with heaps of deferred maintenance.

One that isn't even needed for the line of battle, indeed. Those ships were needed for system command and control and should never expect to have any shots fired at them: the PRH controlled all anti-space ground defensive installations, assuming any planets still had them.

Those ships needed to be visible, not do much. Their mere presence is what kept the population in-line and prevented retaliatory raids from their former governments now in exile. From the ground, no one can tell if the ship is at full complement or if it has a skeleton crew.

I suppose the job of CO of one of those ships was very cushy for the well-connected Legislaturalist who was basically a coward. A Havenite Pavel Young, if you will - not even an Elvis Santino, who thought he could command in battle. The CO can sit in his/her cabin in luxury, having everything they need delivered to them and cozying up to InSec, while they keep the peace in the system they're in. Many COs probably spent their entire assignment without firing a single shot; others may have sent down a KEW or two. Once they've punched their ticket to the Admiralty, they get transferred back to a desk job at the Octagon in Nouveau Paris.

The PN did have a core of competent Legislaturalist officers who knew how to use their ships, but likely those were aboard the SDs and DNs and assigned to the more recently-conquered systems.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:One that isn't even needed for the line of battle, indeed. Those ships were needed for system command and control and should never expect to have any shots fired at them: the PRH controlled all anti-space ground defensive installations, assuming any planets still had them.

Those ships needed to be visible, not do much. Their mere presence is what kept the population in-line and prevented retaliatory raids from their former governments now in exile. From the ground, no one can tell if the ship is at full complement or if it has a skeleton crew.

I suppose the job of CO of one of those ships was very cushy for the well-connected Legislaturalist who was basically a coward. A Havenite Pavel Young, if you will - not even an Elvis Santino, who thought he could command in battle. The CO can sit in his/her cabin in luxury, having everything they need delivered to them and cozying up to InSec, while they keep the peace in the system they're in. Many COs probably spent their entire assignment without firing a single shot; others may have sent down a KEW or two. Once they've punched their ticket to the Admiralty, they get transferred back to a desk job at the Octagon in Nouveau Paris.

The PN did have a core of competent Legislaturalist officers who knew how to use their ships, but likely those were aboard the SDs and DNs and assigned to the more recently-conquered systems.

Eh, they're probably not that bad.

The naval conscripts aren't well trained by RMN standards, but I don't think the Republic (either under Harris or Pierre) was so short of them they'd be deploying ships with skeleton crews.

But in some ways the Triumphant-class seems a massively scaled up Broadsword-class Marine operations support cruiser -- except with a heavy enough broadside to expect to see off anything up to a (equivalent tech level) BC in short order; but designed more for internal pacification than for managing the assault of enemy planets or offensive combat.


After all, you've got a fair number of unhappy recent conquests. Any one of them might have had warships that escaped the surprise attack that took down their system, or offworld resources to fund buying new warships or hiring mercenaries for some retaliation. The BBs are being used to hold down those recent conquests, as well as defend other of your systems that might be targets for some grudge settling. And you'd want those big expensive pacification units to be competent to keep from being destroyed, and to prevent damage to the orbital elements of those system's industries -- which would damage the economies your government is trying to squeeze to fill their depleted coffers.

Disappointing your government's monetary expectations by letting said industry get wrecked is NOT going to be good for your carrier or life prospects, not under either the Harris or Pierre administrations! Fear of that should to focus most BB commanders enough to ensure their crew is reasonably competent.

Similarly you'd want the ground assault units based on the BBs to be able to quickly suppress riot and insurrection before it can wreck too much of the local industry or economy.

Jonathan_S wrote:After all, you've got a fair number of unhappy recent conquests. Any one of them might have had warships that escaped the surprise attack that took down their system, or offworld resources to fund buying new warships or hiring mercenaries for some retaliation. The BBs are being used to hold down those recent conquests, as well as defend other of your systems that might be targets for some grudge settling. And you'd want those big expensive pacification units to be competent to keep from being destroyed, and to prevent damage to the orbital elements of those system's industries -- which would damage the economies your government is trying to squeeze to fill their depleted coffers.

Another thing has just occurred to me: you don't want those Battle Squadron COs to turn into warlords, so you give them only battleships. Should any of them try to, you send an SD Battle Squadron.

