The Two General's Problem

tlb wrote:As it happened the scout was not discovered and the attack was as successful as hoped and was still a failure, because Apollo was already too widely in use. They did destroy the production line, but Beowulf could build enough missiles to replace usage.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:And the Python Lump was out of the yards and working up.

I thought at least some of the ships were caught in the yards; so part of the lump was hit, but not all. They certainly were not empty.

tlb wrote:But suppose that after Oyster Bay, Haven had turned around and conquered Manticore (which was very unlikely, but what the Malign hoped would happen). How does this help the Detweiler Plan? Now Haven has Apollo and all of Manticore's goodies which could be built in Bolthole where they were safe from any attack.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:Had the MAlign already known that Bolthole existed? I don't think they could have missed that hundreds of capital ships had shown up from no known yard...

I do not recall mention of Bolthole from any Malign discussion, but as you say they should have been aware of the discrepancies. Then when the fighting restarted and all the new ships appeared, it should have been obvious. The Secretary of State Giancola and his brother, who knew about Bolthole, were not assets, but there was a Malign asset (Colonel Nesbitt) that worked closely with them and made Yves Grosclaude fly into a cliff.

tlb wrote:

ThinksMarkedly wrote:And the Python Lump was out of the yards and working up.

I thought at least some of the ships were caught in the yards; so part of the lump was hit, but not all. They certainly were not empty.

Unclear.

My understanding is that the "Python lump" is shorthand for all the (surviving) ships that were under construction when the new High Ridge took power and signed the ceasefire with Saint Just; causing Janacek/High Ridge to pause their construction. (So less the ones lost when Thunderbolt overran Grendelsbane)

It seems clear that many, likely a majority or even a large majority, of those ships had recently gotten out of the yards and were working up at Trevor' Star when OB hit.

But yes, Manticore did lose ships under construction. It's just unclear whether those were:
1) remaing ships of the Python Lump that were very nearly finished.
2) additional hulls that were laid down shortly after the resumption of the war (roughly 2 years before OB) -- so at a guess 75% finished for the large ones
3) hulls started across those 2 years as pre-ceasefire hulls were completed and their slips became available for new construction.

What Moh tells us is that:
"In effect, we’ve lost every ship under construction"
"fifteen of [dispersed yards]—none of which had units under construction—are undamaged"
"another eight [dispersed yards] are probably repairable, although the ships under construction have been so badly damaged we’re probably going to have to break them up and start over rather than trying to repair and complete them"

But it doesn't tell us how many were lost or how complete they were. Just that with the rebuilding of yards their first estimate is that Manticore won't be able to complete any new ships for at least two T-years and it'll be more like four T-years for any new capital ships.

Still, given how quickly Manicore had been able to complete a capital ship prior to OB I would expect, even with inevitable delays caused by having to resume long paused work, that nearly everything that had been laid down prior to the ceasefire would have been finished by OB. (And many of those that finished earlier presumably gave up their slips to IAN SD(P)s for their Apollo/Keyhole refits -- which also seem to have completed prior to OB)

So my guess is that most of the ships that were lost were post-Python Lump designs. Of course that means it was the newest and most modern designs that Manticore mostly lost -- more Invictus-class SD(P)s; or possibly even some 3rd generation SD(P) & CLAC classes; which we never got names of.

Jonathan_S wrote:So my guess is that most of the ships that were lost were post-Python Lump designs. Of course that means it was the newest and most modern designs that Manticore mostly lost -- more Invictus-class SD(P)s; or possibly even some 3rd generation SD(P) & CLAC classes; which we never got names of.

The problem with the Python Lump is that they were all ships that needed nearly the same amount of time to complete. That means I don't think a lot of slips had been freed significantly before OB so new ships could be laid down and work progress on them meaningfully. But if the Python Lump was out, then new ships were begun in all of those slips, so indeed maybe 100-150 capital ships were destroyed with OB... only those were likely less than a quarter complete.

That's at least for capital ships. For smaller ships, BC sized and lower, there may have been nearly-complete ships that were lost. As a point of fact, during UH we keep hearing that there's a shortage of the most modern escort ships: there are hardly any Saganami-Cs and the Nikes are few and far between - that's why Task Force 110 was only made up of Sag-A and B plus HMS Phantom and Vukodlak.

The bigger problem is likely that the freed slips were used to service damaged ships from the fighting with Haven, like we saw with HMS Hexapuma.

Jonathan_S wrote:That's not what I'd consider a tactical use. Tactical is something that has an effect within a single battle.

