Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Australia Twilight War & After...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    I'm firmly in the same camp as those who believe that Australia will receive a lighter load of nukes than, say, Canada. Issues like range, limited involvement, and limited capacity will be in turn limiting factors on what kind of megatonnage the USSR directs at Australia. My whole point is that the nuclear exchange will not simply bypass Australia and New Zealand, leaving two potentially important Western nations completely unscathed. I'm sure with a bit of research and analysis, we could come up with a list of ANZ targets that would involve perhaps five Mt--sufficient to knock out the site and support functions of civilian government, the principal military command-and-control center(s), a handful refineries, and a couple of important military bases in each country. The idea would not be annihilate Australia (or New Zealand), which would run the risk of an Allied nuclear response beyond the one already envisioned in canon. The idea would be to prevent Australia from projecting force beyond her own borders for a few years and to prevent the US from using Australia to pursue American aims in the South Pacific.

    Webstral
    “We’re not innovating. We’re selectively imitating.” June Bernstein, Acting President of the University of Arizona in Tucson, November 15, 1998.

    Comment


    • #92
      Hi guys!

      Was out of town for a few days and am just now getting back to the board.

      First: Thanks for the responses, lots of good information and good conjecture as well.

      I tend to agree with Webstral that Oz would suffer some kind of nuclear strike. T2K v1 (which is what I'm working off of) clearly shows that the Soviets were targeting neutral countries to deny those resources to NATO.

      In my game Australia was a Western combatant activly fighting the Soviets in the Middleeast and in N. Korea, as well as in the Pacific ocean.

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

      Here's the back story I developed based on a lot of the info I got here:

      Austraila was involved in combat against the Soviets & their allies and had deployed troops and equipment to the Middle East and Korea. It also acted as a resupply base for Allied shipping in the South Pacific.

      Australia was not hit in the initial nuclear exchanges or late '97. But there was some limited civil panic and disruptions in the immediate aftermath (mostly in the bigger cities.)

      By early 1998 the USSR realized the growing logistics and support roll Austraila had become to US/NATO forces in the ME and Korea and dispatched one of it's few remaining Boomers to take Oz out of the war. The Boomer in question only had 6 SLBM's remaining on board.

      The Soviet boomer made it into the Coral Sea and began launching it missles when it was attacked and destroyed by a US 688 class attack sub that had been tracking it for weeks.

      Four of the six SLBMs were launched before the boomer was destroyed.

      Melbourne, Canberra, and Brisbane were destroyed/badly damaged by 3 of the SLBM strikes. the fourth missle targeted for Sydney malfunctioned and failed to detonate but did contaminate a three kilometer area of downtown Sydney with radiation for a short time.

      The missles targeted for Perth and Darwin went down with the Soviet sub.

      Chaos reigned for a time in the aftermath of the strikes mostly in the cities, in the vast rural areas of the country people mostly hunkered down and waited to see if more strikes were on the way.

      Vital services and supplies were disrupted for a time, but the central government having relocated from Canberra at the start of the Soviet nuke strikes on NATO in '97 had survived the attack largely intact.

      More devastating to Australia was the pandemic of plagues which swept over the country in the fall & winter of 1998 and into 1999.

      While the government maintains control in most coastal areas, much of the interior of the country has become a lawless land ruled by bandits & local warlords. Though it should be noted these groups are few and hold little power.

      From mid 1999 into 2000 a running conflict was fought with Indonesia for control of New Guinea, the Australian Forces have been largely victorious but some limited fighting continues.

      Currently Australia is a vital link in the tenuous supply chain between US forces in the Middle East and the continental United States. The Australian government does not recognize either of the two American governments; CivGov & MilGov, but is in limited communication with both though has more dealings with MilGov via it's forces in the Middle East.

      Though heavily damaged by EMP, Australia with much of its industrial base intact is in the beginnings of a recovery both domestically and as a world power.

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

      I think I'll run with that.

      Thanks again for all the info.

      <S>

      Comment


      • #93
        Now you're getting it Jester!

        One point though, I don't think you understand just how isolated the north really is. Even in the more populated areas there's still vast stretches of beachfront without anyone around. There's no problem slipping ashore under cover of darkness, something the police can testify to in their struggle to intercept smugglers.