The problem is they could hold that infrastructure hostage, meaning the SD flag officer's hands are tied. That would mean the BBs are seeded with InSec and later StateSec operatives to ensure loyalty. It's also possible that after the purges, the regular Navy personnel was transferred off of them to fill in the gaps in the front-line ships and they were crewed instead with new conscripts and mostly StateSec thugs.

We saw how good PNS Tepes was (not!).

The first Havenite war reminds me of Russ-Ukrain current war. IF Haven had simply gotten ALL its fleet repaired, upgraded trained for one big push to Manticore to begin with it ~probably would have been over. Same goes for the Ruskies... If they had bothered to just get their Gear together to begin with for certain everything East of Dnipro would be Russian. But no, they brought it online piecemeal. So did the Havenites.

Putin wanted a SHORT Victorious War. Abject corruption for decades of not repairing, maintaining, etc bites their arses. Will they eventually win? Maybe, but their reserves of tanks/apc/artillery is nearly empty.

Maybe send Putin SVW as a "gift". Maybe he likes space opera...gg

EDIT:
PS: Speaking of lack of maintenance from deferred funds and bad economics... USN Pearl Harbor. Or USN Spanish American so called 'war'--> read up on that hilarity of pure unadulturated hopeless "seamanship" and "gunner". Why did majority of those BB's sink at Pearl? Seals on all the hatches were bad. Bad training on the FEW seals which were ~ok as hadn't been out to sea etc. Why? Great Depression Economics. The GD was so bad the USA never had ANY tanks(not WWI hand me downs or 1 or 2 off test dummies) at beginning of the war. Did not have a single mechanized platoon let alone division or Brigade. People give the UK crap for being unprepared, at least they HAD tank designs and a production line. Ocean crossings makes great neighbor fencing. Back then the USN did have money out of any branch, but even they could not keep their seals maintaned. Was it better to have good carrier doctrine, practice, (some aircraft) than BB seals? Yes. Did they know this at the time? Maybe(I doubt it institutionally at the highest levels though).

Relax wrote:EDIT:
PS: Speaking of lack of maintenance from deferred funds and bad economics... USN Pearl Harbor. Or USN Spanish American so called 'war'--> read up on that hilarity of pure unadulturated hopeless "seamanship" and "gunner". Why did majority of those BB's sink at Pearl? Seals on all the hatches were bad. Bad training on the FEW seals which were ~ok as hadn't been out to sea etc. Why? Great Depression Economics. The GD was so bad the USA never had ANY tanks(not WWI hand me downs or 1 or 2 off test dummies) at beginning of the war. Did not have a single mechanized platoon let alone division or Brigade. People give the UK crap for being unprepared, at least they HAD tank designs and a production line. Ocean crossings makes great neighbor fencing. Back then the USN did have money out of any branch, but even they could not keep their seals maintaned. Was it better to have good carrier doctrine, practice, (some aircraft) than BB seals? Yes. Did they know this at the time? Maybe(I doubt it institutionally at the highest levels though).

I'd say the bigger USN funding stupidity was around their torpedoes -- faced with limited peacetime funding they decided to skimp on expending expensive weapons doing rigorous testing and instead spend their limited funds building up a peacetime stockpile of them.

Too bad the USN torpedoes were the Russian nesting doll of design problems. So they started the war with a somewhat larger, but still inadequate, stockpile of weapons that didn't really work -- and went into crash production (which they'd have to do either way) on the defective design and then doubled down on insisting the (barely tested) weapons must be perfect and any issues are operator error from the ignorant idiot sailors (or airmen) trying to use them.

If they'd spend money testing the crap out of the torpedoes instead they'd have started the war with fewer of them, but at least they'd be able to sink what they hit! Instead of being well into '43 before they got the issues recognized and worked out.

Jonathan_S wrote:

Relax wrote:EDIT:
PS: Speaking of lack of maintenance from deferred funds and bad economics... USN Pearl Harbor. Or USN Spanish American so called 'war'--> read up on that hilarity of pure unadulturated hopeless "seamanship" and "gunner". Why did majority of those BB's sink at Pearl? Seals on all the hatches were bad. Bad training on the FEW seals which were ~ok as hadn't been out to sea etc. Why? Great Depression Economics. The GD was so bad the USA never had ANY tanks(not WWI hand me downs or 1 or 2 off test dummies) at beginning of the war. Did not have a single mechanized platoon let alone division or Brigade. People give the UK crap for being unprepared, at least they HAD tank designs and a production line. Ocean crossings makes great neighbor fencing. Back then the USN did have money out of any branch, but even they could not keep their seals maintaned. Was it better to have good carrier doctrine, practice, (some aircraft) than BB seals? Yes. Did they know this at the time? Maybe(I doubt it institutionally at the highest levels though).

