MaHaL
Conductor of the Choir of Death
- Location
- Canada
Fair enough, I just didn't make the connection to greenhouses from the way you phrased it. Still having something notable for frost intolerance in AB just doesn't scream good idea to me.
A Convoluted North West Mess, 2019 to 1777 ISOT
- Thread starter Zealous Specter
- Start date
- Discussion What if? Timeline
You are almost certainly correct. On the other hand, I'm doing this for fun and not because I really want to submit a completely real and completely complete five-year agricultural plan for production for 12 million people plus livestock, pets, immigrants and neighbours. I'm happy to prove that it can be done without having to go completely nuts and putting an entire province under glass for growing vegetables or conquering Saskatchewan to grow alfalfa, potatoes, wheat, and lentils.
If I was going to provide an analysis of what I think should be grown and how it would be a much longer series of posts not just projecting wheat harvests by the ton.
There would be greenhouse designs, new orchards being planted as shelter belts (with additional notes about species selection), new five year agricultural crop degrees (one year straight academics, four compressed/correspondence classes+field work) for the Civilian Survival Service to manage new communal farms, crop rotation designs, algae culture, seaweed farming of the coast of BC/Alaska/Washington, soil improvements including terra preta, additional composting, and rock dust. Plus revamping the handling of basically all organic for towns, cities, and farms to supply that terra preta through modified coking ovens.
And that's just growing vegetation for food and things that are directly adjacent to vegetation for food and excluding anything like medicinal crop farming (going to need pain killers, so we need to allow for poppy farming along with the weed and what are we going to be fermenting for booze?). Farming livestock is that two or three times again, plus fish farms, plus trying to find data about what should be being provided to supplement feed for the fish. Education is like that all over again with a different set of citations and requirements for how fast things have to scale up and/or sideways. Military technology is another two or three times the research in different dimensions and history again. (Air force? Blue water navy, brown water, green water, coast guard? What kind of an army? Do you design for steam so you can use other people's fuel supplies or diesel/gas for convenience near your own infrastructure?) Military training outside of some ground and airforces centers in Alberta and Naval stuff in BC? How fast can large scale production of new engines spool up? Who should we trade with? Who can we trade with?
I spent a week off and on trying to make the numbers work nicely for building potato farming greenhouses for 12 million people trying to make it fit into multilevel underground parkades with plywood boxes and garbage bag liners and lights lifted from car dealerships to supplement things and it doesn't as far as I can tell. So.
So.
If you've got a better plan then, please. Please.
Roll it on out. Anything beyond, 'I think you're wrong.' Anything at all. Transport, alternate food supply analysis, politics. Anything.
MaHaL
Conductor of the Choir of Death
- Location
- Canada
Look mate, I'm just pointing out something that I didn't see you address you don't need to get that fucking defensive. To me this conversation has gone:
You - "Long detailed interesting agricultural breakdown."
Me - "One point in that concerns me and seems unaddressed."
You - "Nah man I addressed it."
Me - "Fair enough, I didn't notice. Still concerns me though."
To which you, to be hyperbolic, lost your shit at, and then asked that I make a similarly detailed post.
I'm not going to do that, I'm not invested enough to put the amount of effort in you have. I'll hang around offer comments here and there and if something I have relevant knowledge about comes up I'll do more than just little side points.
I'm not asking for something similarly detailed. I know that I have issues about how much I dig into things and what is, in most contexts, an unhealthy urge to run logistics models and I apologize if you felt attacked, pressured or anything like that.
But I put the posts before the one where I just ranted without citations together from Atomic Rocket links, Wikipedia and some google results to fill in around the edges with a spreadsheet, a few sheets of loose leaf and a notepad file to draft things in. Just some noodling down the Wikipedia rabbit hole and a scratch notepad file can take you a great distance toward how seeing much needs to be done and how much there is to do it with (and how much bigger both of those numbers are than many people realize) and I would like some fellow travellers because no matter how many links I click I am just one guy and I'll miss something.
Possibly something very cool, or disastrous, or both. (Also, also, learning new trivia is fun. Sharing new trivia is best.)
And that'd be a shame. (Non-random example: Until DireSquirrel mentioned the Year Without a Summer I'd forgotten about it completely despite reading a book within the last two months set during that period where the temperature and crop issues were a major plot point.)
Pick something you might know a little about that should be affected, see if a quick wiki walk knocks something interesting loose and if so bring your prize back to the thread in summary form to be rewarded with likes or other ratings.
Round your demand targets up and your supply numbers down and you'll go far.