And even with a streak drive (which can shave about 30% off the transit time between systems) the nearest system is still days away -- any combat will be long over before a message carried through hyper will get to its destination.

penny wrote:A single battle is what I'm talking about. Let's say it was the MAN that did what Byng did (minus the stupid act, but attacking in the New Tuscany System) or any act that would cause Henke to come running. A streak boat could have beaten the messenger to Henke way ahead of time and arranged for an attack on Henke to begin, busying her so she couldn't respond to any incident in New Tuscany. That would also have given the operation in New Tuscany time to raid data banks, take prisoners and to effect any other time consuming matters. Let's assume New Tuscany has something of value. Even if planetside.

Jonathan_S wrote:That's pretty much the definition of an operational level use of the capability. Using a communications advantage to set up a battle in your choice of locations to divert enemy attention from an area more important to you. But once this new battle (at Spindle?) starts the streak drive no longer can affect its outcome.

It operationally set the stage for the tactical battle, but the battle there will be decided based on other factors.

Jonathan_S wrote:Getting your fleet/reinforcements to a system before your enemy can is an operational level action; not a tactical one.

penny wrote:True, but you're thinking is limited to hardware and not information. Beating a messenger to the punch, as in beating a Case Zulu, might be more important than reinforcements if said plan has been devised as such. If a GA warship stumbles across a nest of Spiders (LDs) in the New Tuscany System, beating that messenger to Henke and ordering the force hiding in stealth to attack Henke might pay dividends if the force in New Tuscany needs time to rummage through data, take prisoners, search for survivors, take prizes, etc. Especially if a lengthy operation planetside is needed. Although, that might come closer to a strategic use.

Jonathan_S wrote:Again I'd say that's more operational use -- the layer between tactical and strategic.

Strategic is how you plan to win the war.

Operational is where and when you're going to fight the battles, and getting forces and supplies into place to do so (and information on the enemy force's locations and capabilities so you can plan where and when to fight most advantageously)

Tactical is how the forces available in this one battlefield move and fight this one battle.

A streak drive might affect the strategic level if the information it carried caused the MAlign planners to alter their high-level plans to win the war. But if it's just brining messages that cause one battlefield to be picked over (or in addition to) another, or some forces to be rearranged, without a change to the high-level plans then it's acting on the operational level.

Jonathan_S wrote:And the streak drive, definitely has operational level advantages -- but once the forces are present within a star system and combat is imminent I don't see any tactical advantages of it over a normal hyper drive -- not based on what we've been told it can do.

penny wrote:Agreed. But I think it has strategic and tactical advantages as well, dependent upon the imagination and needs of the "general on the spot."

Jonathan_S wrote:Streak drive can certainly have strategic advantages -- if intelligence is found that opens up a new way to win the war then getting that to the MAlign high command in time to take advantage of it would be a strategic advantage.

But tactical, outside of the hyperspace chase, I'm still not seeing an advantage. Not unless the streak drive has additional capabilities RFC hasn't shared.

I was correct about the streak drive having tactical advantages as is inferred in MoH.

MoH Chapter 38 wrote: And the truth was that, despite the accomplishments of the Alignment’s R&D, and despite any tactical advantages which might accrue from the streak drive and the spider, very few star nations could have matched the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore.

penny wrote:I was correct about the streak drive having tactical advantages as is inferred in MoH.

MoH Chapter 38 wrote: And the truth was that, despite the accomplishments of the Alignment’s R&D, and despite any tactical advantages which might accrue from the streak drive and the spider, very few star nations could have matched the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore.

The way I'm used to seeing "despite any tactical advantage" used would be to understand that sentence as including an unwritten caveat along the lines of "(if they have any)".

If RFC had wanted to clearly imply that they each had some tactical advantage it would instead be written as "despite the tactical advantages". That precludes the possibility that one or both have none.

So, based on the way I'm used to seeing the language used, I don't feel that sentence fragment is much evidence that the streak drive must have some (unknown) tactical advantage. It merely places an upper bound of the effectiveness of any potential advantage -- that if a tactical advantage exists is isn't powerful enough to clearly offset the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore. (Otherwise it wouldn't have used "despite")

penny wrote:I was correct about the streak drive having tactical advantages as is inferred in MoH.

MoH Chapter 38 wrote: And the truth was that, despite the accomplishments of the Alignment’s R&D, and despite any tactical advantages which might accrue from the streak drive and the spider, very few star nations could have matched the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore.

The way I'm used to seeing "despite any tactical advantage" used would be to understand that sentence as including an unwritten caveat along the lines of "(if they have any)".

If RFC had wanted to clearly imply that they each had some tactical advantage it would instead be written as "despite the tactical advantages". That precludes the possibility that one or both have none.

So, based on the way I'm used to seeing the language used, I don't feel that sentence fragment is much evidence that the streak drive must have some (unknown) tactical advantage. It merely places an upper bound of the effectiveness of any potential advantage -- that if a tactical advantage exists is isn't powerful enough to clearly offset the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore. (Otherwise it wouldn't have used "despite")

Jonathan_S wrote:Streak drive can certainly have strategic advantages -- if intelligence is found that opens up a new way to win the war then getting that to the MAlign high command in time to take advantage of it would be a strategic advantage.

