RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Archive

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-15-2010, 02:53 AM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,285
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default Canada in Twlight 2000

************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

Canada in Twlight 2000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello all

I been a member for quite some time, but hav'nt found some time to post anything, until now.

Frist Let me say this forum rocks, I got some great infomation on this page for my adventures

Now before I get into my post, I would like to set the record stright, they have memebers in here that call into question my record of service, so let say that I have in uniform since 1994 and Served as Reserve Infantry NCO and Regular Force Adminstrative Clerk, I have served with NORAD Canadian region and with 2nd Canadian Mech Brigade Group HQ and have had one tour to Afghanstian and am training for my second, I had alot trainig and courses are numberous If anyone wishes to ask futher well FREE

Now to get to topic, I know some threads have comment on French Forces in Que and State of Canada, will I was thinking and if war in europe raged before the nukes flew, Canada and Us would gone some war preps right so they would mine key approches by sea, like barrent straits or Gulf of St Lawrence, so I Figure this would factor in greatly in ammount of forgien troops on the ground, I also think that the canadian forces at the time would deployed troops to jumping off points

More to follow


rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
DeaconR

I think that what you suggest is probably true, though that doesn't account necessarily for the effect of severe damage to communications and infrastructure. I will say though that I've always felt that Canada was not really thoroughly explored in the Twilight 2000 sense. I'd be interested to hear what you thought of the order of battle for Canada that I put together btw, it's on this forum.


DeaconR





************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

Canada OOB

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's what I have been working on, I'm also try to put some together on American units in Canadian Military, and Source Book I hope, I also have back information the the units meationed here
Attached Files Post Twilight 2000 Canadian Army Units.doc (26.0 KB, 69 views)



rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

Canada OOB

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here some stuff my brother found but I do'nt know where
Attached Files The Canadian Legions.doc (85.2 KB, 43 views)



rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
Antenna

rcaf_777 Welcome to RPGhost

Antenna
__________________


I can only make one person happy per day...
Today ain't your day...
Tomorrow seems to be a bad day also...


Antenna


Visit Antenna's homepage!



************
thefusilier

Welcome, and for my response I would say...

5 Brigade would most likely have been sent to Europe in the early period of the war to reinforce 4 Brigade. Any reason why they are still in Canada?

For French forces in Quebec. I believe the number is actually quite small, personally I think they'd be probably employed as advisors and such. While mining may have been done around some of the ports to help keep submarines away to a point... It would be very difficult for a post nuke Canada to prevent French forces landing a small number of troops by air and sea.

As far as the USSR sending troops to Alaska. Check the archives here. You will find endless debate on whether it would have or not happened, and how it might have went down if made possible. But by the time they crossed, there would not be much of a significant Canadian Army presence remaining in the country. At least in regards to armoured vehicles and other heavy equipment.
__________________
The Fusilier

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by thefusilier : 06-19-2006 at 07:26 AM.


thefusilier





************
DeaconR

I apologize for taking so long to read this.

I found this very interesting and probably one of the more comprehensive descriptions of Canadian units I've encountered so far. I did like your idea on Russian defection better than the one offered by the Soviet Army Vehicle Guide, largely because it makes the reasons for it more clear and the unit in question more interesting. I liked that you gave some idea of a purpose behind the units in question.

I did have some questions though...I was not aware that Cherokee were part of the First Nations of Canada...weren't they largely found in the Southeastern USA? Or am I mistaken?

Also, I'm wondering about the overall structure. Your writing seems to imply that something like the pre-war divisional structure remains, which is a contradiction if so against the suggested canon in the Challenge articles. Did you have some explanation for this?

When you talk about the 2nd Canadian Legion you describe how "the Canadian people grew tired of sending their sons to fight in the shattered lands" as though there was actually some kind of protest to the government. I'm curious about the degree to which you believe that any form of central government, Federal or Provincial, would have remained in that case.


