Worldwide weapony post-T2K

[Targan]

I dunno about on the net but I've got heaps of stuff on my hard drive. I'll upload a bare-bones Traveller 2300 timeline as an attachment to this post but I don't think I'm allowed to upload the full T:2300 backstory, it probably exceeds 'fair use' under copyright.

Edit: Scratch that, every time I try to upload the file as a Word doc or as a .rar archive the upload fails. The size of the file doesn't exceed the limit and both file types are on the allowable list so the site must be having some kind of issue.

Anyone who wants Traveller 2300 backhistory info is welcome to PM me their email address and we'll work something out.

[95th Rifleman]

It strikes you Well yeah, that's exactly what happens in canon. I take it you've never read the Traveller: 2300 timeline

Nope, never played traveller or read the timeline for it. just T2K and the later 2013 version.

[pmulcahy11b]

I dunno about on the net but I've got heaps of stuff on my hard drive. I'll upload a bare-bones Traveller 2300 timeline as an attachment to this post but I don't think I'm allowed to upload the full T:2300 backstory, it probably exceeds 'fair use' under copyright.

Edit: Scratch that, every time I try to upload the file as a Word doc or as a .rar archive the upload fails. The size of the file doesn't exceed the limit and both file types are on the allowable list so the site must be having some kind of issue.

Anyone who wants Traveller 2300 backhistory info is welcome to PM me their email address and we'll work something out.

Email it to me. I can put it on my site for download, and even turn it into a PDF if people would prefer.

[Legbreaker]

I'd just like to stress that the books state neutral countries were hit in with nukes to deny their facilities and resources to the enemy. This tells me that while not wiped off the face of the planet as the belligerent countries effectively were, France, Switzerland, and all the other neutrals aren't going to be in much shape to supply their own needs, let alone export anything beyond despair and refugees.

They certainly weren't hit anywhere near as hard as those actually involved in the fighting, but to me that just means they'll have a leg up - perhaps a 10 year head start in reconstruction.

It's worth noting however that after WWII, the loosing countries came back fairly strong (after a couple of decades of reconstruction) while the winning countries economies went into decline. Simplified, this was because their outdated factories were flattened and when rebuilt, updated to the latest technology, while those who retained their old factories found that in the 70's and 80's they were up for some very significant upgrading costs. I believe this was one of the causes behind the unemployment problems of the time.

Of course in T2K, those countries which were flattened, aren't going to get the assistance the countries of the 40's and 50's did and therefore reconstruction and recovery is going to be orders of magnitude more difficult and slow.

[Tegyrius]

Where can a good timeline for this be found on the Net I've looked before without much success...

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.phpproducts_id=390&it=1

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.phpproducts_id=413&it=1

- C.

[Mohoender]

Unless you review the game entirely, Liege has not been nuked. Simply because there are no real targets there and simply because, if you nuke Liege (and other minor cities), you can't go with the idea that the Franco-Belgian Union escape most of the nuking.

About France, supplying NATO: why not I effectively doubt that it sells weapons to countries such as Germany and Netherlands but a deal with UK is possible. Altough, I advocate that tensions between UK and France should be high, it is not the only viable option. As much as I think Liege has survived, I, however, think that Brussel was destroyed as NATO HQ makes it a major target. Then, what would be NATO in the game

Talking of France weapon production capability, it is basically intact and, may be, even superior to what it was before the war. The major weapon production area of the country has escaped the nukes (french arm factories are largely located in small cities while the sites located in the largest cities are mostly administrative). You'll find all of the actual ones here (more existed 20 years ago but that gives a fair idea):

http://www.industrymakers.com/ambrosale/recherche_new/recherche_resultat.aspTypeRecherche=RechercheActivit%E9&Chapitre=32847

Therefore, France will still be producing weapons for itself as I can tell you that the number of units available to France is much more important that what you find in the game. The French army should be 3 or 4 time what is indicated in the NATO sourcebook. The Foreign Legion alone should have grown from 8000-10000 to more than 30000. A special policy might even involve the refugees at France's borders: "Apply to the legion, we temporarily feed your relatives. Join it, we allow them into the country. Serve your time, and they'll be granted citizenship". The French army as given in the game is the peacetime army (450.000-550.000 at the time), it should have grown to wartime numbers (1-1.5 millions).

