 |
|
 |
|
Next: Dahak series question.
|
| Author |
Message |
External

Since: Aug 26, 2003 Posts: 392
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:01 pm
Post subject: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore Archived from groups: alt>books>david-weber (more info?)
|
|
|
Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore
But first, a quick note:
=== chapter 65 index 6764 ====
Even now, no one on either side knew exactly what would happen when fleets
of pod-layers this size engaged one another. There was simply no
experiential meterstick, because no one had ever done it before. For that
matter, no battle in history had yet seen almost three hundred and fifty
superdreadnoughts of any kind engage in what could only be a fight to the
death. Over the centuries, tactical formalism had become the rule, with
indecisive battles and limited losses. That might have changed, at least in
this corner of the galaxy, but even here, most of the combatants were still
feeling their way into the changing realities of interstellar carnage.
The Battle of Manticore would be something new and unique in the annals of
deep-space combat. Everyone in both fleets knew that.
But that was all they knew as the missiles began to launch.
====end quote ================
Note well, "still feeling their way into the changing realities of
interstellar carnage." I'll get back to this.
Heck it starts with this. Admiral Tourville (and the rest of the
professional Havenite Navy) knew a new era in warfare had arrived back when
8th fleet rolled over the Navy of the People's Republic of Haven, before
the coup and restoration. And Admiral Forakker had done wonders in
developing the tactics and doctrines to use Haven's tech to its best
result. Paralleling a similar situation in Earth history -pre-Diaspora,
shifts in technologies had also accompanied shifts in doctrine.
A brief history note: pretty much up until the French Revolution, war
was something conducted by Professionals at the Behest of the King (overly
simplifying cause I do not want to type everything). But with the French
revolution, well,the trained professionals seem to largely have Monarchist
Tendencies, so the French Republic solved that problem by introducing
political commissioners to keep an eye on the few that remained, and went
to the "Levee en' masse", essentially 'nationalizing' the war by
nationalizing the population and resources. It became no longer a case of
The King lost a battle, but "we have lost". This was the first serious
development of nationalism, where every one of Us was called to Defend Our
Way of Life, and our enemy was no longer Them, as an abstraction, but Them
as a Nation. It was no longer a case of King Louise against King George,
but ordinary Frenchmen and Englishmen could travel freely, as long as they
stayed out of the battle grounds; but of France against England, Frenchmen
against Englishmen. Bad things became even more identified with Them
(French/English Leave, and so on.) War changed. Napoleon was the first to
capitalize on this, but not the last. Unfortunately, his tactics worked
well with the technology he had, but when that changed (the shift from
smoothbore to rifled musket), it was a blood bath. E.g the American Civil
War was fought according to Napoleon, but with different weapons. Similar
lags occurred with the introduction of other technologies: the metal
cartridge, the semi-automatic rifle & machine gun, quick firing artillery,
air support, etc, etc. First to grasp that the technology allowed for a
complete change of tactics often had tremendous initial success. But that
is going to remain outside the scope of this post.
So here we are, about two thousand three hundred and some odd years
later (give or take) and new technologies are being deployed in a new way,
on both sides. Admiral Tourville expected to get knocked about a bit on
his way to victory, but even he was a bit surprised when the butcher's bill
for the first course was presented. Intellectually he had known, but his
guts hadn't yet caught on.
Then the Salamander pops up and just flat hammers 5th fleet into scrap.
In one volley. Faster than you can say "bulldozing baby seals", 75 wallers
go "poof". And an insignificant number of missiles cruises right through
his units, right through the defenses, and demonstrates what the term "alls
fair in love and war" is all about. Doing the monster mash in waffle
stompers. "Splat!" So nice to have a compassionate enemy.
He does the only wise and moral thing he can: surrender. Save his
people, spare their lives. They came so damn close ... but close doesn't
count in this case.
Now, now that the battle is over, wrecks scooped up, bodies recovered,
prize ship distributed, medals and promotions issued, and the Royal Navy
taking precedent in every shipyard for repairs and construction, now the
'eggheads' are wondering "What do we do next?" This is more than a
rhetorical question. When the first Haven-Manticore war broke out, it was
understood that you just didn't attack the opposition's home star.
"Wouldn't be prudent", not optimal, not tactically sound. But that was
then, this is now, a 'now' when the concept of Total War has been fully
explained as not only acceptable, but actually accomplishable.
