

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jonathan_S, tlb and 32 guests
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
n7axw
Posts: 5997
|
Wow. Has this discussion ever been a case of 20-40 hindsight. The only thing that Manticore could have done to anticipate Haven's next move was on the basis of past behavior. Based on that there was no reason to anticipate Beatrice.
IIRC, the Queen's temper was the real problem. Had she continued to Torch instead of blowing her stack in the aftermath of the assassination attempt on Berry, things could probably have been worked through, especially with cats present... I've always wondered how much authority the monarch really has. It seems to vary from monarch to monarch. Even with Elizabeth, it has varied. When High Ridge and Janacek were running things, it seemed pretty low. But with William Alexander in charge, it is obviously much greater. She really didn't have to accept High Ridge as PM... I wonder if Roger would have been willing to refuse the conservatives choice of PM. What are the legal parameters of the monarchs job? One other thing... given the concept of civilian control of the military, it seems obvious to me that the First Lord, the PM, and apparently the Queen have their role to play... which also seems to vary with the personalities involved. All I know is that I don't have the answers.. Don - When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
|
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
kzt
Posts: 11360
|
The monarchy has a LOT of power. Not just theoretical power like in the UK.
|
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Galactic Sapper
Posts: 524
|
What you've continued to ignore: Sanskrit was approved BEFORE the ceasefire, through the correct admiralty channels. They were always planning to uncork Apollo ahead of full deployment. It wasn't just the Queen popping her top. It wasn't just White Haven suggesting a operation. Caparelli and Givens were already on board; the allies were already on board. |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
kzt
Posts: 11360
|
The Queen is totally able to order the RMN to do something. The RM in the name is literal. The monarch is the actual commander in chief of the military. Not the symbolic commander, the actual commander and can tell them exactly what to do and can fire or appoint people as needed to get that done.
It might be unwise, but it's totally something she can do. |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
ThinksMarkedly
Posts: 4729
|
I was assuming a very rushed working up time, under wartime conditions. Swapping out a crew from an older SD or SD(P) for the new ship. For an attack at Haven, most of those ships would be firing from a hundred million km away and surrounded by hordes of LACs, with coordinated fire control from the flagship. It would be an acceptable risk. This argument also works against me: if the ships would have been rushed during the war, they may not have been after BoMa did happen. The war was effectively won, there was no longer the need to take risky shortcuts. On the other hand, your explanation of the work up time in the scale you're saying could help explain the discrepancy between when we know the yards cleared (Oct/Nov 1921) and the fact that they weren't available for Sanskrit in July. |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
ThinksMarkedly
Posts: 4729
|
And I'm arguing that however inappropriate that discussion was, it's of no consequence. The Space Lords did agree with the course of action, after all.
I need to reread House of Steel now to see how it describes the roles of First Lord and First Space Lord. To me, it has always sounded like the First Lord was the civilian authority over the military, the direct representative of the Monarch. Unfortunately, the wiki is short on details. Anyway, here's problem in your argument:
First to all, I disagree on multiple levels that the Queen could and would have committed to unilateral action like that. This is exactly what she reproached the High Ridge administration for, so she'd have been very careful to consult with the allies. In a moment of anger, she may have said to cut orders without consulting, but her subordinates would have conferred with their counterparts anyway. Any actions of an Allied Fleet would have to be approved by the Joint Chief and the RMN would definitely not have held sole control like you described above. Second, if she can order the First Lord to have orders cut, what does it say about the First Lord's ability to command the Admiralty? That makes it sound like the First Lord did speak with the Queen's voice.
I agree you can let the enemy decide when to attack when it's immaterial where he will attack. The problem is that it was very much material where he would attack. The Alliance had much shallower depth than Haven, so almost any conceivable attack would have hurt. Gobi had hurt by attacking Zanzibar. Any escalation of that would have hurt more. The rest of your argument is very much correct, but I continue to disagree that it applies.
This is dangerously mixing facts and assumptions/conclusions. Theisman's actions before the summit only showed what he did, not what he was prepared to do or would do later. The latter is a conclusion, an extrapolation. With wrong assumptions and input, you get incorrect conclusions. Garbage in, garbage out. And I'm saying that did happen. Fact 1) the purpose of Cutworm was to keep the RHN from massing for an attack. Fact 2) the RHN did not mass for an attack. Conclusion: Cutworm was the reason RHN did not mass for an attack. We know that's an incorrect conclusion, or at leat partially so. But it's completely believable that the RMN had arrived to that conclusion and believed it to be correct. If you continue with that conclusion, then you have to continue with operations to keep the RHN from massing for an attack. Doing nothing wasn't an option and I've argued that continuing with the same operations after the RHN had demonstrated they could trap Eighth Fleet was suicide.