        You go ashore up north and almost guarentee you're not going to survive. It only takes one mistake - the vehicle isn't where it's supposed to be, the landing was in the wrong spot, the weather is hotter than expected that day, and you're toast (litterally in some cases).

        Dogger, I like what you've got there. Not sure I'd be nuking Brisbane in preference to Newcastle or Wollongong though (both MAJOR industrial centres).
        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

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Legbreaker View Post
          Now you're getting it Jester!

          One point though, I don't think you understand just how isolated the north really is. Even in the more populated areas there's still vast stretches of beachfront without anyone around. There's no problem slipping ashore under cover of darkness, something the police can testify to in their struggle to intercept smugglers.

          You go ashore up north and almost guarentee you're not going to survive. It only takes one mistake - the vehicle isn't where it's supposed to be, the landing was in the wrong spot, the weather is hotter than expected that day, and you're toast (litterally in some cases).

          Dogger, I like what you've got there. Not sure I'd be nuking Brisbane in preference to Newcastle or Wollongong though (both MAJOR industrial centres).

          Leg do you doubt the Spetzis as anything less than the super human beings nay the supermen that they are! Oh nooo!

          Actualy, the idea and the local makes it even more alluring as a landing place. As well as the inhospitality of the land as well. As for landing in the wrong spot. That is why one communicates with their shore people and do not deploy until the landing zone is confirmed, ie, the ground liason is on scene with transportation, as well as it is clear to land with no unwanted observers.

          Here is another plan that would be decent.

          The team lands, moves over road or even up some river via zodiak type inflatible raft to their base. A base like I described earlier.

          They study their target. Say a factory. They study it for a week or two learnng its routine. They then assemble the team, prep and brief. Set up rally points for their withdraw, actualy they come up with multiple withdrawl routes to cover successful operations as well as if it all goes to hell.

          They then make their way to an isolated road artery in which delivery trucks transit and enter their factory. They hijack a chosen vehicle and ride within the vehicle with their equipment. Thus, they transit a regular road not leaving any tracks that can be followed. That is how they reach the target. They will have studied the security of the facility. They can either off load before they reach the plant. Or if security is lax they can enter the facility, or they can just take down the guards. They are now inside and they act doing their thing. They could seriously cripple most places in about 15 minutes or less. They then use the vehicle they hijacked to make it to an extraction point, blend in with traffic and other vehicles, or another location where they have other vehicles waiting and make their getaway going to a safe house in another location. They may even send out a decoy vehicle laying down a track for persuers to follow as they go on a wild goose chase in the end only finding an abandoned and most likely boobyrapped vehicle.

          And yes, I love planning things and figuring out how they can be maid to work.
          "God bless America, the land of the free, but only so long as it remains the home of the brave."

          Comment


          • #95
            A few thoughts here.

            Australia is a massive nation in size, in fact it's coastline is longer than the coastline of the USA even thought Australia is physically somewhat smaller. That coupled with a low population and for Twilight: 2000 timelines it would mean less than 20 million spread across the nation (probably closer to 18 million or less at that time).
            Most of these people are found along the eastern coast as are many important industrial centres. In harsh reality, there's probably less than 25 important places to attack with nuclear weapons, some of these have already been mentioned.
            So Australia could be significantly damaged with very little effort on behalf of the USSR including smuggling in teams and gear. As noted by Legbreaker, the vast expanse of the northern reaches are sparsely populated and some towns are as far apart as 200-800km from each other.

            However, that decentralization has some benefits in that even with the complete destruction of one of those towns, it would not be sufficient to halt that State let alone the nation. The flip side of course is that that town is isolated from help should anything occur and in some cases, harbour towns being closed down would significantly affect trade etc. etc. for some time. For example, simply sinking a laden container or bulk carrier ship in the mouth of some ports up north would lock up that harbour for months simply because the heavy gear needed to clear it could take weeks to arrive (because of the distances involved).

            As for sabotage teams wanting to get at least 100km clear of a target, in Australia it can be somewhat different. You would want to either stay close or get the hell out of Dodge by a good couple of hundred km's.
            This is because in the country regions, the people are so isolated they tend to pay much more attention to things than city people expect. Any small town in the outback probably has a handful of people who are very aware of all the "newcomers" to town and all the 'comings & goings'.