DeaconR





************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

Canada OOB

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok guys let just tell you where I got some this infomation that used here, first most of my informtion on the Canadain forces in Europe and at home comes from two sources pubs one is First Clash writem by the Department of Defence in 1984, it gose through what the Canadain Units in Europe would do when War started and how they would fight in it it states that main Infantry units would be 3 battalion Royal Canadian Regitment and 1st Battlion of Royal 22 Regitment or(Vandoo's) it also talks about a US Corbra Sqn given too them as war started too, Now as for other units been shipped to Norway they would been ethier from 5 CMBG or 1 CMBG, not the Airborne or any other unit of speical Service Force, This unit was to be the stragtic national Reserve unit used IN CASE Canada was invaded, that why they did alot and I mean alot of Artric training, as for infomation contain in the Canada Legions my brother wrote that I pass him your comments, I hope to hear something soon, keep the questions flying


rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

Canada OOB

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The other pub I forgot to meation is called counterstrike also publish by Department of National Defence in 1987 which details the same type of warfare in a diffrent setting


rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
thefusilier

Was the Legions info written with the traditional or cannon Twilight 2000 story? It is thoroughly written, but dosn't seem to reflect on the effects of the war as one would expect?
__________________
The Fusilier


thefusilier





************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

4 Cmbg Oob

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here a chart of 4 CMBG minus the US Corbra Sqn, I hope to find more info as it come aviable
Attached Images 4 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group2.JPG (53.5 KB, 24 views)



rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
Matt Wiser

About your OBs: you mention "CFB Wainwright." I don't think the Canadians got Alaska after all was said and done. After all, there's still 10th Mountain and the two AK ANG Brigades still up in the Land of the Midnight Sun. (And for what it's worth, I still don't buy a Soviet Alaskan invasion to this day-what were Frank Frey and Mark Chadwick thinking when they came up with that?)


Matt Wiser





************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

CFB Wainright

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CFB Wainright, is a Canadian Army Training Center, located two hour south of Edmonton Alberta, is used for large scale training by the Canadian, German and British Armies, this is not to be confused with Camp Wainright which as was meationed is in Alaska


rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
thefusilier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Wiser
I still don't buy a Soviet Alaskan invasion to this day-what were Frank Frey and Mark Chadwick thinking when they came up with that?)



Ah Matt... we've been fighting that battle... We're suppose to find ways to make it work... somehow.... right?
__________________
The Fusilier


thefusilier





************
Law0369

Iam with Matt the pacific fleet smashes any sovit threat to mainland north america with the us 600 ship navy end of story.... also remember that there is over 500 million firearms in north america under private ownership... thats one hell of a millita.
__________________



Law0369





************
thefusilier

Nobody here probably thinks it is very plausable. My point was we once were discussing how to make it work... to come up with solutions and answers for the questionable (like this) elements in the story. I beleive the same was done for the Southern US invasion. This makes it easier for those who don't want to throw away traditional cannon story elements.

For example, the US can sustain several Pacific naval defeats... 500 million firearms, but outdoor living Alaskans and still not going to be the stopping force for hardened veteran Soviet paratroopers and spetznaz. Including those with experience fighting Chinese partisans. Throw in the post nuclear attack, and whatever else people can come up with.
__________________
The Fusilier


thefusilier





************
Law0369

who beats the pacific fleet???????

no one in the pacific even has a real aircraft carrier!
the rusting soviet fleet what a joke.

the invasion of the us and canada is a joke ... on any front!
i could come up with 50 reasons that have already been posted here.
__________________



Law0369





************
Law0369

yea you also forgot the 3 or 4 brigades of active duty and reserve and national guard in place it takes a 3 to 1 ratio to make an amphib landing! so the would need about 4 to 5 divisions right of the bat to land. where dose the shipping come from. the supply chain. the pac fleet subs out of bangor , bremerton and hawaii would have a field day on unarmered merchants with no escorts. the soviet never had an amphib fleet to speak of and never had the divisions trained in naval assault. SO ITS ALL A JOKE TO ME . I DROP IT FROM ANY CANNON AND HAVE THE REAL FORCES BOTH SOVIET AND ALLIED FIGHT IT OUT IN NORWAY.
__________________



Law0369





************
Targan

What about a winter invasion using those huge hovercraft detailed in the Soviet Vehicle Guide? Thats pretty unconventional and in RL untried as far as I know, but who knows? It could work.
__________________



Targan





************
Raellus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Law0369
the soviet never had an amphib fleet to speak of and never had the divisions trained in naval assault.



Not true, my friend. What about the Polnochny, Ropucha, and massive Ivan Rogov class amphibeous warfare vessels? Not to mention the Admiral Kuznetov, Kiev, and Moskva class "carriers".

The Russians also have some pretty massive assault hovercraft (I can't remember the class names but I'll find them).

The Soviets also had an "elite" (an overly generous assessment, IMHO) naval infantry division and naval Spetznaz comandoes. Plus, what's to stop them from cramming a bunch of rudimentary trained infantry divisions on ships and sending them on over? Heck, that's what we did on D-Day '44!