I'm sure that Admiral Theisman is seriously concerned about the day
when the Royal Manticore Navy will have the numbers to free up Eighth Fleet
from guarding the Junction and Manticore, and pay a return visit. Because
you know that he knows, just as we know, that her Grace is a stone killer
when she needs to be. And unless Sharon is able to pull several rabbits
out of the hat to counteract Keyhole, it will not be pretty. Quantity has
it's own quality, but ... the safest place to be in that conflict will be
on the surface of another planet, in another system. "Da sky is falling!"
Me thinks the only saving hope for Haven is to get hard proof of the
Mesa/Manpower interference, spill the beans on the forging of Manticore
Diplomatic correspondence and propose that the Star Kingdom and the
Republic pound on Mesa like blacksmiths working out issues.
Good luck on that.
tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough! >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <mamm425oflcg8hotm821sm65saie163amt DeleteThis @4ax.com>,
phamp DeleteThis @mindspring.com says...
(excellent article!)
> Me thinks the only saving hope for Haven is to get hard proof of the
> Mesa/Manpower interference, spill the beans on the forging of Manticore
> Diplomatic correspondence and propose that the Star Kingdom and the
> Republic pound on Mesa like blacksmiths working out issues.
I agree! Although I prefer the expression "beat Mesa like a rented
mule"  >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 18, 2004 Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:23 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
pyotr filipivich wrote in message ...
>Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore
>
> So here we are, about two thousand three hundred and some odd years
>later (give or take) and new technologies are being deployed in a new way,
>on both sides. Admiral Tourville expected to get knocked about a bit on
>his way to victory, but even he was a bit surprised when the butcher's bill
>for the first course was presented. Intellectually he had known, but his
>guts hadn't yet caught on.
>
> Then the Salamander pops up and just flat hammers 5th fleet into scrap.
>In one volley. Faster than you can say "bulldozing baby seals", 75 wallers
>go "poof". And an insignificant number of missiles cruises right through
>his units, right through the defenses, and demonstrates what the term "alls
>fair in love and war" is all about. Doing the monster mash in waffle
>stompers. "Splat!" So nice to have a compassionate enemy.
>
> He does the only wise and moral thing he can: surrender. Save his
>people, spare their lives. They came so damn close ... but close doesn't
>count in this case.
>
> Now, now that the battle is over, wrecks scooped up, bodies recovered,
>prize ship distributed, medals and promotions issued, and the Royal Navy
>taking precedent in every shipyard for repairs and construction, now the
>'eggheads' are wondering "What do we do next?" This is more than a
>rhetorical question. When the first Haven-Manticore war broke out, it was
>understood that you just didn't attack the opposition's home star.
>"Wouldn't be prudent", not optimal, not tactically sound. But that was
>then, this is now, a 'now' when the concept of Total War has been fully
>explained as not only acceptable, but actually accomplishable.
> I'm sure that Admiral Theisman is seriously concerned about the day
>when the Royal Manticore Navy will have the numbers to free up Eighth Fleet
>from guarding the Junction and Manticore, and pay a return visit. Because
>you know that he knows, just as we know, that her Grace is a stone killer
>when she needs to be. And unless Sharon is able to pull several rabbits
>out of the hat to counteract Keyhole, it will not be pretty. Quantity has
>it's own quality, but ... the safest place to be in that conflict will be
>on the surface of another planet, in another system. "Da sky is falling!"
>
> Me thinks the only saving hope for Haven is to get hard proof of the
>Mesa/Manpower interference, spill the beans on the forging of Manticore
>Diplomatic correspondence and propose that the Star Kingdom and the
>Republic pound on Mesa like blacksmiths working out issues.
>
> Good luck on that.
>
>
pyotr, one thing that struck me when I first read the book, was that Honor's
tactics in the final battle were technically foreseeable. Maybe not
counter-able, but foreseeable. After all, in Honor's previous battle, she'd
used some of Apollo's capabilities to smash Giscard's fleet. It occurred to
me that it should have been foreseeable that in an age with multi-drive
missiles, you can have exceptional range with such missiles, when combined
with this new telemetry technology. I suspect that the only real limiting
factors with Apollo are the range of the new telemetry tech and the how many
missiles can you control in any given salvo. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:37 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <dsample-248E71.17454124042006.DeleteThis@news.giganews.com>,
dsample.DeleteThis@synapse.net says...