            If 'that nice young couple from Europe who'd been in town for the last few years' suddenly were absent after a local disaster/act of sabotage, somebody would likely notice and report it for fear that they had been injured etc. Obviously that could seriously compromise a special forces team trying to live in the area.
            If leaving the area, you would want to get more than 100km away because in many of those towns, people regularly roam up to 100km+ away from town even in a day for various reasons (work, recreation or simply 'getting out of town for a while').
            Again, these people pay attention to others in the area particularly because they may need assistance if anything goes wrong. Like any small community, people tend to recognize others from the town even if they don't actually know them so strangers will be spotted very quickly.
            Any team wishing to hide out in the outback needs to be almost 100% self-sufficient because of these factors. And one other thing they absolutely must have - water, because if they want to camp out near any water source, they are going to be sharing it with all the other people in the area (again increasing their chance of detection).

            You could travel for a thousand kilometres and not see another person in some places but then you would also be too far away from any normal source of food and water let alone tech/mechanical/medical assistance.

            As for railways and roads, many areas of the outback are flat and road & rail can easily avoid having to go through tunnels or ravines etc. and bridges are few & far between so the chances of using these as chokepoints are much lessened. It's far easier to destroy the road/rail. Planting landmines on the road would be far more effective.
            Or if it comes to that, it's easier (and probably safer) to contaminate a town's water storage.

            Comment


            • #96
              I'm not sure you're understanding the MASSIVE distances involved Jester....

              Ok, landings are likely to be held off until contact is made with any shore party (if there is one), but you land too far from civilisation and you've got problems with fuel as well as food, water and shelter. It's not uncommon to have to carry additional fuel in your vehicle to last the distance between fuel stops....

              Basically, if you're in a vehicle up north, you're going to be noticed at some point. If you're on foot, you're already dead.
              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

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Dogger View Post
                More devastating to Australia was the pandemic of plagues which swept over the country in the fall & winter of 1998 and into 1999.
                Unlikely. The only disease problems that Australia suffers from in modern times are the seasonal influenzas that arrive from other parts of the world each year. In other, more populous parts of the world there tend to be reservoirs of disease in the wild or in segments of populations which have poor socio economic conditions and health. Conjunctivitis and ear infections are endemic in many Aboriginal communities but not "plagues". By 1998 and 1999 Australia would not have very many overseas visitors arriving in its major population centres.

                If there was a disease outbreak in Australia in 1998-99 it would probably be able to be confined by authorities to the area where it arrived. The great distances involved in moving around Australia and the lack of air travel would mean that disease outbreaks would be easily contained. Also, Australia has a pretty good healthcare system, it that wouldn't completely break down even during the Twilight War.

                Australia also has excellent medical research facilities (private, university and public hospital-based) and organisations such as CSL and the CSIRO that even during the Twilight War would be capable of developing vaccines against new disease outbreaks. Of course, distributing vaccines could be a problem.
                sigpic "It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli

                Comment


                • #98
                  I thought this site may provide information that helps illustrate the conditions and size of the Australian bush

                  Australian cattle stations are the biggest in the world. Read about life, work, horse riding and tourism on remote Outback cattle stations.


                  It's worth the read

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Targan View Post
                    Unlikely. The only disease problems that Australia suffers from in modern times are the seasonal influenzas that arrive from other parts of the world each year. In other, more populous parts of the world there tend to be reservoirs of disease in the wild or in segments of populations which have poor socio economic conditions and health. Conjunctivitis and ear infections are endemic in many Aboriginal communities but not "plagues". By 1998 and 1999 Australia would not have very many overseas visitors arriving in its major population centres.
                    Entirely agree. Moreover, unlike the rest of the world and despite whatever damages it suffers, Australia will probably still has access to medical supplies and it will have enough surviving medics. Unless, of course, the conflicts turn to a full nulcear exchange with at least 20.000 nukes sent by both sides.

                    USSR is only hit by 50-100 warheads out of 9000+ (USA). USA is hit by 80-150 warheads out 45000+ (USSR). You can estimate that the total of warheads used worldwide doesn't exceeds 1000 (more probably 500). The T2K exchange is very limited indeed.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Legbreaker View Post
                      Yep, that's my site.
                      It'll be gone at the end of the month, Geocities is closing down. I'll clean up the atrocious spelling, abysmal layout and general poor work before putting it up elsewhere. I've got a lot of new stuff that never made it up there because the formatting system for Geocities is very crude and difficult.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Legbreaker View Post
                        I'm not sure you're understanding the MASSIVE distances involved Jester....