So, if those vessels and units weren't already committed elsewhere during the Twilight War...

It's possible, BUT NOT PROBABLE. A subtle, but important difference.
__________________
"This one goes to 11." -Nigel Tufnel

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Raellus : 06-21-2006 at 02:49 AM. Reason: typo


Raellus





************
DeaconR

I don't ever recall ever reading or hearing anythign that dismissed the Soviet Union as a threat. Would there have been a cold war if that had been the case? Matt, Law, please guys, can we not have this debate again? I know you don't agree and never will, but honestly, would you be kind enough to perhaps post an alternate naval war scenario and not debate this in every thread it gets brought up in? I'd actually be very interested in that.


DeaconR





************
thefusilier

Law I think you might have missed my post...

"Nobody here probably thinks it is very plausable. My point was we once were discussing how to make it work... to come up with solutions and answers for the questionable (like this) elements in the story. I beleive the same was done for the Southern US invasion. This makes it easier for those who don't want to throw away traditional cannon story elements."

Points on how it would not work are not supportive to this. The opposite end result is what some people are looking for. And anything is possible, even against the totally invicible Pacific Fleet.
__________________
The Fusilier


thefusilier





************
TiggerCCW UK

Quote:
Originally Posted by Law0369
SO ITS ALL A JOKE TO ME . I DROP IT FROM ANY CANNON AND HAVE THE REAL FORCES BOTH SOVIET AND ALLIED FIGHT IT OUT IN NORWAY.



Grand so Law - feel free to drop what you want in yourn game world, but don't bitch at people if they want to keep it in theirs. Twilight is a game - yes most of us choose to alter the world to make it more realistic, but if I chose to have the 11th Kenyan Airborne Pachyderm Wing land on DC instead of the TDM in my game that doesn't make it wrong. There have been pages upon pages wasted by all of us argueing over each of our chosen game worlds/history/styles - can't we just acept that we don't all want exactly the same game?
__________________
Its 106 miles to friendly lines, we've a full tank of meth, half a box of AP ammo, its dark and we're wearing 1st generation NVG's - hit it!


TiggerCCW UK





************
Law0369

well iam not bitching about anything i go by facts that i know and things that can be explained with reason and an invasion of alaska and the southwest are just moronic and unreasonable to anyone with a military mind. i am not some civie here just making stuff up . i know what could and would happen i have 3 years at sea on us naval vessals. i have trained on every contenent and with some 46 countrys . been to 4 wars and half a one. i have led units from fire team to platoon.and have done this as a regular not on the weekend for fun. this is where i come with my facts and ideas from. i have been to the black sea and seen the russian fleet been on there ships. i have walked the ground most of us talk about here most of the time with a weapon in my hand.


lets talk about recent posts.
"3 ambhib ships" is not going to carry a alot. what a bunch of crap to even bring up the soviets three ships. the usmc deploys in 3 ship units and can only hold a bn of infantry the rest is support. we have 13 big deck amphibs in the regular forces and at one time could only carry a division if we loaded them all up with all there smaller escort ships working together.

untrained troops landing at normandy? my god man have you never read history? most of the allied units trained up to 2 years to land at normandy. with over 1700 ships. could only land 3 american divisions and 2 allied on the first day.and this was accross the english channel not 1000's of miles of open sea. the units used the 4th infantry us and 29th us were in the uk for over 2 years and 1st us was doing combat ops with 3 combat landings since 1942. so yes they were trained in my mind.

high speed hovercraft? well i ride in lcac's the us version all the time they cant "fly" in bad sea states so there goes your winter war and they have limited range. where are they coming from? with only 200 mile one way range? after that 200 miles they refuel on the beach so where are the support units and fuel resorces dont think the soviet have this.

there one division of naval infantry would have been used in norway or some other theater by this time now if they did not use them the that one 12,000 man soviet unit is going to hit the beach ver. 4 to 5 brigades of 7,500 men each pure suicide. plus the whole state of alaska has one weapon or 20 in there homes. and yes they know how to use them field craft and hunting skills of the western world are good. ask men from canada and the western united states. i come from this area used firearms since age 5 .