I'd say the bigger USN funding stupidity was around their torpedoes -- faced with limited peacetime funding they decided to skimp on expending expensive weapons doing rigorous testing and instead spend their limited funds building up a peacetime stockpile of them.

Too bad the USN torpedoes were the Russian nesting doll of design problems. So they started the war with a somewhat larger, but still inadequate, stockpile of weapons that didn't really work -- and went into crash production (which they'd have to do either way) on the defective design and then doubled down on insisting the (barely tested) weapons must be perfect and any issues are operator error from the ignorant idiot sailors (or airmen) trying to use them.

If they'd spend money testing the crap out of the torpedoes instead they'd have started the war with fewer of them, but at least they'd be able to sink what they hit! Instead of being well into '43 before they got the issues recognized and worked out.

Ah yes, the triple M14 USN torpedo design epic FAILURE saga any one of which stops it from detonating. Pure bureaucratic CYA genius in action!!!

tlb wrote:So, you do not think that Haven was trying to recapture the most valuable systems from Manticore? Isn't the push to capture Trevor's Star when Manticore had the edge in missiles pods? So Haven moves to retake and faces an Alpha launch before the Manticore retreat. Isn't that a losing tactic, even with BB's? The systems may have been valuable to Haven, but that does not mean that they are equally valuable to Manticore.

PS: I think the cold node surprise only involved incompetent commanders.

By that logic Haven should never go on the offensive because they could potentially face an alpha launch...

Manticore would have the edge in missiles whether the RHN uses SD's only or SD's and DN's or SD's, DN's and BB's. Using the BB's doesn't weaken the Havenite position at all, instead it adds 370 platforms that can be used in combat.

tlb wrote:It was a single battle and I do not know if they used all ammunition. Also Tourville lost two thirds of his fleet, so I would agree that it was "pretty risky".

That's because he had "just enough" to win against the forces he knew about, this seems to be a theme for the RHN throughout the series. At the start of both the first and second war the RHN had the numerical and firepower advantage and could have ended the war in the initial phases of the war, instead both times they use an inadequate portion of their forces and fail to accomplish their mission.

tlb wrote:So, you do not think that Haven was trying to recapture the most valuable systems from Manticore? Isn't the push to capture Trevor's Star when Manticore had the edge in missiles pods? So Haven moves to retake and faces an Alpha launch before the Manticore retreat. Isn't that a losing tactic, even with BB's? The systems may have been valuable to Haven, but that does not mean that they are equally valuable to Manticore.

Sigs wrote:By that logic Haven should never go on the offensive because they could potentially face an alpha launch...

Manticore would have the edge in missiles whether the RHN uses SD's only or SD's and DN's or SD's, DN's and BB's. Using the BB's doesn't weaken the Havenite position at all, instead it adds 370 platforms that can be used in combat.

If there is a major disadvantage because Manticore can launch Alpha strikes using their pods, which Haven cannot equal; then Haven should be more cautious, until they have similar pods. Adding more targets when being overwhelmed by a massive missile strike, does not seem like winning strategy; even if Manticore is also losing ships.

tlb wrote:If your only point is that they must have had a fleet train, I expect you are correct for that time in the war. That would have not been true in the beginning, which goes to explain why they did not do much commerce raiding in Silesia then.

.

They MUST have a fleet train... no fleet train means no offensive operations.

Haven launches an offensive and captures a system, the fleet train comes in after the battle and the units are rearmed, refuelled and topped up on consumables and spares. Then repair ships do whatever repairs are necessary to allow damaged ships to make their way home.

If they have no fleet then after a long battle where they have exhausted their ammunition and suffered battle damage they would have to retreat to the nearest base even when victorious to rearm and refuel oh and they abandon any damaged ships in the system they conquered because their repair facilities might as well be in a different dimension for any ships that can't make it into hyper.


Imagine how ridiculous it would be to travel 30LY to conquer a system and then retreat 30LY to rearm and refuel while scuttling perfectly repairable wallers only to to travel 30LY back to the system to find the RMN occupying the system again and have to do this all over again all because you don't have the fleet train to rearm, refuel, top up your consumables and repair your damaged ships after a battle.