And why the hell would Theisman wait for for the window of vulnerability to close? He's not a cat playing with a trapped mouse. He knew his estimates from NavInt could be off, so he wouldn't have waited too long. He was particularly worried about the 120 Andermani SD(P)s that were MIA. More importantly, why would he wait for Hemphill to come up with a Horrible Surprise? The RMN had proven time and again it could and would innovate. He had no way of knowing there was something in Sonja's bag of surprises, but he could not bet his nation on it being empty. Finally, this is not about what Theisman would actually do, it's about what the Alliance analysts thought he would do.
That is my point: the moment he made up his mind that the window of vulnerability was closing, he would have gone for the kill. The fact that Operation Beatrice was even on the table in May 1921 shows that he was thinking that. The fact that it was one of the two (among others) that he briefed Prichart on shows that it was becoming very relevant to him. In an universe absent of crystal balls, the Alliance planners needed to be very wary of that.
I'm not forgetting that. I'm merely pointing out that the decisions made by the Alliance were logical at the time. I completely understand that if they had held Apollo back but gone for a stronger Solon-like attack, Theisman would have activated Camille instead of Beatrice, which would have made the Battle of Manticore far worse for the RHN (like you described). But they had to account for another possibility: that resuming the exact same tactics and not revealing a new missile system that could be used for defence would have convinced Theisman that attacking was still doable. There's value in deceiving your enemy into thinking your have more capability than you actually do. Doing nothing could convince Theisman of the same even more surely.
They might have thought it was likely, but you can't count on that. That's no way to conduct a war. That was my argument above. An attack on Yeltsin would be nearly as bad as Manticore, though. And as far as tertiary targets go, there weren't any of relevance. Zanzibar was already a secondary target, of far higher value than Basilisk, especially after Giscard trashed everything in it in 1913.
Yes, running down the clock would have been preferable. But doing nothing or doing ineffective attacks could have convinced Theisman that the Alliance had nothing further. At this point in time, the RHN is still growing faster than the Alliance, adding more firepower faster, but the tipping point was close. Everyone knew this. The whole point of the escalation was to keep Theisman from attacking before the clock ran out. Which, incidentally, is exactly what Theisman thought he was doing! If they had something else to keep him distracted with, then indeed they would have used it. There wasn't. (cutting the discussion about ship numbers, since the data we have seems to be inconsistent or, worse, contradictory) |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
munroburton
Posts: 2379
|
In addition to the other replies, the Manticoran political situation has changed radically in several ways since Cromarty died. In no particular order: 1) San Martin was admitted and their peers likely reinforced the Centrist and Crown Loyalist parties more than they weakened them. 2) The SKM became the SEM, with a new Imperial parliament. Although Talbott's representation is initially reduced, it contributes towards the dilution of the traditional Manticoran opposition. 3) The Liberal party split into the Montague and New Kiev factions. The Conservatives also have new leadership. 4) The power to initiate budgets moved from the Lords to the Commons. This is a big one, because a prime minister who commanded a majority of the Lords in theory held that power. No longer. The combination of those means the premiership is not as powerful as it once was and that Elizabeth probably has two or three alternative candidates she could appoint, who in turn would be able to form the necessary coalitions in both Houses. This is probably temporary. Eventually, the Commons and its elected politicians should figure out how to take effective control of the government regardless of the premiership's occupant. Money is power. |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Star Knight
Posts: 843
|
@Galactic Sapper
I’m not ignoring anything. The original Sanskrit is just not very relevant to the discussion about the renewal of Sanskrit. But a couple of points: 1) Yes, they always planned to test Apollo during Sanskrit. There’s a crucial different however between what they could have done originally and what they actually did when they launched Sanskrit after months of delay. Eighth Fleet simply wouldn’t have had enough Apollo capable wallers and more importantely Apollo missile pods to copy the performance of the actual operation. This means the strategic impact wouldn’t have nearly been the same. The RHN would of course have noticed some missiles behaving in odd ways and be somewhat more effective and wondered about it, but since it wouldn’t have been possible to just blow one or even two trapping forces out of space with now casualties, the strategic impact would have been neglible no matter what. 2)I’m not so much criticizing the original Sanskrit but it’s renewal after months of delay due to the summit talks. I still wouldn’t have revealed Apollo in the original Sanskrit and think this would have been an mistake, but as shown above, it would have had not real impact. My point is that the strategic picture has changed radically for Manticore from before the Summit talks to after the Summit talks collapsed. After the Summit talks Manticore was suddenly looking at an opportunity to win the war outright thanks to the emergence of Apollo and impending fleet wide rollout. And as explained numerous times by now, at least the First Lord completed failed to realize this. This radical change in strategic outlook wasn’t apparent immediately after Cutworm III when they planned Sanskrit, since the capabilities of Apollo were ill understood at the time. But after months of additional planning and more importantly, continued rollout of Apollo, they had a very good idea what revealing Apollo at Lovat would look like. They might have still underestimated it’s actual effectiveness, but they were at least eighty percent there. This simply wasn’t the case immediately after Solon. 