I dont know if you all have not looked this up but check out the ageis class destroyer and cruiser of the us navy. best ships in world hands down just one of these ships would wreak the soviet invasion fleet.

now once they get ashore how will they be resupplied? by air? is the us air force gone? by sea over 1000's of miles of sea? i just dont thinks so even if they did get ashore it would be a bridge too far type of matter. so in my mind just like my post on poor mexico it just could not happen. will i wait at my computer for your counter fire. please have it backed up by facts and not emotion.
__________________



Law0369





************
Raellus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Law0369
lets talk about recent posts.
"3 ambhib ships" is not going to carry a alot.

untrained troops landing at normandy? my god man have you never read history?

high speed hovercraft? where are they coming from? with only 200 mile one way range? after that 200 miles they refuel on the beach so where are the support units and fuel resorces dont think the soviet have this.

I dont know if you all have not looked this up but check out the ageis class destroyer and cruiser of the us navy. best ships in world hands down just one of these ships would wreak the soviet invasion fleet.

please have it backed up by facts and not emotion.



Are you serious?!?

Alright LAW, let's see if you can take it as well as you give it...

Dude, don't patronize me. I know what I'm talking about. I wasn't "emotional" about this until you called my FACTS "a bunch of crap"...

You make it sound like the U.S. navy could brush aside the Cold War Soviet navy without breaking a sweat. Probably today, but in 1984 when T2K was written? Uh, NO. Have you even read Red Storm Rising? Or played Harpoon? Try taking out a Soviet fleet with a an "Aegis destroyer or cruiser". Please.

The current Black Sea fleet that you saw is but a pale and empty shell of the once mighty Soviet Navy. You saw a fleet almost 20 years past it's prime, underfunded, undermanned , and poorly maintained- NOT the Cold War Soviet Navy. There's no comparison.

Why do you think our navy is so kick-ass today? It's because we were competing with the Soviets, almost ship for ship. Our constant technological innovation and training (think Aegis) is a direct result of developing countermeasures to real and/or perceived Soviet threats.

3 Amphibeous warfare ships? Are you kidding?!? Those are 3 ship CLASSES. A CLASS of ships and a single ship are different. Do you know the difference? A CLASS of ships is made up of multiple vessels. Like the Ticonderoga class or the Arleigh Burke class.

The hovercrafts that you are used to are much smaller than than what I was referring to. The Soviet Pomornik CLASS Heavy hovercraft has a range of 300m an can carry 3 MBT's or 10 APC's plus 230 troops. That's just a single CLASS of hovercraft. The Soviets were well ahead of the U.S. in hovercraft both technologically and in numbers during the height of the Cold War.

"Thousands of miles of sea..."? Look at a map or globe. Eastern Russia is a couple of hundred miles (if that) from Alaska.

I have a BA in history. I didn't say "untrained" troops. I said troops with rudimentary training. Do you know the difference? Speaking of history, once again we are talking about the Soviet fleet circa the mid-late 1980's, NOT the Russian "fleet" today. Big, big difference.

Last but not least, my post ended with "possible, NOT PROBABLE" Do you know the difference between possible and probable? Reread this: "NOT PROBABLE". That was, and still, is my position. We're on the same side!!! So chill out.

Please read a whole post carefully before you try a rip us all a new one, O.K?

Alright. I feel better now. I'm not "emotional" any more. We'll see how LAW reacts.
__________________
"This one goes to 11." -Nigel Tufnel

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Raellus : 06-21-2006 at 12:57 PM.


Raellus





************
Law0369

well this is my reaction you talk about books and games i talk about real life. and i cant post large here going to "dover" to pick up a friend so i will be gone for the next few days.
__________________



Law0369





************
Raellus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Law0369
well this is my reaction you talk about books and games i talk about real life. and i cant post large here going to "dover" to pick up a friend so i will be gone for the next few days.



Well, granted, you do have a lot of "real life" experience...

So, you know more about military technology, operations, strategy, and Cold War geo-political history that anyone else.

I can't argue with that!

O.K. then, you win.
__________________
"This one goes to 11." -Nigel Tufnel

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Raellus : 06-21-2006 at 02:20 PM.


Raellus





************
FightingFlamingo

Ok I know this is done... but AK has a s&^% load of coastline to defend...
I'm not going to address any aspects of naval warfare in the pacific, just for sake of argument I'm going to ignore them... AK has so much coast line, and the relatively small numbers of US Troops in AK, that the possiblity exists for there to have been an UNAPPOSED Landing. That would releave pressure of off Soviet inexperience in conducting amphibious warfare, and make the give any landing more chance to establish a beachhead before a US/Canadian response...