Then, France will have taken over the weapon production capability of Belgium (largelly located in the Meuse valley, in the Ardennes and south of Brussel) with a nuclear research center depending of Liege university (Sart-Tilman), aircraft production capability (spareparts and more for the F16/Hercules), tank and vehicle production (Patton, M113/AIFV, Scorpion light tank and apc family, Land rover...), Heavy weapons and gun by Cockrill-Sambre (90mm gun, mortars), Light weapons (FN). Exports to the UK, Ireland, Portugal/Spain, the Middle East, Latin America and allied countries in Africa is perfectly plausible.

Concerning Germany, I have a tendency to have Switzerland being the main provider with Germany supplying what it can in raw materials.

Sweden could be the main weapon provider to the Scandinavian area

Soviet Union and US still produce a small number of weaponry/equipment as do Israel which as always been a master at recycling military equipments.

[Mohoender]

I'd just like to stress that the books state neutral countries were hit in with nukes to deny their facilities and resources to the enemy. This tells me that while not wiped off the face of the planet as the belligerent countries effectively were, France, Switzerland, and all the other neutrals aren't going to be in much shape to supply their own needs, let alone export anything beyond despair and refugees.

I always thought that this concerned essentially oil facilities. In the case of France you simply can't except by devastating the country. In the case of Switzerland, the country would have immediately switched to its wartime politics and much facilities would have survived being moved. For my part, i don't even think that one nuke hit Switzerland. Why would you do that The country has no oil, no raw materials and you already disrupt so much the raw material production of its neighbors that the ammount of supply the Swiss can send is far from being capable of tipping the balance. Most oif what it produces will be used domestically and what it would send to (for exemple Germany) will be ammo and spareparts.

[Mohoender]

My idea of equipments found with Franco-Belgian Union

I did not include ships and engineer equipments

Tanks
- AMX 56 Leclerc (slowly entering service in the early 1990's it is expensive and only fully replaced the AMX-30 in the most prestigious units such as the 2nd and 5th DB).
- AMX-30 Brenus (the main French tank)
- AMX-30B2 (progressively being improved to Brenus standards)
- AMX-13/90 (phased out in 1989, several could be returned to service, spare parts would not be a problem)
- Leopard 1 (spare parts can be produced along some for M60 Patton)

Recon vehicle
- Vextra-105 (may be entering service in the very late 1990's)
- AMX-10RC
- VBC-90 (a fair number in the gendarmerie)
- ERC-90
- AML-90
- VBL (several thousands)
- EBR (a few might be put back into service, nevertheless unlikely)
- Scorpion 90 light tanks

IFV-APC
- AMX-10P
- AMX-13 VCI (a good question)
- VAB (the main French work horse)
- VBRG (several hundreds in the Gendarmerie)
- Vextra IFV (may be entering service in the very late 1990's, , I find it more likely than the VBCI)
- AIFV (also spare parts for M113)
- Spartan APC
- Local vehicles such as the BDX
- PVP (not developped until the early 2000's but it could be developped nonetheless as it is based on vehicles existing in T2K).

Soft-skinned vehicles
- Land Rover
- Peugeot P4
- Auverland
- Hotchkiss Jeep
- Renault (TRM-2000/4000/10000)
- Volvo N10
- Berliet GB 8KT/Renault GBC180 and GBH280
- Acmat VLRA (possibly a number of armoured version)
- Simca-Marmon
- Several more types as the list is quite large even including possibly a fair number of WW2 GMC trucks

Artillery
- Pluton/Hads
- MLRS
- AuF1
- Mk F3
- M109 (spare parts can be produced)
- Caesar system
- TR-F1
- Older 105-155mm howitzers
- Kanonenjagdpanzer (small number with Belgium)
- Crotale air defense system
- Roland air defense system
- Hawk air defense system
- Mistral air defense system
- AMX-13/30 AD with twin 30mm
- 20mm air defense gun (tarrasque and Rheinmetall both home produced)

