welsh said:
That's true to the best of my knowledge too. Except of course for the SLBMs.
Welsh,
Of course! However, the SLBMs carried by the Han class submarines lack either the yield or CEP (size or "Circular Error Probability", IE: accuracy) to successfully take out hardened silos on their own. By using GPS the Chinese can improve their accuracy to the point where they could target individual silos, but GPS appears to be non-functional.
Yes, true that. But the nice thing bout nuclear doctrines is that they can mix it up to confuse the enemy a bit. Why not strike the US ICMB fields and other strategic targets, then go after cities? I am not sure. But I assume that war planners run different scenarios.
Hey, anything is possible. Doctrine is determined by capabilities. It does have to be worked out ahead of time because during a nuclear war command and communications are not a given! Short of an all-out exchange, there are LNOs ("Limited Nuclear Options") whereby a mix of military, government and civil targets can be selected. Say, to cause damage to the industrial base, destroy the power grid, eliminate Soviet ground forces threatening Europe (not so much any more), neutralise nuclear deterrent forces (counter-force), government/military command (decapitation) and so on. The US's doctrine is based on "flexible response", where the nuclear forces and command is hardened to survive a nuclear attack, and then launch a measured counter-attack and not rely on "canned" attack plans (Emergency War Orders).
I have to say, the thinking that using nuclear assets on urban areas only destroys needed infrastructure and little else is right on the money in my opinion.
The old doomsday thing. I read about that as well. That the Russians have a "doomsday system" that will launch a strike in the event of strike.
But one of the things we have going in the story is quite a bit of uncertainty about what the Russians are up to or if there is a strike coming. We'd like to give our players as little info on this as necessary, given the nature of the game.
Fine by me! This is FYI for the characters who'd know about this kind of thing, like Mr. Foo, the USAF folks, etc. The USA had a similar "fail-safe" like Dead Hand which was dismantled between 1992-'95. The 351st Missile Wing based out of Whiteman AFB was armed with the ERCS ("Emergency Rocket Communication System"). Minuteman III missiles with radio transmitters would take off and broadcast pre-recorded EAMs ("Emergency Action Messages"; IE: launch orders). This was in case the Russians launched a successful decapitation strike, orders for retaliation could be sent to nuclear forces. Unlike Dead Hand, which was automatic once turned on, the ERCS had to be ordered by living humans in the chain-of-command. Unlike the ERCS, Dead Hand is reputed to still be in operation.
Just one more thing for the players to worry about, if they know of it at all...
I have never heard about that before. SO the Israelis would strike at the Russians with a aircraft delivered bomb? That's interesting. Got more validation on that?
Bear in mind, this is just conjecture and unconfirmed information.
The IAF might be able to pull this off flying 1-way, and would have been required to do so prior to the development of the Jericho missiles. But their main delivery system would now be the Jericho II and III IRBMs. II could hit southern Russia, the new III can target Moscow. The following link outlines how the main Israeli missile complex is not hardened like US and Russian sites (the Chinese rely on deception and the "shell game" with multiple possible storage and launch locations). To me suggests that their doctrine is either based on LOW or (more likely) on pre-emptive strikes.
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/africa_middle_east/news/jir/jir990901_1_n.shtml
Trivia: Jane's Defense Magazine began out of data collected by Fred Jane for a naval wargame over 100 years ago, originally known as "All the World's Fighting Ships".
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/israel/doctrine.htm
As the Israelis have never overtly declared themselves in possession of a nuclear deterrent, it's hard to say what their real doctrine is. But this makes sense and explains the US intervention in the
Yom Kippur war pretty well. Washington may not have wanted to get directly involved if a conflict were to be confined to the Middle East. However, the implied threat of a general nuclear war would be considerable leverage for Tel Aviv to bargain with Washington for massive logistical support (which is indeed what happened in 1973).
This is more of an anti-zionist "conspiracy theory" angle on the subject:
http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/israelithreats.html
Thanks for the heads up on this. I had thought that automatic weapons were regulated by the 1934 National Firearms Act
Quite interesting. Note that some states do ban fully-automatic weapons. Also, all after-market conversions are illegal.
10. Erica's helo's call sign is "NSP Tango-115", apparently.
Didn't know much about call-signs. Thanks for the heads up on that.
No worries. I emailed a friend who was a policeman in rural Missouri, figuring it would be pretty similar. For the other police and military radios if you want call signs randomly choose a letter (in the military phonetic alphabet) and number, and Bob's your uncle. Like "Charlie-Two", "India" or "Indigo-Zero Seven", "Zulu-Four Four" etc. Traditionally, the unit CO's call-sign is usually "(something)-Six", although they're getting away from this. Now they will be "(whatever) Actual" to indicate this is the unit CO.
Also, in the past there were 10-codes and various security protocols. Nowadays with digital encryption, listening in on police channels is impossible. So the militia
would not be able to listen in with a scanner, assuming the NSP has upgraded it's comms in the last 5 years, which is pretty probable given the DHS funds floating around for this. However, police radios
can access the older analog CB channels. The common police practice is to use "plain text" or just spoken English with a minimum of codes and jargon, as it appears that they cause more confusion than they solve. Like, "what the fuck is a "10-663" again? Fellating a Kiwi fruit? Where's that damn code book!"
Saying "over and out" is improper radio protocol. "Over" means your finished transmitting and are waiting for a reply, "Out" means you're signing off. I'm not sure if anyone's said this, but "repeat" is also
verboten; use "say again" or "I say again" instead. ("Repeat" over a military channel is always a priority request to repeat an artillery fire mission and many police are ex-military.) 10-4 ("Roger") and 10-20 (location, often abbreviated as "Twenty") are the only common 10-codes still in use that I know of.
My bad. You're right. "eh" is better.
But we're still touched you thought of us!
12. Cell networks and local circuits usually are jammed in a crisis due to overload. Although the demand should be dropping as the living people making those calls decline in numbers. However, long-distance lines are usually functioning if the trunk lines are intact and there is power.
For the sake of our story most of the communications networks have gone down. Why? That's a good question. Not all, however. There are some limited communications networks still active- such as Mr. Foo's little comm unit. Some of the local radios still work too, but not much.[/quote]
Understood. Just pointing out that this is something that Mr. Foo and anyone else who's read a government disaster pamphlet or watched the media in the aftermath of Katrina might know.
Yep. Although some of the landing fields have gone off or are over-run. There were a few choices, and I think Erica figured out that she could make one of a few decisions. While there are airfields in Syndney and Kimball, those are hard to get at. There are perhaps private airfields in Brownson and Potter that I am not aware of, but... I am not aware of them.
Well, given the fuel she's aiming at either Johnson Lake or Hanson Field. They're both isolated. Googlearth lists local airports.
16. We have 2 semis? Cab-overs or long-nose? Trailers? Sleepers? FYI: these trucks have around 24 hours endurance (consume 12.5 gal/hr. diesel with 300 gal. in the twin tanks).
Good question. We actually have three semis pulling three different loads. Regretfully one is repair. Baldwin and David's are both useable. I forget off the top which gear they are loading, but its in the notes.
Which notes?
I only ask because I think those are more viable transports than the chopper, which has a limited range. Take those, add some "hillbilly
hadji" armour (improvised steel plating like US Humvees in Iraq) to them and the tow-truck (to remove wrecks/blockages), and you're good to go. Once van trailer for people/supplies, plus a tanker for fuel. Or a flatbed for the chopper. You never know....
As these kinds of extremist groups have little possible connection to Islamic terrorists, the government may have decided that it's better to keep their assets focused as much as possible on the foreign threat and let apparently sleeping dogs lie.