3) I dispute the idea that even the original Sanskrit was planned through the correct admiralty channels. Or to be more precise, I don’t think it was done in a constructive decision making environment. I’ve been over this before and won’t repeat every detail again, but neither Caparelli or Givens really have any choice in the matter. White Haven is driving the agenda, not them. They were very much forced to follow his lead and enact his orders, they were not at any point during the second war able to act independently from his meddling. If you don’t agree with this admittedly pretty unique interpretation of the plot in AAC I don’t mind. I’m not here to convince you, I just want to offer an different take based on what I took from a plot designed to get from A to C no matter what. |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Star Knight
Posts: 843
|
@ThinksMarkedly
And I’m arguing the Space Lords were in no position to do anything but to agree. They lose any argument with them on one side and the First Lord, Eighth Fleets CO and the Queen on the other. Well they could have resigned. But they were too loyal for that.
You can also look at those pearls: http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... gton/298/1 http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... gton/298/1 probably more accurate for the time AAC was written
There’s zero textev for the Queen or rather the RMN needing Allied approval for operational commitments of ALLIANCE units. The interpretation from the book is clear IMO, once units are committed to an Alliance fleet formation, they are under Alliance command, that is to say RMN command in this case. If Manticore would dispatch a battle squadron to Yeltsin, those units would be under Grayson command no matter what and the Admiral in question wouldn’t consult with Manticore if the Grayson gave him an order. Furthermore, what Joint Chiefs, what counterparts? The allied counterparts of the First Lord and the Space Lords are sitting at Yeltsin and Potsdam. The Joint Chiefs aren’t a thing, this body gets set up after the alliance with Haven. Presumably because everyone was horrified once they realized how naval starategy was decided in the Star Empire, not that it did them any good ![]() I’m not sure what you’re saying with your second point. Yes, the situation was f*ked up, nobody should have given the Space Lords orders for specific operations. That was their job to present to the Crown and Government.
‘It would have hurt’ is not a relevant argument. The point is it would not have hurt in any meaningful way, could not be deterred anyway and would be irrelevant within months.
If we assume your take here is correct (and let’s do so, if only to move the discussion along), your conclusion is still wrong based on the change in strategic outlook after the summit talks. Manticore doesn’t need to keep Haven off balance anymore. They simply need to hang on for another couple of months to get Apollo deployed. Nothing Theisman could conceivably accomplish until than would matter. Also again keep in mind, the actual attack on Sanskrit was very much based not on any of those strategic considerations. It was a punitive attack ordered by the Queen and signed off on by the First Lord without consulting the Space Lords based on no strategic considerations at all.
Theisman doesn’t know the window of vulnerability is closing in the first place if you don’t reveal Apollo at Lovat. In his mind, the window of opportunity is still getting wider since they are continue to launch more wallers than Manticore does and will do so until 1922 at least. He had at least another tyear before his situation would have stopped improving. Would he have waited that long ? No probably not. He probably would have launched Beatrice in September at the earliest. Much more likely toward the end of the year. But by September it would have been too late. There is no chance in hell he would have mounted an attack on Manticore before Manticore would have had deployed Apollo System Defense pods. And there is equally no way in hell Manticore would expect anything of the sort, the entire battle plot rests on the assumption that Manticore couldn’t conceivably have known about such an attack.
This argument could be made for any time before and after Thunderbolt. And you could conceivably argue that Theisman was way too passive during the war. But that’s why you avoid tipping him off with testing a game changing weapon in a game changing manner.
No this just means unlike the Mantis is made his homework and had a worst case option rapidly available. To some extend it’s also just because Pritchart ask for it and ordered him to prepare for Beatrice. He wouldn’t have done so himself I don’ think. But the point still remains: If you expect Theisman to go for broke, you don’t give him further reason to do so until the window of vulnerability is closed. And you keep Eighth Fleet at home to fend of his attack. Not that any of this considerations are particularly relevant, since Manticore didn’t waste two brain cells thinking about any of this. The Queen ordered an punitive attack and that was it.
