RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #211  
Old 04-28-2012, 12:02 PM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,239
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan View Post
Are we going off your list or Jason's? According to Jason's list HMAS Stirling is literally carpet-nuked. Coming up with feasible Twilight War strike lists is quite a tricky process and I wouldn't expect everyone who assembles a strike list is going to have the time or patience to make themselves extensively familiar with the geography every every target. But the strikes listed for the Perth area in Jason's list are a fairly obvious case of massive overkill. Two of the three targets listed (Kwinana Refinery and HMAS Stirling) are about 7km apart and face each other unobstructed across protected, open water and between them receive six (count 'em, six!) 800kt warheads.?
Which is why I said " probably some damage from the strike on Perth". HMAS Stirling is a very small naval base, a few building, a dock and two jetty's. Its located on Garden Island, a slender island about ten kilometres long and one and a half kilometres wide, lying about 5 kilometres (3.1 mi) off the Western Australian coast, to which it is now linked by a man-made causeway. HMAS Stirling is located right on its southern extremety and I doubt that the Soviet SS-18 travelling from Russia 10,000 miles away was accurate enough to hit it right on the dockyard. More likely it landed on the eastern side of it in Cockburn Sound or to the west in the Indian Ocean if not further out in the ocean or on the mainland. It certainly would be badly damaged but I'd be certain that not all of ships were at port during the nuclear strike, and that the dock and jetty survived which is all the ships need to have a mooring.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan View Post
Just... why? Why would you pour a combined 4.8mt of nuclear destruction onto an area less than 10km across which is completely flat and not hardened against that sort of attack? One warhead would do all the damage needed, but why not say two for good measure. And lobbing three 800mt warheads all at Perth Airport? Is there a vast hidden subterranean military-industrial facility buried under there? And why would you throw three warheads at one airport but not throw even one at the biggest RAAF fighter base on this part of the continent, RAAF Pearce, which is just north of Perth?
You'd have to ask Jason that.
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:03 PM
Rainbow Six's Avatar
Rainbow Six Rainbow Six is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 1,385
Default

Whilst speculating about potential Austalian nuclear targets, it's probably worth bearing in mind that the BYB would suggest that Australia was definitely hit, but not to the point of saturation.

Quote:
Australia was largely untouched by the nuclear exchange, but the global panic which followed left its mark on both the Cities and the outback.
(page 240, v2.0)

"Largely untouched" is obviously open to interpretation, but suggests to me at least, a relatively limited number of targets (I note SSC mentioned at least five potential targets in one post, which would seem to me to be consistent with the country being relatively untouched).
__________________
A collection of articles written for the Twilight 2000 Role Playing Game

http://www.twilight2000files.com
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:32 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

One compromise might be to have a first round of strikes carried out by a single long-range ICBM with a large number of warheads, as Jason suggests. The first round has a couple of hits, a couple of near-misses, and a couple of flat-out misses. Throw a malfunction or two in there to round out the picture.

Then weird things start to happen. The follow-on strike gets delayed for some reason, and then the missile allocated for the job has a malfunction. In the original thread, I advocated a strike from a boomer. Maybe the Soviets get unlucky, and they lose three boomers trying to get into a good firing position around Australia. Finally, another missile is sent in and also has spotty results. By this time, the Soviets are losing interest in further punishing Australia. Perhaps the US counts re-entry vehicles and hits Vietnam with a string of much more successful nuclear strikes. The surviving Soviet leadership decides that Australia has had enough for the purpose of denying the West an intact industrial base in that part of the world and pencils in "Mission Accomplished" after Australia takes a half-dozen good hits.
__________________
“We’re not innovating. We’re selectively imitating.” June Bernstein, Acting President of the University of Arizona in Tucson, November 15, 1998.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 04-28-2012, 06:43 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,390
Default

I would think that the panic alone might be what damaged Australia to the extent it was - you have a lot of people living in the cities and if you get widespread panic that they are about to get hit that would cause a lot of damage - i.e. widespread looting, cops and firemen leaving their positions and fleeing or being overwhelmed, fires out of control -

for instance think about the large scale wild fires that Australia has had - now imagine you get large scale fires breaking out from panic and looting in the cities and no firemen to fight them - you could end up with huge areas of the cities burned out or heavily damaged without a single nuclear bomb hitting them

Now add in a single nuclear strike that takes out Melbourne or Sydney or Brisbane to start that panic - and viola you have that combined with the resulting panic causing the damage to Australia that causes the government to collapse and the military to take over
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 04-29-2012, 01:17 AM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Weiser View Post
Ok, some notes, I chose the SS-18m5 as it had a 16,000km range thus the oomph to GET to Australia. It's the longest ranged ICBM in the Soviet arsenal. It's got 10 800kt warheads. So, sadly, the overkill factor is a given.