                        Ok, landings are likely to be held off until contact is made with any shore party (if there is one), but you land too far from civilisation and you've got problems with fuel as well as food, water and shelter. It's not uncommon to have to carry additional fuel in your vehicle to last the distance between fuel stops....

                        Basically, if you're in a vehicle up north, you're going to be noticed at some point. If you're on foot, you're already dead.
                        The Kangaroo 87 exercise worked out that an enemy coming in against any opposition at all could expect to lose 50% of their casualties due to the terrain, climate and fauna alone.

                        Comment


                        • Think of the toughest, nastiest, most brutal terrain imaginable.

                          Now multiply that by a factor of ten.

                          Then expand it's size to encompass about half the continental US.

                          If you can wrap your head around that, you're halfway to a vague understanding...
                          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

                          Comment


                          • The worse terrains I can think of being the Sahara (roughly the size of the entire US) and some of the deepest rain forests, I'll avoid multiplying this by ten. However, I may mix both and add some swamps areas.

                            Of course, if you count Australians in the middle of that, may be you must multiply this by ten.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mohoender View Post
                              The worse terrains I can think of being the Sahara (roughly the size of the entire US) and some of the deepest rain forests, I'll avoid multiplying this by ten. However, I may mix both and add some swamps areas.

                              Of course, if you count Australians in the middle of that, may be you must multiply this by ten.
                              We actually have those terrains, and they're all in the north too

                              Add to that gibber deserts, salt pans that span hundreds of kilometres, crocodile infested swamps, forests that catch fire every year and burn faster than you can run, and vast, vast distances with almost no one in it.

                              Nothing is safe to eat, it takes a life time living in the scrub to be able to discern what is edible and what is not, and any large area can only support a small amount of people once a year. The top 9 out of 10 poisonous snakes in the world live in the Top End, and even a kangaroo can kill you if you let it get too close. About half the year it is lethally dangerous to go into the ocean because huge swarms of deadly jellyfish carrying the world's most lethal poison drift about, all but invisible.

                              Then add people like Legbreaker and Targan shooting at you when you least expect it!

                              Comment


                              • but..

                                If you were hell bent on getting a foot hold on Aussie soil ,those very same conditions would be as big a problem for a defender trying to evict you wouldnt it

                                I mean invasion -be it far fetched both strategically and logistically - could be done over decades of low or semi intensity " conflict" rather than in one fouls swoop like our military planners think .

                                1) invasion fleet with large contingent of support and camp followers arrive at suitable spot in Northern Australia - say a huge rag tag fleet of military and civillian followers of an ousted warlord /defeated side somewhere close or whatever with nowhere to go but where no one would consider it possible to attack..or back to the firing squads and re education camps of their homeland.

                                2) suitable land for settling and producing food and vegetable oils etc is conquered in a massive ,chaotic ,bloody landing operation .

                                3) rather than try to "secure lines of advance " etc they dig in and try to build up more or less like the KMT did when they ran to Taiwan/Formosa in the 1940s.Cottage industries and some more efficient ones are started as a part of the plan.

                                4)as years go by they will trade injury and insult with the righteous owners of the land and may or may not be able to expand said foothold a ways .

                                To all the incensed Aussies ( or everyone else for that matter )that fume at this laughable notion - I hope you get that I am thinking in game terms here - firstly that the situation COULD arise and then secondly that it DOES.

                                That means that T2K conditions would apply - and that leaves something to the individual to interpret imho .

                                I am thinking a sort of migrations type invasion /war on Australian soil due to the upheaval of T2K rather than a "operation whatsitsname" to coldly and planned conquer .

                                Tha Australian military would have to be sufficiently overwhelmed by the invasion that they cant repulse it , but withdraw to positions where they know it can be contained by the size and terrain of the continent.

                                The newcomers would have to have resources to maintain their enclaves and to keep up enough military pressure -either trough being reinforced or through local production and conscription .

                                history has examples of these kind of invasions a plenty -but not from Australia afaik - except for ypu Aussies that is .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X