> Yes, the Havenites had foreseen what Apollo meant for combat. That was
> the reason they attacked the Manticoran system when they did. They
> hoped that Apollo hadn't been deployed in large enough numbers to make
> what Harrington did to them possible yet. They wanted to force an end
> to the war with a decisive victory while the old rules still applied,
> because they knew that under the new rules that Apollo made possible
> they were in deep trouble.
Agreed. They had a perfect foreshadowing of this during Operation
Buttercup. White Haven and 8th Fleet were slicing through the Peeps
like wet tissue. The Peeps got very lucky that the Cromarty
Assassination happened when it did (not to mention the ensuing cease-
fire and subsequent screwups by Cromarty's successor.) It doesn't take
a genuis (and Theisman and company are pretty astute) to realize that
they won't do any better in Round Two. It was pretty much a forced
move, and I'm kinda surprised the Manties were so surprised. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:59 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Good points, but perhaps I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to tactical
surprise by the Republic, but rather, by the fact that, after
demonstrating Apollo's capabilities at Lovat, it wouldn't be crystal
clear that as soon as 8th Fleet was big enough, and all-up with Apollo
and the other gadget (can't remember the name) that takes out the
Republican pod-control system, the next step was going to be Buttercup
II, and that should have been absolutely obvious to both sides, so the
Manties should have taken the possibility more seriously. Then again,
maybe this is just 20/20 hindsight on my part >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 18, 2004 Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 10:10 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Don Sample wrote in message ...
>In article <e2jc00$1mm5$1@pyrite.mv.net>,
> "Fred Burton" <fburton.TakeThisOut@starfire.mv.com> wrote:
>
>> pyotr filipivich wrote in message ...
>> >Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore
>> >
>> > So here we are, about two thousand three hundred and some odd years
>> >later (give or take) and new technologies are being deployed in a new
way,
>> >on both sides. Admiral Tourville expected to get knocked about a bit on
>> >his way to victory, but even he was a bit surprised when the butcher's
bill
>> >for the first course was presented. Intellectually he had known, but
his
>> >guts hadn't yet caught on.
>> >
>> > Then the Salamander pops up and just flat hammers 5th fleet into scrap.
>> >In one volley. Faster than you can say "bulldozing baby seals", 75
wallers
>> >go "poof". And an insignificant number of missiles cruises right
through
>> >his units, right through the defenses, and demonstrates what the term
"alls
>> >fair in love and war" is all about. Doing the monster mash in waffle
>> >stompers. "Splat!" So nice to have a compassionate enemy.
>> >
>> > He does the only wise and moral thing he can: surrender. Save his
>> >people, spare their lives. They came so damn close ... but close
doesn't
>> >count in this case.
>> >
>> > Now, now that the battle is over, wrecks scooped up, bodies recovered,
>> >prize ship distributed, medals and promotions issued, and the Royal Navy
>> >taking precedent in every shipyard for repairs and construction, now the
>> >'eggheads' are wondering "What do we do next?" This is more than a
>> >rhetorical question. When the first Haven-Manticore war broke out, it
was
>> >understood that you just didn't attack the opposition's home star.
>> >"Wouldn't be prudent", not optimal, not tactically sound. But that was
>> >then, this is now, a 'now' when the concept of Total War has been fully
>> >explained as not only acceptable, but actually accomplishable.
>> > I'm sure that Admiral Theisman is seriously concerned about the day
>> >when the Royal Manticore Navy will have the numbers to free up Eighth
Fleet
>> >from guarding the Junction and Manticore, and pay a return visit.
Because
>> >you know that he knows, just as we know, that her Grace is a stone
killer
>> >when she needs to be. And unless Sharon is able to pull several rabbits
>> >out of the hat to counteract Keyhole, it will not be pretty. Quantity
has
>> >it's own quality, but ... the safest place to be in that conflict will
be
>> >on the surface of another planet, in another system. "Da sky is
falling!"
>> >
>> > Me thinks the only saving hope for Haven is to get hard proof of the
>> >Mesa/Manpower interference, spill the beans on the forging of Manticore
>> >Diplomatic correspondence and propose that the Star Kingdom and the
>> >Republic pound on Mesa like blacksmiths working out issues.