I’d argue Zanzibar wasn’t of any value but that’s not really relevant. The Graysons had more than a hundred podlayers in their home fleet, based on their existing fleet, construction rates and lack of Alliance commitments (why wasn’t the Protectors Own not deployed with Eighth Fleet??). One could argue the force levels at Manticore wouldn’t have been enough to take Yeltsin.
Yes, this was the whole point. And it’s entirely the wrong move since the best case for you would actually be an Havenite attack after the window of vulnerability had closed. Haven would lose the Battle of Manticore outright and just like what actually happened, Eighth Fleet would not need to fight itself to Nouveau Paris but negotiations could start as soon as they show up at Haven. I don’t understand why you have such a distaste for the defense approach. The defensive stance is almost always preferable if an offensive approach is not necessary. As was the case here. |
Top |
Re: OK KZT: What's wrong with AAC? | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
ThinksMarkedly
Posts: 4729
|
Hello Star Knight First of all, let me thank you for the awesome discussion. It's been fun so far. I'm cutting down on most of the topics I'm replying to since I think we agree on the facts, but we differ on interpretations of what happened and conclusions to take thereof. So we'll have to agree to disagree on most things. Indeed we have no textev that there was a discussion with the Allies, but there's also zero textev that there wasn't. What we do know is that the cease-fire for the summit was discussed, as unilateral negotiation with Haven was the capital sin of High Ridge, so resumption of hostilities must have been too. But the latter is my extrapolation.
I do agree with you there. But that's knowing Theisman's mind. My argument is that the Alliance planners could not count on that. And by not trying to continue to deceive Theisman that they had more firepower than they actually did, they would be inviting such an attack before they were ready. The conclusion would be incorrect, as we know, but it's entirely logical from their point of view and from the facts they had access to.
Yes, I could very much argue that! That's no way to conduct a war. Once you're in it, as he advised Pritchart before Thunderbolt, you're in it for keeps. If you lose, you could lose more than what you had when you decided to start (or resume) hostilities. What they should have done is drive straight for Manticore and tell the Queen "would you just listen to us?! Here are the terms of the surrender we're asking. You'll see they're pretty reasonable." Much like Parnell should have done. Of course, all of this would have had consequences. They were trying to clean Haven's image of the Peep legacy and it's debatable if driving straight for Manticore and demanding surrender could have helped or hampered that. This is also why the Grand Alliance "toyed" with the SLN for as long as it did: trashing the enemy can lead to revanchism.
He wouldn't have violated the chain of command any more than he "could have flown without countergrav" (from his conversation with Pritchart). But coming up with Beatrice was his and his planners' doing, not an ask by Pritchart.
No, one would not argue that because clearly Manticore couldn't take Yeltsin. ![]()
This whole discussion is based on whether the offensive approach was necessary or not. We'll have to agree to disagree. Anyway, to the new point. In your reply to @Galactic Sapper, you wrote:
There are a lot of assumptions there. First, that an attack in April/May would have inflicted such inconsiderable losses that Theisman would have overlooked it. Theisman is not stupid, as he's often demonstrated. The fact that his wallers got blown up one after the other, once targeted, is just piling on what was obvious after the attack: Apollo missiles had incredibly much better accuracy than those without. The number of pods fired was not the issue. So the RHN would have noticed the strategic shift and adapted accordingly. Now, we may argue that the circumstances before the summit were different and that the Alliance had to do it. You can say my arguments about having to deceive the RHN into thinking they had more than they actually had was true in April/May, but not true any more in June. The second point, an IMO the most important, is that no one had any way of knowing how well Apollo would perform against real targets. Simulations are good and all, even mock exercises and test firings, but until they were fired against a real Soverign of Space with a Havenite skipper commanding, the real performance was unknown. I don't think the Alliance had captured any Soveriegn of Space thus far, so they couldn't rule out some fluke of design causing it to have much better odds than against an Alliance ship. You wrote:
There's a good chance they didn't know it. I'm sure they hoped for it, but just like the MDMs 7 T-years before, how well they would actually work could only be guessed at. We're talking about driving through tens of thousands of CMs firing in your way against very powerful ships nearly as good as your own and better in some ways, controlled by a brand new FTL feedback link from 4 light-minutes away. As Shannon said, "oops". |
Top |