Support Weapons
- Mortars (120, 81 and 60mm)
- MILAN
- HOT
- ERYX
- APILAS
- LRAC-89
- Grenade launchers and rifle grenades

Light weapons
- Browning HP
- Beretta M9
- French pistols (forgot which one)
- MAT-49 (likely to be back in production as it is easy to build)
- Beretta M12
- MAS-49/56 (rare and not in front line)
- FAMAS
- FN FAL
- FN FNC
- FR F1/F2
- Hecate
- FN Minimi
- FN MAG
- M2HB

Aircrafts
- Dassault Rafale
- Dassault Mirage 2000
- F16 Fighting Falcon (spare parts can be produced)
- Dassault Mirage F1
- Dassault Mirage 3/5
- Crusader F8
- Dassault Mirage IV
- Sepecat Jaguar
- Dassault Super Etendard
- Breguet Atlantic
- Breguet Aliz
- E-3 Sentry
- Dassault Alpha Jet
- Fouga Magister
- Several basic training aircrafts
- Airbus A400M (In very late 1990's if any)
- C-130 Hercules
- C-160 Transall
- Noratlas
- Airbus
- Caravelle
- Nord 262
- KC-135
- Several types of light transport aircraft including Embraer, Falcon, Broussard, Paris...

Helicopters
- Tigre
- Gazelle
- Alouette
- Puma/Super Puma and evolutions
- Agusta 109
- Lynx
- Dauphin

[Legbreaker]

I always thought that this concerned essentially oil facilities.

The following is from the 2.2 BYB.

major industrial and oil centers in neutral nations are targeted, to prevent their possible use by the other side.

The exact same words are in V1.0.
So, oil isn't the only target possibility, and in fact is likely to only represent a minority of targets hit in the neutral countries given the wealth of industry which could be deemed as potentially helpful to an enemy - weapons, ammunition, vehicles, spare parts, electronics, the list just goes on and on.

Now I know next to nothing about the distribution of industry across France, but I'm fairly certain it's not all located in one convenient to hit with a nuke location and therefore I can see relatively widespread destruction. Not perhaps on the scale seen in belligerent countries, but destruction all the same.

As for Switzerland, perhaps they did dodge a nuke, mainly I'd think because they have a loooooong history of neutrality unlike France. Switzerland surely has some nukeable targets, but given their history of sitting on the fence, I'd assume they were not hit. What's the point after all It's not like the Swizz have ever helped (or harmed for that matter) anybody any time in the last few centuries!

[Mohoender]

Now I know next to nothing about the distribution of industry across France, but I'm fairly certain it's not all located in one convenient to hit with a nuke location and therefore I can see relatively widespread destruction. Not perhaps on the scale seen in belligerent countries, but destruction all the same.

And, then, we are back to the old issue: is France party to the war or not. Unlike US, France has little in term of large industrial centers except if you count the large civilian centers to the north, Strasbourg, Toulouse and the Rhone Valley. Then, to really destroy it, you must use quite a lot of nukes as Industries are much more scattered.

Large French cities are administrative and trade centers, rarely industrial centers (a nuke on Paris will not destroy one single industry). Paris is ten times smaller than NYC (3 times smaller than Detroit) but the area containing the industries around Paris is ten times larger than the same NYC.

Ground weapon industries are scattered in the small and average cities of the Massif Central valleys. If you take Roanne where most current tanks are being produced, the city itself is 35.000h with an urban area of 100.000. Basically, it is Burlington (Vermont).

If you use the needed amount of nukes, France get into the war or to his knees (fine with me but if it's so, it can't manage to retain any sort of government, the Union Corse is an urban legend, it can't move to the Rhine and secure the borders, It never invaded Belgium, Germany or Netherlands).

The game has been quite good when locating most destruction to the Atlantic coast. If you hit a number of location to the Atlantic coast you deny to France the capability to trade with the outside. First, you destroy half of its oil production. Second, you destroy its main harbor facilities (Bordeaux, Nantes, Le Havre, Dunkerque and Saint Nazaire) with the exception of Marseille. If I'm not mistaken, Marseille is still working and that could be because an eventual nuke hit the "Etang de Berre" instead of the city (one more quarter of the oil production capability). If inland cities are hit, these should be Lille, Strasbourg and Toulouse. You can add Lyon but it is simply not fun.