Honestly, I generally agree that the Soviet Navy wouldn't have had the ability to project the force,
__________________
Cold Blue Steel - the spirit of the bayonet


FightingFlamingo





************
rcaf_777
Rracf_777

Canadian Response

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Canadian Army would most likey wait for Soviet Army to come to them, I remember talking to Sgt Major I knew and he told about stockpiles of ammo, gas and other supplies pre-positioned in the artric for this case, I mean at the time of Twilight Canada had a Brigrade of Troops about 5,000 men that could parachuted into the artric to stop them the Brigrade was

The Canadian Airborne
1st Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment
2nd Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment
Royal Canadian Dragoons (Armour Regiment)
2nd Regiment Royal Canadian Horse Artillery
2 Service Battalion
2 Feild Amblance
2 Combat Engineering Regiment
Speical Service Force Headquarters and Signals Squadron
427 Tactical Heilcopter Squadron
2 Military Police Platoon

If the invasion happened it would also a company of Canadian Rangers which are kinda like inuit LRRP






rcaf_777


Visit rcaf_777's homepage!



************
DeaconR

RCAF, I think what you're saying sounds pretty accurate, but I'm still very curious about the answers to some of the questions I posted. Though I agree with Matt and find the idea of Canadians occupying Ft. Wainwright being a little dubious.



*************
thefusilier

I forget, did the northern invasion begin after or before the nuclear strikes?


*************
thefusilier

No Deacon, he said CFB Wainwright not Ft Wainwright. Its a completely different place. Wainwright is in Alberta... basically a gigantic open field.

*************
ReHerakhte

The Soviets had quite a bit of experience in amphibious warfare, they'd been doing it since WW2 and written a number of papers on it before WW2. There's a good rundown of their 1941-1943 operations at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1995/ACB.htm
It's worth considering too that the Sovs had intitiated the construction of a class of supercarriers on a few occassions (the last in the late 1980s) to compete directly with the USNs carrier fleet and we shouldn't forget that both the US and the USSR deployed nuclear weapons designed for the destruction of naval fleets particularly those containing aircraft carriers or amphibious warfare ships and the Soviets had plans for 17+ Ropucha-I class landing ships along with plans for a fleet of Orlan class WIGs.

I nicked this piece from Answers.com
"By the end of the Cold War the Soviet Naval forces had over eighty landing ships as well as two Ivan Rogov-class amphibious assault docks. The latter were assault ships that could transport one infantry battalion with forty armored vehicles and their amphibious landing craft. At seventy five units, the Soviet Union had the world's largest inventory of air-cushion assault craft. In addition, many of the Soviet merchant fleet's (Morflot) 2,500 ocean-going ships could off-load weapons and supplies in an amphibious landing."

*************
rcaf_777

CFb Wainright
Yes CFB Wianirght is Alberta Canada NOT AK, CFB Wainright at the time of Twilight 2000 is a collection of old 1950 buildings, it primary roll is act a training area for 1 CMBG in Edomnton and the British and German Army Units at CFB Shilo, currently is home to Canadian Version of National Training Center and all units Deploying to Afghanstian train there [Come]


*************

DeaconR

Um. Feel kinda dumb, I was thinking about Alaska but of course you're right. I even live in Alberta.


*************
Antenna

Purely the invasion on Alaska from Soviet part must have been to boost morale within the T2k USSR. If you think about it telling people that "yes the scurvy dogs of NATO have tried to enter Mother Russias soil, but the victorious red army instead stand on USA's soil". Think of that phrase... It really sounds in one way silly, which the true solider of red army would think, becouse the bullets seems to still hit friends in frontline service, but for the politics of the USSR sounds like a triumph is born(again). The difference between what is felt inside a nation when a news like this is broadcasted and the troops in frontline service cannot be mixed with each other. When the USSR starts to loose men in their ranks in far far east (read alaska) the news say "on eastern front no news". Invading Alaska has no value more then boosting morale in USSR according to me, to get those extra tanks or MRLs from the assembley lines done or what ever goal you have for your part of the production line. Talking of possibility to invade purely logisitcally you need to know that USSR have had no problem with sacrifices during WW2 but while beeing in afgahanistan during the 80's. The afghanistan war in the 80's was called USSRs vietnam at least in sweden after a while and was compared to that conflict also. I will no mention the current war on terrorism becouse that was not the intention with this post. If anyone want my views on the war on terrorism I can give you a my views in another thread.

*************
rcaf_777

Canadian Cities
Here somthing my brother came up taken from??? hope this helps someone
Attached Files
File Type: doc Canadian Cities.doc (27.9 KB, 20 views)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.