>> >
>> > Good luck on that.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> pyotr, one thing that struck me when I first read the book, was that
Honor's
>> tactics in the final battle were technically foreseeable. Maybe not
>> counter-able, but foreseeable. After all, in Honor's previous battle,
she'd
>> used some of Apollo's capabilities to smash Giscard's fleet. It occurred
to
>> me that it should have been foreseeable that in an age with multi-drive
>> missiles, you can have exceptional range with such missiles, when
combined
>> with this new telemetry technology. I suspect that the only real
limiting
>> factors with Apollo are the range of the new telemetry tech and the how
many
>> missiles can you control in any given salvo.
>
>Yes, the Havenites had foreseen what Apollo meant for combat. That was
>the reason they attacked the Manticoran system when they did. They
>hoped that Apollo hadn't been deployed in large enough numbers to make
>what Harrington did to them possible yet. They wanted to force an end
>to the war with a decisive victory while the old rules still applied,
>because they knew that under the new rules that Apollo made possible
>they were in deep trouble.
>
Actually, Don, I disagree.
I don't think that they "foresaw" anything. They understood the power of
what they saw firsthand in Apollo's first use, but they did not extrapolate
the tactical uses of the system. That's my point.
Understanding that Apollo was horrifically dangerous was rather obvious from
the first use. But Honor didn't use Apollo in the same way in the first
engagement as she did at the Battle of Manticore. Haven understood that the
capability shown when Honor defeated Giscard was dangerous, thus a good
reason to push their attack on Manticore. But I don't recall any mention
that the Havenites recognized any of the additional capabilities that Apollo
might give the RMN. Of course, not knowing the technical limitations of
Apollo, I suppose that it might be unfair to expect the Peeps to know what
more it could do beyond what they'd observed. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:52 am
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <e2k0a3$1snr$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton.DeleteThis@starfire.mv.com
says...
> Understanding that Apollo was horrifically dangerous was rather obvious from
> the first use. But Honor didn't use Apollo in the same way in the first
> engagement as she did at the Battle of Manticore. Haven understood that the
> capability shown when Honor defeated Giscard was dangerous, thus a good
> reason to push their attack on Manticore. But I don't recall any mention
> that the Havenites recognized any of the additional capabilities that Apollo
> might give the RMN. Of course, not knowing the technical limitations of
> Apollo, I suppose that it might be unfair to expect the Peeps to know what
> more it could do beyond what they'd observed.
Now, this I just don't understand. If I were Tom Theisman and I heard
about an engagement where the enemy deployed a new missile control
system that enabled his missiles to penetrate my defenses virtually at
will, allowing him to wipe out several squadrons of SDs at extended
range, I'd certainly assume a worst case. And furthermore, the Peeps
DID expect the worst case, which is why they attacked Manticore when
they did, unfortunately, they were a little bit too late, or it would
have worked (at least to the extent of forcing a draw...) I'm afraid
I'm with Don on this one... >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 18, 2004 Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Dan Swartzendruber wrote in message ...
>In article <e2k0a3$1snr$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton.RemoveThis@starfire.mv.com
>says...
>> Understanding that Apollo was horrifically dangerous was rather obvious
from
>> the first use. But Honor didn't use Apollo in the same way in the first
>> engagement as she did at the Battle of Manticore. Haven understood that
the
>> capability shown when Honor defeated Giscard was dangerous, thus a good
>> reason to push their attack on Manticore. But I don't recall any mention
>> that the Havenites recognized any of the additional capabilities that
Apollo
>> might give the RMN. Of course, not knowing the technical limitations of
>> Apollo, I suppose that it might be unfair to expect the Peeps to know
what
>> more it could do beyond what they'd observed.
>
>Now, this I just don't understand. If I were Tom Theisman and I heard
>about an engagement where the enemy deployed a new missile control
>system that enabled his missiles to penetrate my defenses virtually at
>will, allowing him to wipe out several squadrons of SDs at extended
>range, I'd certainly assume a worst case. And furthermore, the Peeps
>DID expect the worst case, which is why they attacked Manticore when
>they did, unfortunately, they were a little bit too late, or it would
>have worked (at least to the extent of forcing a draw...) I'm afraid
>I'm with Don on this one...
Dan, I think that the Peeps expected the worst case that they foresaw. But
the worst case that they foresaw wasn't exactly the same as the actual worst
case scenario. That's my point.