But I put the posts before the one where I just ranted without citations together from Atomic Rocket links, Wikipedia and some google results to fill in around the edges with a spreadsheet, a few sheets of loose leaf and a notepad file to draft things in. Just some noodling down the Wikipedia rabbit hole and a scratch notepad file can take you a great distance toward how seeing much needs to be done and how much there is to do it with (and how much bigger both of those numbers are than many people realize) and I would like some fellow travellers because no matter how many links I click I am just one guy and I'll miss something.
Possibly something very cool, or disastrous, or both. (Also, also, learning new trivia is fun. Sharing new trivia is best.)
And that'd be a shame. (Non-random example: Until DireSquirrel mentioned the Year Without a Summer I'd forgotten about it completely despite reading a book within the last two months set during that period where the temperature and crop issues were a major plot point.)
Pick something you might know a little about that should be affected, see if a quick wiki walk knocks something interesting loose and if so bring your prize back to the thread in summary form to be rewarded with likes or other ratings.
Round your demand targets up and your supply numbers down and you'll go far.
So. Boats and ships and associated nonsense.
The US Navy currently breaks navies down into blue water (ocean-based operations, frequently far from home ports), brown water (naval forces engaging on rivers and smaller lakes) and green water (blue water, but for other reasons restricted to near home ports). I'm going to throw the Coast Guard in as a fourth category. But that is in the future, probably five-ish years I'd guestimate. With the loss of GPS and other supporting facilities, in the short run, everything that came through the Event is going to be doing Coast Guard work. Them's the facts.
In the longer run, what we can build becomes more important.
On hand we have...
CANADA
CFB Esquimalt
United States
Washinton State
Naval Base Kitsap is broken into two parts
Bangor
Bremerton
Aircraft Carriers
USS Nimitz (CVN-68)
USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70)
Two nuclear aircraft carriers are uh, probably overkill for anything in the 18th century you can resolve through the use of air strikes. That tremendous operational range is nice though.
Naval Station Everett
I didn't find anything for Alaska before I got tired and stopped looking.
The Arleigh-Burke class of Guided-missile destroyer is ~2.8 times longer than one of the latest first rates in the Royal Navy, and frankly, just ridiculous in comparison. Their range isn't quite good enough to get to Hawaii and back on their own tanks, but if we scroll back up to the Halifax frigates those are.
And then there are the aircraft carriers.
For post Event production, I favour the coast to be guarded by torpedo boats, the rivers patrolled by boats with jet pumps for thrust (like the Small Unit Riverine Craft or the older Swift Boats or, if what you really want to do is put your boats on a wet meadow with absolutely no stealthy option, an Air Boat), and starting up production of Destroyers to fill blue water naval requirements.
Now, fun times, where do these go? BC drains into the Pacific and Arctic Oceans, which is nice and fine. Plenty of big boats there to deal with anyone who wants to pick a fight or ice that eats expeditions.
Alberta drains into Hudson Bay/the North Atlantic, the Arctic Ocean and, via the Milk River, the Gulf of Mexico (Milk to Missouri to Mississippi). Much like Hawaii (not yet unified, so that's yet another bit of fun) gives the ones who hold it a great place to control the Pacific, the Mississippi gives a tremendous amount of leverage to the first group to take it and hold it in controlling the North American continent. I'm not saying that you want to forget the Saskatchewan Rivers - there is going to be trappers and traders coming up them and causing problems, but if you want to do something to deal with the Americans and whatever hijinx they get up to, that is theroad river you want to go down. I am willing to take arguments on what the power source should be for the riverine craft - I'm not sure that the lack of flexibility from using gasoline or diesel is enough to offset the greater power to weight ratio that comes from not having a steam engine and condenser to lug around. That should probably be sorted out in trials before ordering the stacks and stacks of them you'd want for such a situation. Not that there wouldn't be a lot of things to sort out before the mass production could begin anyway, and a lot of that should be common.
Gives everyone involved time to scale things up while decisions are being made, I guess.
The US Navy currently breaks navies down into blue water (ocean-based operations, frequently far from home ports), brown water (naval forces engaging on rivers and smaller lakes) and green water (blue water, but for other reasons restricted to near home ports). I'm going to throw the Coast Guard in as a fourth category. But that is in the future, probably five-ish years I'd guestimate. With the loss of GPS and other supporting facilities, in the short run, everything that came through the Event is going to be doing Coast Guard work. Them's the facts.
In the longer run, what we can build becomes more important.
On hand we have...