I double teamed a lot of targets on the assumption one or more warheads might fail to fuze. It was a Soviet preoccupation. Not to mention their warheads tended to be higher yield to make up for their higher CEP.
Ah, that makes sense. One ICBM launched on a trajectory for the SW coast of Australia, what are the juiciest targets in its payload footprint? If there aren't many, just do a thorough job on the ones you target. If I'd only had the one bourbon on the rocks instead of three when I wrote my last post I probably would've figured that out myself. Oops!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Weiser View Post
As for Perth Airport, I wasn't sure if RAAF Pearce had such a role. I can switch that. I hit the airport as the Soviets would see it and say "Ah, B-52s could land there comrade".

To do an airfield, you want to parcel out three per runway. One warhead at either end and a third right on the middle.
I'm pretty sure I remember seeing media articles or footage of very large military aircraft landing at RAAF Pearce.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Weiser View Post
Finally, in terms of overkill...it's the Soviets? When have they not been into overkill?
Just to make sure we're on the same page, is your list showing the targets that were hit (either directly or close enough that the target was neutralised) or the locations that were targeted (whether or not they were actually destroyed)?
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 04-30-2012, 12:03 AM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,390
Default

Very nice site on Australian Forces that gives some good information of the setup of their armed forces

http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/structure/one_army.asp

I.e. The Infantry Battalion


1993 Rifle Section:

9 Other Ranks
2 x Minimi light support weapon
1 x M79 grenade launcher
2 x 66mm rocket launcher


Rifle Platoon:
Platoon Headquarters (1 Officer, 2 Other Ranks)

3 x Section

Rifle Company:
Company Headquarters (2 Officers, 4 Other Ranks)

3 x Rifle Platoon

Battalion:

39 Officers, 662 Other Ranks

Battalion Headquarters

Administration Company
Transport Platoon
Quartermasters Platoon
Catering Platoon
Technical Support Platoon
Medical Platoon

Support Company

Signals Platoon
Mortar Platoon
Assault Pioneer Platoon
DFSW (Direct fire support weapon) Platoon
Reconnaissance and
Surveillance Platoon

4x Rifle Company

1993
Armoured Personnel Carrier (Cavalry) Squadron **

Section:
6 Other Ranks
3 armoured personnel carriers


Troop:
Troop Headquarters (1 Officer, 5 Other Ranks, 3 armoured personnel carriers)

3 x Section

Squadron:
9 Officers, 132 Other Ranks

Squadron Headquarters (9 armoured personnel carriers)
Support Troop (17 armoured personnel carriers, 3 tracked load carriers)
Administration Troop (4 armoured personnel carriers, 12 tracked load carriers)
Tech Support Troop (6 armoured personnel carriers, 1 cargo carrier, 1 armoured recovery vehicle)

4 x Armoured Personnel Carrier Troop

I am assuming the 9 officers and 132 other ranks are what is in addition to the 4 x APC troops it mentions
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 04-30-2012, 01:04 AM
Jason Weiser's Avatar
Jason Weiser Jason Weiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan View Post
Just to make sure we're on the same page, is your list showing the targets that were hit (either directly or close enough that the target was neutralised) or the locations that were targeted (whether or not they were actually destroyed)?
The first column is the common map reference location, and the second is the description of the actual target. I did it this way because in this post 9/11 world, I am not going to have wrong headed individuals swear I am in league with other more wrong headed individuals, if you get my drift.
__________________
Author of "Distant Winds of a Forgotten World" available now as part of the Cannon Publishing Military Sci-Fi / Fantasy Anthology: Spring 2019 (Cannon Publishing Military Anthology Book 1)
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 04-30-2012, 01:58 AM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin View Post
Very nice site on Australian Forces that gives some good information of the setup of their armed forces

http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/structure/one_army.asp
1993 Rifle Section:

9 Other Ranks
2 x Minimi light support weapon
1 x M79 grenade launcher
2 x 66mm rocket launcher
Varied from unit to unit. Some units had the grenadier armed with M16/M203. Many units were still using the old structure of one GPMG (M60 in reserve units, MAG 58 in regular) and no Minimi.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin View Post
Rifle Platoon:
Platoon Headquarters (1 Officer, 2 Other Ranks)
In my experience the PHQ consisted of the Officer (1st or 2nd Lt), 2IC (Sergeant), Signalman (private) and a runner (usually the most senior private and next in line for promotion to Lance Corporal).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin View Post
Rifle Company:
Company Headquarters (2 Officers, 4 Other Ranks)

3 x Rifle Platoon
Plus support section (9 men) which (in addition to either F88 or L1A1 rifles) was armed with 84mm Carl Gustav's (4 of) and GPMGs (4 of) and occasionally had a Landrover 110 plus trailer attached (to carry tripods, extra ammo, etc)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin View Post
Support Company

