Re: [FT] Size of "Countries" in FT

Beth spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

>	As for fighting in Antarctica! Count me out!
>	Seriously, I have a very minimal experience with the SG/DS end
of the GZG
> universe so I'm probably going to open mouth and change feet here I
fear,
> but I'd say that fighting in Antarctica would be a very seasonal and
> exceedingly dangerous operation at any point in history.

Not necessarily seasonal, but very dangerous, for sure. 

 Based on the
> weather I don't think you could fight effectively there in winter
> (casualties due to exposure, no light, loss of orientation due to the
> effects of gale force blizzards etc. would make sure your fighting
force
> got whittled down very fast) - then again I guess someone's going to
point
> to a war fought in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere at
this
> junction.

The Canadian Rangers and Canadian Regular Force train to conduct 
combat operations in temperatures as low as (and this is bad 
admittedly) -115 C. That's about -200 or something obscene for the 
Farenheit scale. 

 May be a well trained unit landed during late autumn could use
> the bad weather over winter to aid an attack if their sensor etc.
> technology was a lot more advanced then now (have to keep track of
> yourself, your unit, your location, sudden changes in the physical
> surroundings etc.) and if the other side didn't have a matching force
down
> there or within reach (I'd say the defender had the advantage off the
bat
> so you'd have to make sure the attacking force was streets ahead in
> everything else).

>From what I have seen on the Canadian Rangers (all Inuit), without 
them, the poor caucasians would be lost. They live on the land and 
know lessons that it takes decades to impart. They have an impeccable 
sense of direction, great marksmanship skills, awesome survival and 
environmental skills, and just have a 'feel' for things. You'd 
definitely want a unit that trained in that climate very regularly. 
Regular units without such training would suffer brutal consequences. 
And the advantage would be with the defender for sure. (For example, 
when the GPS and such fails, or the snowstorm is too thick, the 
Innuit Team Leader looks to the snow.... the prevailing NW wind curls 
the snow over in one direction - thus indicating what direction it is 
back to town or back to base.... and this is just one of their 
tricks). 

 Fighting in summer wouldn't be a picnic either - ice
> shelf movements, ozone hole stripping off the skin, snow blindness,
still
> freezing weather, continued problem of isolation and no cover of
darkness
> to name just a few blindingly obvious snares.

Besides, summer up there still isn't warm. Anyplace where (at the 
extreme) skin takes frostbite damage in 15 seconds is pretty gross. 

 As for the actual equipment
> required, I don't pretend to know a lot about grav vechiles etc., but
if I
> had to invade I'd take at least some huskies as by all reports (based
on
> present day equipment) they're less apt to breakdown/cause ice bridges
to
> collapse and they can apparently sense when the ice is about to give
way.

The Canadian Rangers operate with dogsleighs sometimes, but with 
skiddoos more often. But they have a large maintenance component to 
keep them running. Also, they have to operate in teams to climb ice 
ridges with their skiddoos and sleighs. They have to stop every 15 
minutes to check each other for frostbite. The operational day is 
short, as you MUST start making camp early (igloos and combat tents) 
and get water boiled, etc. etc. Storms in the far north (and 
presumably far south) are just foul. 

> And as for actually landing a force, its going to be difficult to do
safely
> without being spotted. Ships would have to crunch their way in,

Or hover on contra-grav to debark a fighting force. 

 planes have
> to land at least a little way inland as they set-up waves in the ice
which
> could splinter the whole area if they're too close to the edge - not
to
> mention tell anyone with 50 km (I think that's what the minimum
distance
> was) that you've arrived.

I think GEVs would be of use - closed cockpit, heated, good manoevre 
over snow, although ridges and such present some issues but so does 
less that billiard ball planes in non arctic conditions. They'd offer 
speed and low ground pressure. Might have problems with fans icing 
when stopped, but I think the friction vs the air of spinning fans 
would keep them from icing in motion (and you could do some other 
tricks like putting heating elements in the fan blades). 

>	As for the fate of Antarctica within the GZG universe, well I'm
still
> working out the finer points. Basically though, "nationalistic face"
based
> international conservation (as in "our conservation is as good as
yours")
> made sure the scientists had free reign for longer than would
otherwise
> have been the case. Eventually though the major powers turned to
military
> matters and as their attention shifted the mining companies sent in
> mercs.,Half a decade later the IAS had metamorphosed from a scientific
> organisation (to do with antarctic studies) into a nation of its own

I'd be interested in hearing detail of how you propose this change 
occured. This does not seem to be a totally trivial effort. 

 - they
> then returned to Antarctica and kicked the miners and their mercs out
(more
> by getting themselves employed as essential personnel and then locking
the
> doors). Even then the recognition of the IAS's existence as a nation
had a
> lot more to do with the fact they'd also made themselves indispensible
to
> the earlier exploration missions as scientists and engineers (a niche
they
> continued to exploit from that point forward).

They must have support from either the UN or some major nations or 
someone would take them out for their resources eventually. Probably 
the UN - and that in exchange for some resource access. This might 
help the UN out in the economic sector - since they are now somewhat 
independent of member countries. 
 
> I'm not sure if any of that was what you're after or on thread, but I
hope
> it helped.

Nice Work Beth. 

Tom. 
 
 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/