CANADA
CFB Esquimalt
HMCS Vancouver (FFH 331)
HMCS Regina (FFH 334)
HMCS Calgary (FFH 335)
HMCS Winnipeg (FFH 338)
HMCS Ottawa (FFH 341)
HMCS Regina (FFH 334)
HMCS Calgary (FFH 335)
HMCS Winnipeg (FFH 338)
HMCS Ottawa (FFH 341)
HMCS Nanaimo (MM 702)
HMCS Edmonton
HMCS Whitehorse
HMCS Yellowknife
HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709)
HMCS Brandon (MM 710)
HMCS Edmonton
HMCS Whitehorse
HMCS Yellowknife
HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709)
HMCS Brandon (MM 710)
HMCS Victoria (SSK 876)
HMCS Corner Brook
HMCS Chicoutimi (SSK 879)
HMCS Corner Brook
HMCS Chicoutimi (SSK 879)
CFAV Tillicum (YTM 555), tugboat
Fire-class fireboat
CFAV Firebrand (YTR 562), fireboat
Ville-class tugs
CFAV Lawrenceville (YTL 590), tugboat
CFAV Parksville (YTL 591), tugboat
Glen-class tugs
CFAV Glendyne (YTB 640), tugboat
CFAV Glendale (YTB 641), tugboat
Orca-class patrol craft training tender
Orca (PCT 55)
Raven (PCT 56)
Caribou (PCT 57)
Renard (PCT 58)
Wolf (PCT 59)
Grizzly (PCT 60)
Cougar (PCT 61)
Moose (PCT 62)
Fire-class fireboat
CFAV Firebrand (YTR 562), fireboat
Ville-class tugs
CFAV Lawrenceville (YTL 590), tugboat
CFAV Parksville (YTL 591), tugboat
Glen-class tugs
CFAV Glendyne (YTB 640), tugboat
CFAV Glendale (YTB 641), tugboat
Orca-class patrol craft training tender
Orca (PCT 55)
Raven (PCT 56)
Caribou (PCT 57)
Renard (PCT 58)
Wolf (PCT 59)
Grizzly (PCT 60)
Cougar (PCT 61)
Moose (PCT 62)
Washinton State
Naval Base Kitsap is broken into two parts
Bangor
2 guided missile subs
USS Ohio (SSGN-726)
USS Michigan (SSGN-727)
8 Ballistic missile subs
USS Henry M. Jackson (SSBN-730)
USS Alabama (SSBN-731)
USS Nevada (SSBN-733)
USS Pennsylvania (SSBN-735)
USS Kentucky (SSBN-737)
USS Nebraska (SSBN-739)
USS Maine (SSBN-741)
USS Louisiana (SSBN-743)
1 Fast attack subs
USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23)
USS Ohio (SSGN-726)
USS Michigan (SSGN-727)
8 Ballistic missile subs
USS Henry M. Jackson (SSBN-730)
USS Alabama (SSBN-731)
USS Nevada (SSBN-733)
USS Pennsylvania (SSBN-735)
USS Kentucky (SSBN-737)
USS Nebraska (SSBN-739)
USS Maine (SSBN-741)
USS Louisiana (SSBN-743)
1 Fast attack subs
USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23)
2 Fast Attack subs
USS Seawolf (SSN-21)*
USS Connecticut (SSN-22)*
USS Seawolf (SSN-21)*
USS Connecticut (SSN-22)*
USS Nimitz (CVN-68)
USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70)
Two nuclear aircraft carriers are uh, probably overkill for anything in the 18th century you can resolve through the use of air strikes. That tremendous operational range is nice though.
Naval Station Everett
USS Momsen (DDG-92)
USS Kidd (DDG-100)
USS Gridley (DDG-101)
USS Sampson (DDG-102)
USS Ralph Johnson (DDG-114)
USS Kidd (DDG-100)
USS Gridley (DDG-101)
USS Sampson (DDG-102)
USS Ralph Johnson (DDG-114)
USCGC Henry Blake (WLM-563)
USCGC Blue Shark (WPB-87360)
USCGC Blue Shark (WPB-87360)
I didn't find anything for Alaska before I got tired and stopped looking.
The Arleigh-Burke class of Guided-missile destroyer is ~2.8 times longer than one of the latest first rates in the Royal Navy, and frankly, just ridiculous in comparison. Their range isn't quite good enough to get to Hawaii and back on their own tanks, but if we scroll back up to the Halifax frigates those are.
And then there are the aircraft carriers.
For post Event production, I favour the coast to be guarded by torpedo boats, the rivers patrolled by boats with jet pumps for thrust (like the Small Unit Riverine Craft or the older Swift Boats or, if what you really want to do is put your boats on a wet meadow with absolutely no stealthy option, an Air Boat), and starting up production of Destroyers to fill blue water naval requirements.
