RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Morrow Project/ Project Phoenix Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-30-2018, 12:29 PM
tsofian tsofian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 342
Default Cost of a Base

This Page https://www.sara-tx.org/public-infor...past-projects/ has a lot of information on The San Antonio River flood diversion tunnel. At 3 miles long and over 24 feet in diameter this is a really good model for the manned bases with a frozen team I've been working on. This project cost over 110 million dollars. This is also about the smallest size for Prime Base, if the test campaign with three levels is used as a benchmark. Camp Century had around 2 miles of tunnels and 200 persons on staff, for another benchmark.

From this we can see that a Project with a dozen bases, perhaps including Prime and Alternative Prime would cost in the low billions of dollars, maybe 10 billion as a cap.

Project Azorian, which was the attempt to raise Soviet submarine K-129 cost about 800 million dollars (in 1970s dollars not 1990s dollars). It is around an order of magnitude less. From the sinking of K-129 in 1968 to the revealing of the story by Anderson in 1975 was around 6 years. Not only did the US media have information but the Soviets did as well, although their experts believed the salvage was either impossible or highly unlikely and they didn't act aggressively on that prospect.

I'm not sure what this says about budgets and costs and operational security but does at least give some figures for period projects.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-30-2018, 12:59 PM
dragoon500ly dragoon500ly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee, USA
Posts: 2,894
Default

I hate to say this, but to fully fund the Project, on any useful scale, then we are looking at trillions, just in R&D, equipment purchases and recruiting. Just thinking about the financial hoops that the CoT had to.jump through, makes my head hurt!
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-30-2018, 02:13 PM
cosmicfish cosmicfish is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dragoon500ly View Post
I hate to say this, but to fully fund the Project, on any useful scale, then we are looking at trillions, just in R&D, equipment purchases and recruiting. Just thinking about the financial hoops that the CoT had to.jump through, makes my head hurt!
Agreed 1000%. Single-digit trillions would be my lowball estimate. I always assumed that BEM gave the CoT everything from general business guidance to specific stock tips to help finance this thing, and that "how long it will take to finance this" was even part of the decision on how far back he needed to go to get things started.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-30-2018, 04:49 PM
tsofian tsofian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 342
Default

Trillions?

Here are the budgets for the entire United States Department of Defense between 1960 and 1989. This is in hundreds of billions of dollars. In 29 years this is around 10 trillion dollars. This funds EVERYTHING including the Vietnam War, R&D for hundreds if not thousands of projects, pay all the various uniformed service members, buy some aircraft carriers, thousands of high-performance aircraft and tens of thousands of helicopter. So the project, which might have 50,000 people and a few hundred or even thousand vehicles and weapons would send the same amount? Why would the Project cost as much as the entire DoD budget over the same period?

1960 344.3
1961 344.0
1962 363.4
1963 368.0
1964 364.4
1965 333.1
1966 356.2
1967 412.0
1968 $449.3
1969 438.1
1970 406.3
1971 370.6
1972 343.8
1973 313.3
1974 299.7
1975 293.3
1976 283.8
1977 286.2
1978 286.5
1979 $295.6
1980 303.4
1981 317.4
1982 339.4
1983 366.7
1984 381.7
1985 405.4
1986 426.6
1987 427.9
1988 426.4
1989 427.7
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-30-2018, 08:09 PM
dragoon500ly dragoon500ly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee, USA
Posts: 2,894
Default

[QUOTE=tsofian;79988]Trillions?

Here are the budgets for the entire United States Department of Defense between 1960 and 1989. This is in hundreds of billions of dollars. In 29 years this is around 10 trillion dollars. This funds EVERYTHING including the Vietnam War, R&D for hundreds if not thousands of projects, pay all the various uniformed service members, buy some aircraft carriers, thousands of high-performance aircraft and tens of thousands of helicopter. So the project, which might have 50,000 people and a few hundred or even thousand vehicles and weapons would send the same amount? Why would the Project cost as much as the entire DoD budget over the same period? /QUOTE]

I can only speak for my own little heresy...

I don't have a time traveling Bruce, so I attempt to base my version of the Project on what IMO are likely scenarios. I start with the CoT forming about the same time as the Soviet development of an atomic weapon, which provides the initial boost for the Project. With no time travel, they have to develop fusion power and cryo technology almost from scratch. Add additional medical research into the Projects various wonder drugs, the acquisition of property, equipment, vehicles, then toss in widespread construction of everything from supply caches all the way to Prime Base. The Project also requires satellites and rockets, even spread over thirty odd years, you are still talking about an obscene amount of money, so yes billions, and I'm comfortable with stating trillions.
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-01-2018, 08:59 AM
cosmicfish cosmicfish is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 477
Default

Since I am at my computer now and not on my phone, let me go into a little more detail.

You could do TMP cheaper... provided you cut out a lot of stuff. And I mean a LOT. Ultimately, the only technology genuinely NEEDED for the Project is cryogenics, but everything you cut out makes a near-impossible task even harder, and after a while it gets to the point where you are just tilting at windmills.

Also, when I say trillions, I am speaking in 2018 currency - I have not accounted for inflation.