Signals Platoon
Mortar Platoon
Assault Pioneer Platoon
DFSW (Direct fire support weapon) Platoon
Reconnaissance and Surveillance Platoon
Occasionally included an SFMG Platoon armed with GPMGs and tripods for use mainly in the indirect role at ranges up to 3,000 metres. This was separate to the Anti Armour Platoon (armed with 84mm Carl Gustav).
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 04-30-2012, 07:49 PM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,868
Default

Mention was made of RAAF Base Curtin in an earlier post. I'd like to offer some clarification of Curtin's status. It is not an active duty base and no squadrons are meant to be based there during peacetime.
It is one of three 'bare bases' that the RAAF maintain as forward deployment bases. The three bases and their locations are now available on on the net so there's no security breach in posting them here.
They are: -
RAAF Scherger near Weipa, Queensland
RAAF Curtin near Derby, Western Australia
RAAF Learmonth near Exmouth, Western Australia

More information can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAAF_Bare_Bases

Last edited by StainlessSteelCynic; 04-30-2012 at 07:50 PM. Reason: clarifying the RAAF policy on basing units at bare bases
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 06-21-2012, 09:46 AM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,645
Default Official warning

Ladies and gentlemen. Anyone who is considering visiting Australia in the near future, please be advised drop bear mating season has just commenced. It's an especially dangerous time to be walking in forested areas.

Name:  Drop bear warning.jpg
Views: 195
Size:  86.9 KB
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Old 06-21-2012, 09:57 AM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
It's an especially dangerous time to be walking in forested areas.
Thank God they don't hunt in packs. That's all I'll say.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 06-21-2012, 12:45 PM
Jason Weiser's Avatar
Jason Weiser Jason Weiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 364
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan View Post
Thank God they don't hunt in packs. That's all I'll say.
So, do they come at night mostly?
__________________
Author of "Distant Winds of a Forgotten World" available now as part of the Cannon Publishing Military Sci-Fi / Fantasy Anthology: Spring 2019 (Cannon Publishing Military Anthology Book 1)
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 06-21-2012, 12:52 PM
Jason Weiser's Avatar
Jason Weiser Jason Weiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
Ladies and gentlemen. Anyone who is considering visiting Australia in the near future, please be advised drop bear mating season has just commenced. It's an especially dangerous time to be walking in forested areas.

Attachment 1849
Wait? 1 in 10? Are you telling me, assuming a population of 30 so million... approx. 3 million Aussies have been attacked? Man you may need to try the rabbit solution on those critters before they start depopulating the country!
__________________
Author of "Distant Winds of a Forgotten World" available now as part of the Cannon Publishing Military Sci-Fi / Fantasy Anthology: Spring 2019 (Cannon Publishing Military Anthology Book 1)
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 06-21-2012, 12:59 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,390
Default

Interesting pic there

To get back to the thread topic the East Africa/Kenya sourcebook I am working on, as part of its description of forces, has a small section detaliing how the Australians were not able to send any forces to aid the US and Brits in Kenya until 1999 due to both the war they had with Indonesia and because of the damage they took from taking three nukes from the Soviets on three of their biggest refineries, one of which took out most of Rockingham and HMAS Stirling along with it, with the strike being carried out by a single ICBM in December of 1997 with three warheads, and causing 500,000 casualties in the process.

In other words big enough to really hurt (thats 1 out of every 60 Aussies killed along with a big naval base along with a lot of industry) but not catastrophic to where the country falls apart.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 06-22-2012, 09:48 AM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Weiser View Post
Wait? 1 in 10? Are you telling me, assuming a population of 30 so million... approx. 3 million Aussies have been attacked? Man you may need to try the rabbit solution on those critters before they start depopulating the country!
Actually, we only just cracked 21 million a short time ago. And yes, about 2 million Australians (mostly city dwellers who've stupidly wandered out into the bush alone) have had an "encounter". Most get away with little more than a scratch and a pressing need for a change of underwear (only through dumb blind luck though for the most part), but there are a few deaths every month, and many more serious maulings, especially of the unaware tourists who think backpacking in the wilds without protection is a good idea...

In some respects, Drop Bears are our best solution to illegal immigrants, ever since the government stopped the navy putting .50 cal "warning holes" in their boats anyway.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 06-22-2012, 02:30 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

21 million. Wow. About the population of Texas, give or take. And that makes Australia a larger-than-average nation. Sometimes I think every American ought to live in a very small, poor nation (not Australia, lest my Australian cousins interpret the physical proximity of their nation's name with the adjectives "very small" and "poor" as meaning those adjectives apply to the jewel of the Southern Hemisphere) for at least a year to get a better perspective on things.
__________________
“We’re not innovating. We’re selectively imitating.” June Bernstein, Acting President of the University of Arizona in Tucson, November 15, 1998.
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 06-22-2012, 11:53 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,645
Default

And that's up from the 6 million we had during WWII.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
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 01:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.