If you take the case of Belgium, the problem is quite the same and targets should be Antwerp and Brussel. Ostende Might be on the list as well but I tend to spare it because it, then, allows France to support Quebec. Liege could indeed be a target but most arm indsutries and the FN might survive a hit on the city. It will depend on where the nuke hits. If it hits to the north, the FN is destroyed. If it hits to the center, little factories if any are destoyed. If it hits to the south, the Sart-Tilman is demaged. Liege itself is at the bottom of the Meuse Valley and surrended by a large plateau. If you hit the city, the plateau might not suffer much.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

The threads on American weapons post-exchange and the discussion on a german alternative to the G11 got me thinking. When you get right down to it, NATO is screwed. Most NATO nations rely on weapons that need modern industry, what would happen post-exchange for the west of the world

I'll examine Britain first as it's the nation i know most about, I welcome comments and ideas for the other NATO nations and WP nations aswell.

In 2011 the L85 is an effecive, reliable and good weapon that will see service for the forseeable future. The only problem is it took H&K to fix the damn thing back in 2000. This is not going to be happening in the twilight war.

In 1996 the L85 was rather crap, it was one of those lovely designes that worked great in "ideal" conditions but proved to be sub-standard in the field. During the first gulf war the L85 was considered next to useless by many soldiers due to it's jamming issues. It can be assumed that a few of these faults had been ironed out by 1996 in the T2K timeline (as they had been in reality) but it was still an essentilay unreliable weapon. As the H&K upgrade in 2000 can be ruled out due to the events of the twilight war it can be safely assumed that post-nuclear exchange, this weapon would dissapear rather rapidly from service.

What does that leave the British with Well the only alternative would be to fall back on the old FN-FAL variant known as the SLR L1A1 which was manufactured in Britain and it can be safely assumed that large numbers could be found in storage. But could Britain manufacture this weapon the SLR was built in Liverpool, Birmingham and the London borough of Enfield. All 3 where targets of nuclear strikes, as was almost all of the UK's industrial capability.

So what the hell could Britain do, post-exchange, to re-arma nd rebuild her armed forces I'm throwing this one out because, quite frankly, i have no bloody clue otherthan to continue to use stored weapons untill they ran out.

I can see them possibly going back to the old Lee-Enfield although you'd have to convert them to 7.62mm NATO or make more British .303

Chuck

[95th Rifleman]

The Russians are many things, stupid is not one of them. An attack on France is almost guaranteed to bring them into the war on NATO's side.

Sure some neutral countries would of been hit but i don't think the soviets would of done much against France, not after they made such a show of staying out of the war.

France has a significant military, both conventional and nuclear with a strong naval capability. As long as they stayed neutral I don't honestly see the soviets gunning for them. Why risk bringing them into the war when they are happy to sit out and watch

[95th Rifleman]

I can see them possibly going back to the old Lee-Enfield although you'd have to convert them to 7.62mm NATO or make more British .303

Chuck

In second line and civil defense units, definitey.

[Nowhere Man 1966]

The Russians are many things, stupid is not one of them. An attack on France is almost guaranteed to bring them into the war on NATO's side.

Sure some neutral countries would of been hit but i don't think the soviets would of done much against France, not after they made such a show of staying out of the war.

France has a significant military, both conventional and nuclear with a strong naval capability. As long as they stayed neutral I don't honestly see the soviets gunning for them. Why risk bringing them into the war when they are happy to sit out and watch

Good points, I think the Soviets would have enough problems with all the American (and UK/Red Chinese) nukes they had to take a hit with. I think if they can avoid the French beating them up as well, they would leave France alone. I think over time, maybe the USSR would seek France as a trading partner, if the Soviets could get things going relatively well, France could receive raw materials from the USSR in exchange for finished products.

Chuck

[Mohoender]

I can see them possibly going back to the old Lee-Enfield although you'd have to convert them to 7.62mm NATO or make more British .303

Chuck

The conversion has been carried out in the mid-1950's