Of course, they understood that the Manties could have eventually done a
Buttercup II (good way to put it) with only the limited view of Apollo that
they saw when Adm. Giscard's fleet was annihilated. And they made a
decision based on that information. Would they have made a different
decision on deciding to attack Manticore if they'd known the full extent of
Apollo's capabilities? Maybe yes, maybe no.
I think that had the Peeps known what Apollo's full capabilities were, they
may have not attacked out of fear that even a severely outnumbered Manty
force would be able to do what Honor's fleet did. I think that the Peeps
decided to attack because, while they were rightly concerned with Apollo's
capability (AS THEY UNDERSTOOD IT), they didn't see that it could greatly
extend the range of Manty firepower to the point of making an attacker
nearly invulnerable, and so on and so on. I think that had Adm Theisman,
etc. knew the full extent of Apollo, he would have feared that even a single
fleet of Manty ships would be sufficient to hold off the entire Peep assault
force from outside the Peeps' maximum range. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <e2m0vd$2dl6$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton.TakeThisOut@starfire.mv.com
says...
> I think that had the Peeps known what Apollo's full capabilities were, they
> may have not attacked out of fear that even a severely outnumbered Manty
> force would be able to do what Honor's fleet did. I think that the Peeps
> decided to attack because, while they were rightly concerned with Apollo's
> capability (AS THEY UNDERSTOOD IT), they didn't see that it could greatly
> extend the range of Manty firepower to the point of making an attacker
> nearly invulnerable, and so on and so on. I think that had Adm Theisman,
> etc. knew the full extent of Apollo, he would have feared that even a single
> fleet of Manty ships would be sufficient to hold off the entire Peep assault
> force from outside the Peeps' maximum range.
Understood. I guess my point is that however bad it *might* be to
attack Manticore *now*, it will only get worse. And in fact, if they'd
managed to attack a little earlier, it would have worked (let's not
forget also that Kuzak and D'Orville beat the Peeps up pretty badly
first...) We've kind of wandered a bit off though, since I wasn't
arguing that the Peeps were wrong, but the RMN was (to be so surprised.)
I mean, they already showed that they were willing to go all the way to
Nouveau Paris once, so why not again? Oh well, as another posted
pointed out, this is a interesting exercise in debate >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 18, 2004 Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:29 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Dan Swartzendruber wrote in message ...
>In article <e2m0vd$2dl6$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton RemoveThis @starfire.mv.com
>says...
>> I think that had the Peeps known what Apollo's full capabilities were,
they
>> may have not attacked out of fear that even a severely outnumbered Manty
>> force would be able to do what Honor's fleet did. I think that the Peeps
>> decided to attack because, while they were rightly concerned with
Apollo's
>> capability (AS THEY UNDERSTOOD IT), they didn't see that it could greatly
>> extend the range of Manty firepower to the point of making an attacker
>> nearly invulnerable, and so on and so on. I think that had Adm Theisman,
>> etc. knew the full extent of Apollo, he would have feared that even a
single
>> fleet of Manty ships would be sufficient to hold off the entire Peep
assault
>> force from outside the Peeps' maximum range.
>
>Understood. I guess my point is that however bad it *might* be to
>attack Manticore *now*, it will only get worse. And in fact, if they'd
>managed to attack a little earlier, it would have worked (let's not
>forget also that Kuzak and D'Orville beat the Peeps up pretty badly
>first...) We've kind of wandered a bit off though, since I wasn't
>arguing that the Peeps were wrong, but the RMN was (to be so surprised.)
>I mean, they already showed that they were willing to go all the way to
>Nouveau Paris once, so why not again? Oh well, as another posted
>pointed out, this is a interesting exercise in debate
>
Dan, there is something to be said for the statement that the RMN may have
been wrong to show off Apollo the way that they did, before it was more
widely deployed. It certainly did precipitate the Peep's attack on
Manticore.
Arguably, the RMN may have been better off if they'd waited long enough so
that they could have it fully deployed and used it to directly attack Haven
and other major Peep systems with its full range in a Buttercup II campaign. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:28 pm
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <e2mlqj$2l0t$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton DeleteThis @starfire.mv.com
says...
> Dan, there is something to be said for the statement that the RMN may have
> been wrong to show off Apollo the way that they did, before it was more
> widely deployed. It certainly did precipitate the Peep's attack on
> Manticore.