There are three major contributing factors that I see as leading to the cost of the Project:

1) Technological advancement. BEM brings back prototypes of advanced technologies, but that is really little more than a sales gimmick. Someone still needs to invent them and develop them, because time travel doesn't allow for knowledge to come from nowhere. And then you have to invent all the supporting technologies (and there are a LOT) that support all those inventions.

Take the portable laser weapon described in 3ed. Right now, state of the art laser technology would cost me a cool million for a laser that is the right size, but is nowhere near powerful enough to serve as a weapon. Then I would need to add the environmental controls (so that it doesn't melt itself) and a battery pack that would make state of the art modern batteries and capacitors look like something that came out of a pyramid. Heck, we had to tear a small satellite apart because the launch got delayed by a year and we knew that our batteries would have degraded too much in that short amount of time to be viable for the mission duration. And those were expensive, expensive batteries.

Or fusion power. We have already spent many, many billions on fusion power and are not within a century of what TMP needs. Forget about the fusion packs for a moment and consider just the one type of fusion reactor the Project most needs - a unit sized for vehicles with enough power to operate the vehicle and its subsystems, with enough fuel for at least a couple of years. That requires incredible work to first develop the impossible and then develop the advanced materials and techniques required to miniaturize them all.

Add to that the cost of developing all of the tools needed to make all this stuff, because that often gets disregarded. I could make a truly amazing laser right now... if someone would only invent a way to manufacture optical antenna arrays at lambda/2 spacing, and ways to efficiently produce the kind of precision optics. Tooling get surprisingly expensive.

And while people often think that they can use civilian costs for comparison, you really can't. You're buying for an effort that cannot afford for equipment to fail, because it might not be replaceable and someone might die when it breaks. It needs to last a looooooong time on the shelf and work perfectly when you need it. It needs to operate with minimal maintenance and parts, in conditions where you can expect ash, and radioactivity, and combat conditions. This stuff is expensive.

2) The size of the Project. 50,000 people in the Project? If we go with the assumption that 40,000 of those are in field teams, and that there are an average of 8 people per team, that is 5,000 field teams. Each one needs their own bolthole, 6 unique caches, and at least 1 vehicle (preferably two, given the dispersion of the Project). Each bolthole has a fusion reactor, as does each vehicle, so that is 10,000+ compact fusion reactors, 35,000 excavations, and 5,000+ large, militarized vehicles that need to be acquired and modified.

By the way, do you know how many of those vehicles currently exist? Acquiring thousands of militarized vehicles is not something you do off the surplus market, because there aren't that many surplus vehicles available! The ones that ARE available are often being sold because they are near the end of their useful lives - not something you want to buy and then expect to use every day for the next 20 years!

You also need to identify, recruit, and train at least 50,000 people to a degree that will probably be on par with special operations training costs of ~$250k each - that's $12.5B ignoring the recruiting costs. You need to pay them at least until they "die", along with the untold thousands who will work for the Project without ever seeing the inside of a bolthole.

You need more than a hundreds thousand firearms, plus ammunition and accessories. 50,000 CBR kits. How many Science One vehicle are out there, and how much do THEY cost??

The scale is daunting.

3) The secrecy. This serves as a cost multiplier for everything out there. Buying a hundred V-150's and getting them discretely into boltholes is going to be stupid hard. It is going to take bribes, and misdirection, and evading massive government organizations specifically looking for this kind of skullduggery. Doing all that research is going to require building your own labs and finding scientists not only willing to do the work but also willing to keep it all secret (no publishing???). Ordinary security for a classified project adds significantly to the cost of the program, and TMP needs the kind of security that would make the Manhatten Project look like an open air forum. It would be like doing the Manhatten Project, a hundred times larger, as Americans, in Berlin.

Going to the example in your original post, a 3 mile tunnel 24' in diameter... What is the cost of doing THAT in secret? The cost of mineral rights, the cost of evading mining inspectors, the cost of covering up the purpose of the dig, the cost of disposing of the 7 million cf of dirt and rock, the cost of discreetly turning a tunnel into a bomb shelter, the cost of loading all the vehicles and equipment, etc?

So yes, I'll stick with trillions. Scale things drastically back, get rid of every single bit of non-existing technology possible, and you could do it cheaper. But your chances of success, heck, your chances of getting to the war without being discovered and dismantled, get lower with every dollar. And at some point, TMP turns into a pipe dream, a bunch of survivalists with a pie-in-the-sky goal that could never be accomplished in their lifetimes.

Last edited by cosmicfish; 12-01-2018 at 09:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-05-2018, 04:06 AM
dragoon500ly dragoon500ly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee, USA
Posts: 2,894
Default

Just a thought (quit your crying!!)

Has anybody ever given thought to how supplies would be stored in the various tunnel(s) of our hypothetical base?

Arguments can be made that for efficient utilization of space, pallets would be stacked high and tight. Disadvantages to this is that the entire tunnel would have to be frozen, running a risk of everything be damaged if anything causes the tunnel to lose integrity.

Another option is to carefully pack everything into modified shipping containers, fitted with individual cryo units. Disadvantages would include per unit cost, as well as the necessary increased size of tunnels to allow for the easy storage and access to needed supplies.
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis.
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 01:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.