Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker
All in all, very useful but extremely vulnerable when used by the wrong people using wrong tactics.
|
So true! So lamentably true! No doubt there will be some tragic incidents in the years ahead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker
Resourcewise, they are likely to be expensive to set up and maintain...
|
Also quite true. Provided the resources for investment in a useful number of airships exists, the planners in the Colorado enclave will be looking carefully at the return on investment (ROI). There should be some lively discussions over the next few years in Colorado Springs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker
...and other projects (such as repairing rail lines for example) are going to be screaming should too much be allocated to the airships.
|
I wonder about the priority for rail in early 2001. Granted, the rail infrastructure in Milgov's capitol will have suffered some damage since late 1997. The movement of bulk goods by rail within the Colorado-Oklahoma region certainly makes excellent sense, given the well-known fuel efficiency of rail and the availability of oil in Oklahoma. Beyond that, though, where are the rails going to lead? Attempting to push trains through warlord- and marauder-controlled territory is not likely to yield good results. Rail is even more vulnerable to interdiction than a road network. The same problem exists for all the isolated MilGov enclaves and cantonments.
Once the airships have done their work by improving agricultural output, industrial output, and moving military resources to critical areas, MilGov will enjoy a growing number of contiguous friendly-controlled territories. Then the rail advocates are going to justifiably want a greater allocation of resources. Ironically, the more successful the airships are in a given timeframe, the more quickly their very success will cause them to be replaced as the prime movers of goods and people. I believe Faust experienced a similar phenomenon.
Webstral