>
> Arguably, the RMN may have been better off if they'd waited long enough so
> that they could have it fully deployed and used it to directly attack Haven
> and other major Peep systems with its full range in a Buttercup II campaign.
Good point, Fred. I have to admit, that occurred to me the other day
driving to work. Talk about telegraphing your punch
p.s. hey, can I copyright the term "Buttercup II"? >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 18, 2004 Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:34 am
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Dan Swartzendruber wrote in message ...
>In article <e2mlqj$2l0t$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton RemoveThis @starfire.mv.com
>says...
>> Dan, there is something to be said for the statement that the RMN may
have
>> been wrong to show off Apollo the way that they did, before it was more
>> widely deployed. It certainly did precipitate the Peep's attack on
>> Manticore.
>>
>> Arguably, the RMN may have been better off if they'd waited long enough
so
>> that they could have it fully deployed and used it to directly attack
Haven
>> and other major Peep systems with its full range in a Buttercup II
campaign.
>
>Good point, Fred. I have to admit, that occurred to me the other day
>driving to work. Talk about telegraphing your punch
>
>p.s. hey, can I copyright the term "Buttercup II"?
>
a) Well, we all certainly know what is meant when someone says Buttercup II.
B) There's no reason why the RMN couldn't have continued with some other,
smaller raids on lesser targets with non-Apollo forces just to keep the
peeps' attention, but without generating enough threat to precipitate such a
major response. Just enough to let'em know you still care, if you know what
I mean. ....while at the same time, the RMN would be ramping up 8th fleet
for a BC2 campaign.
My thought is that a full-blown nasty Apollo-capable 8th Fleet could wreak
all sorts of nastiness in a reverse Battle of Manticore by invading the
Haven system and using that exceptional range to blow the guts out of their
Home Fleet at extreme range. And maybe rinse, reload, and repeat a number
of other systems where the Peeps have large mobile forces.
Maybe try to hit'em hard and fast across a wide front to try to punch out as
many mobile units as possible. One of the really nasty things about
Apollo's extreme range capability is that you can show up with what seems
like a numerically inferior force that might tempt an enemy to force an
engagement.
This sort of idea seems like one that has a limited window of usefulness.
It would seem to be best used in a very short space of time where you denied
the enemy knowledge of the capability, so that you could tempt them into
action.
Just a few thoughts... >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 18, 2004 Posts: 411
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:40 am
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
John Savard wrote in message <444eee5f.2418292.TakeThisOut@news.usenetzone.com>...
>On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 12:01:40 GMT, pyotr filipivich
><phamp.TakeThisOut@mindspring.com> wrote, in part:
>
>> Me thinks the only saving hope for Haven is to get hard proof of the
>>Mesa/Manpower interference, spill the beans on the forging of Manticore
>>Diplomatic correspondence and propose that the Star Kingdom and the
>>Republic pound on Mesa like blacksmiths working out issues.
>
>I don't know.
>
>With the loss of the Home Fleet, the political situation on Manticore
>may well hobble the MSN in doing what it needs to do - seizing the
>initiative.
>
MSN? What's the MSN? Don't you mean the RMN?
>Since both "At All Costs" and the previous novel, "War of Honor", dealt
>with wars that were tragically unnecessary, though, it would be bad for
>the series to let this continue indefinitely.
>
>Instead, my hope is that the next novel will feature Honor Harrington
>busting Theisman out of his imprisonment as a POW
Actually, I think that you mean Tourville. Tourville was the admiral who
surrendered to Honor and is now a POW. Thiesman is still back
on Haven.
That said, there's no reason that Honor and Theisman might now end up
meating and hammering out some sort of resolution. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 26, 2003 Posts: 392
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:56 am
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Okay, so I'm late and catching up, but Dan Swartzendruber
<dswartz DeleteThis @druber.com> wrote on Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:52:16 -0400 in
alt.books.david-weber :
>In article <e2k0a3$1snr$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton DeleteThis @starfire.mv.com
>says...
>> Understanding that Apollo was horrifically dangerous was rather obvious from
>> the first use. But Honor didn't use Apollo in the same way in the first
>> engagement as she did at the Battle of Manticore. Haven understood that the
>> capability shown when Honor defeated Giscard was dangerous, thus a good
>> reason to push their attack on Manticore. But I don't recall any mention
>> that the Havenites recognized any of the additional capabilities that Apollo
>> might give the RMN. Of course, not knowing the technical limitations of
>> Apollo, I suppose that it might be unfair to expect the Peeps to know what
>> more it could do beyond what they'd observed.