But tactical, outside of the hyperspace chase, I'm still not seeing an advantage. Not unless the streak drive has additional capabilities RFC hasn't shared.

penny wrote:I was correct about the streak drive having tactical advantages as is inferred in MoH.

MoH Chapter 38 wrote: And the truth was that, despite the accomplishments of the Alignment’s R&D, and despite any tactical advantages which might accrue from the streak drive and the spider, very few star nations could have matched the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore.

MIGHT is not the same thing as DO. Any tactical advantages might only be from the spider drive and the high-lighted section would still be correct.

The only tactical advantage that occurs to me for the streak drive would be the ability to flee in a way that prevents pursuit (included in what Jonathan_S wrote). So if you want to count that as a win, go ahead.

penny wrote:I was correct about the streak drive having tactical advantages as is inferred in MoH.

MoH Chapter 38 wrote: And the truth was that, despite the accomplishments of the Alignment’s R&D, and despite any tactical advantages which might accrue from the streak drive and the spider, very few star nations could have matched the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore.

Jonathan_S wrote:The way I'm used to seeing "despite any tactical advantage" used would be to understand that sentence as including an unwritten caveat along the lines of "(if they have any)".

If RFC had wanted to clearly imply that they each had some tactical advantage it would instead be written as "despite the tactical advantages". That precludes the possibility that one or both have none.

So, based on the way I'm used to seeing the language used, I don't feel that sentence fragment is much evidence that the streak drive must have some (unknown) tactical advantage. It merely places an upper bound of the effectiveness of any potential advantage -- that if a tactical advantage exists is isn't powerful enough to clearly offset the industrial efficiency of the Star Empire of Manticore. (Otherwise it wouldn't have used "despite")

As I indicated, I think it would be more prudent, and accurate, to say that that passage infers instead of implies.

Being a student of naval history, I think RFC did not want to rule out that some above average Admiral just might see what another does not. So, that passage is somewhat of a placeholder. It is called “The Art of War” for a reason. It would be totally arrogant to think anything is truly set in stone.

Let’s wait and see if the “purveyors” of the tech will display any tactical uses.

I accept your explanation of the wording as plausible. But I think it is a placeholder for what some other more ingenious fellow might come up with.

Personally, I don’t think RFC would have ventured there if “there” isn’t a possibility. Any seasoned naval historian knows that history teaches to never say never.

penny wrote:As I indicated, I think it would be more prudent, and accurate, to say that that passage infers instead of implies.

In written text, the author implies and the reader infers.

From The Free Dictionary

infer: deduce, reason, guess; draw a conclusion:
They inferred her dislike from her cold reply.

Not to be confused with:
imply – signify or mean; to suggest:
Her words imply a lack of caring.

There is a modern, sloppy usage that treats "infer" as the same as "imply" (although it is discouraged). But then your statement is meaningless, instead of just incorrect.

PS: Yes, the passage in Mission of Honor is a placeholder; but the author is not writing as a naval historian, instead he is a science-fiction writer here. He is giving himself wiggle room for the needs of the story. He might decide to create one or more tactical advantages for the streak drive (over what Jonathan_S suggests) and he might not. Let's not forget that this saga was initially presented as "Hornblower in Space", but that turned out to be misdirection by the author. So if some "above average Admiral" sees a previously unknown advantage, it will only because he decided that was the way the story should go.

penny wrote:As I indicated, I think it would be more prudent, and accurate, to say that that passage infers instead of implies.

Being a student of naval history, I think RFC did not want to rule out that some above average Admiral just might see what another does not. So, that passage is somewhat of a placeholder. It is called “The Art of War” for a reason. It would be totally arrogant to think anything is truly set in stone.

Let’s wait and see if the “purveyors” of the tech will display any tactical uses.

I accept your explanation of the wording as plausible. But I think it is a placeholder for what some other more ingenious fellow might come up with.

Personally, I don’t think RFC would have ventured there if “there” isn’t a possibility. Any seasoned naval historian knows that history teaches to never say never.

I don't think any streak drive tactical advantages will come to pass. It may yet prove to have a tactical capability in some scenario, aside from a faster communications loop over long distance. But it won't be an advantage because the GA will have streak drives too.

Herlander Simões didn't know much about the spider driver, other than the name. But he was a hyperspace physicist working on the streak drive. And we know the secret to cracking the kappa and iota bands was simply brute force, so that's not an insurmountable engineering effort either. Knowing that it's possible (and they'd have known that from Firebrand too) is 90% of the work.