>
>Now, this I just don't understand. If I were Tom Theisman and I heard
>about an engagement where the enemy deployed a new missile control
>system that enabled his missiles to penetrate my defenses virtually at
>will, allowing him to wipe out several squadrons of SDs at extended
>range, I'd certainly assume a worst case. And furthermore, the Peeps
>DID expect the worst case, which is why they attacked Manticore when
>they did, unfortunately, they were a little bit too late, or it would
>have worked (at least to the extent of forcing a draw...) I'm afraid
>I'm with Don on this one...
Theisman knew that the latest Manti developments would put his navy at
risk. But he also knew that the Mantis didn't have a lot of them. It was
a calculated risk, in his opinion, to launch Beatrice, with the idea that
he could win that battle, occupy Manticore, and end the war. But he had to
do it now, before more of those infernal things reached the fleet.
But his calculated risk, was more of a gamble. The difference is that
a risk leaves you no worse than you are, but may bring victory; a gamble
must succeed, or the alternative is disaster. we shall have to see if
Beatrice was a risk or a gamble. Right now, it appears to be a gamble that
did not pay off, and only Manticore's lack of resources prevent them from
doing some serious butt kicking in return.
As Tourville himself realized "Defeat made all the more poisonous by
how close Beatrice had come to success . . . and how completely it had
failed, in the end...."
--
pyotr filipivich
Typos, Grammos and da kind are the result of ragin hormones
Fortesque Consulting: Teaching Pigs to Sing since 1968. >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2003 Posts: 66
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:56 am
Post subject: Re: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <kaat429r8ta4cg5j42ufdmlnfm7npa5112.DeleteThis@4ax.com>,
phamp.DeleteThis@mindspring.com says...
> Okay, so I'm late and catching up, but Dan Swartzendruber
> <dswartz.DeleteThis@druber.com> wrote on Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:52:16 -0400 in
> alt.books.david-weber :
> >In article <e2k0a3$1snr$1@pyrite.mv.net>, fburton.DeleteThis@starfire.mv.com
> >says...
> >> Understanding that Apollo was horrifically dangerous was rather obvious from
> >> the first use. But Honor didn't use Apollo in the same way in the first
> >> engagement as she did at the Battle of Manticore. Haven understood that the
> >> capability shown when Honor defeated Giscard was dangerous, thus a good
> >> reason to push their attack on Manticore. But I don't recall any mention
> >> that the Havenites recognized any of the additional capabilities that Apollo
> >> might give the RMN. Of course, not knowing the technical limitations of
> >> Apollo, I suppose that it might be unfair to expect the Peeps to know what
> >> more it could do beyond what they'd observed.
> >
> >Now, this I just don't understand. If I were Tom Theisman and I heard
> >about an engagement where the enemy deployed a new missile control
> >system that enabled his missiles to penetrate my defenses virtually at
> >will, allowing him to wipe out several squadrons of SDs at extended
> >range, I'd certainly assume a worst case. And furthermore, the Peeps
> >DID expect the worst case, which is why they attacked Manticore when
> >they did, unfortunately, they were a little bit too late, or it would
> >have worked (at least to the extent of forcing a draw...) I'm afraid
> >I'm with Don on this one...
>
> Theisman knew that the latest Manti developments would put his navy at
> risk. But he also knew that the Mantis didn't have a lot of them. It was
> a calculated risk, in his opinion, to launch Beatrice, with the idea that
> he could win that battle, occupy Manticore, and end the war. But he had to
> do it now, before more of those infernal things reached the fleet.
> But his calculated risk, was more of a gamble. The difference is that
> a risk leaves you no worse than you are, but may bring victory; a gamble
> must succeed, or the alternative is disaster. we shall have to see if
> Beatrice was a risk or a gamble. Right now, it appears to be a gamble that
> did not pay off, and only Manticore's lack of resources prevent them from
> doing some serious butt kicking in return.
>
> As Tourville himself realized "Defeat made all the more poisonous by
> how close Beatrice had come to success . . . and how completely it had
> failed, in the end...."
Precisely! This is what I wish I could have (as eloquently) said! >> Stay informed about: Some thoughts on the analysis of the Battle of Manticore |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|