Now, fun times, where do these go? BC drains into the Pacific and Arctic Oceans, which is nice and fine. Plenty of big boats there to deal with anyone who wants to pick a fight or ice that eats expeditions.
Alberta drains into Hudson Bay/the North Atlantic, the Arctic Ocean and, via the Milk River, the Gulf of Mexico (Milk to Missouri to Mississippi). Much like Hawaii (not yet unified, so that's yet another bit of fun) gives the ones who hold it a great place to control the Pacific, the Mississippi gives a tremendous amount of leverage to the first group to take it and hold it in controlling the North American continent. I'm not saying that you want to forget the Saskatchewan Rivers - there is going to be trappers and traders coming up them and causing problems, but if you want to do something to deal with the Americans and whatever hijinx they get up to, that is the
Gives everyone involved time to scale things up while decisions are being made, I guess.
- Location
- Somewhere left of nowhere near anywhere
Ya I'll say 1 of them is out at sea doing what Aircraft carriers do best and wasn't there for the event. since it would be pretty odd for both to be in port at the same time.
GeshronTyler
Kleiner Giftzwerg
Spain (California, Mexico, Texas), and France ( Lousiana/New Orleans/Gulf Coast) would be wanting to maintain/broaden influence counter BC expansion. They have the same issues as the British, regarding the decision loop.
That takes us from the relatively clean place of what is possible on a technical level, to what is possible on a political level.
Like, is it possible for the territory inside the Event to unify at all?
It's not technically impossible, sure, but a constitutional amendment for Canada requires a minimum of 2/3s of the provinces and 50%+ of the population. So, Alberta and BC would have to agree and that would let them do things to the Yukon and the other incomplete Territories on a legal basis. It might require a 'national' election to build a new Parliament to legally recognise the fact that the country is much smaller and to supply enough MPs to form a quorum for the national part of the constitutional amendment, so that's great fun as well.
For America, it looks like the general Article V convention might be necessary. Do the bit of Washington and the majority of Alaska get equal representation, or is it by population, partly by territory? How much of a vote does the Nimitz (or Carl Vinson, I'm not picky) get too?
There is a city that crosses the border between Alberta and Saskatchewan. Not two cities next to each other with the same name, but one city, with one council who pick and choose between the applicable laws of two provinces. How long does it take for Lloydminster to declare itself the inheritor of Saskatchewan's seat at the table for any constitutional issues?
I don't know if this would be able to be dealt with as an attack, but there are still clauses in the NORAD and NATO treaties that should probably be checked over. Also, Canada and America would be the only members of the UN present, and it would include a permanent member of the Security Council, what does that do?
And then there's the First Nations and Metis groups and treaties.
Alberta is the western end of a lot of treaties. I haven't dug into them, but I'd be surprised if Alberta and BC can honour all the clauses after the event. And making new ones is, well... I know I'd be doubtful about joining a group that had a history of sending my kids to Residential Schools, or even just boarding schools, involuntarily.
That said, I would like to put forward the name 'Free Northern Group' for the hypothetical unified political group, and 'Fingie' (Proposed pronunciation: Fin-gee) for the demonym. Northern, because it is. Group, because this sure wasn't a planned, voluntary action that brought everyone together to unite under a single banner. Free, because I'm hopeful that the anti-slavery forces can get their acts together fast enough to put in clauses banning supporting slave owners over slaves into this new constitution.
And we'd be so new. So very, very new guys.
Like, is it possible for the territory inside the Event to unify at all?
It's not technically impossible, sure, but a constitutional amendment for Canada requires a minimum of 2/3s of the provinces and 50%+ of the population. So, Alberta and BC would have to agree and that would let them do things to the Yukon and the other incomplete Territories on a legal basis. It might require a 'national' election to build a new Parliament to legally recognise the fact that the country is much smaller and to supply enough MPs to form a quorum for the national part of the constitutional amendment, so that's great fun as well.
For America, it looks like the general Article V convention might be necessary. Do the bit of Washington and the majority of Alaska get equal representation, or is it by population, partly by territory? How much of a vote does the Nimitz (or Carl Vinson, I'm not picky) get too?
There is a city that crosses the border between Alberta and Saskatchewan. Not two cities next to each other with the same name, but one city, with one council who pick and choose between the applicable laws of two provinces. How long does it take for Lloydminster to declare itself the inheritor of Saskatchewan's seat at the table for any constitutional issues?
I don't know if this would be able to be dealt with as an attack, but there are still clauses in the NORAD and NATO treaties that should probably be checked over. Also, Canada and America would be the only members of the UN present, and it would include a permanent member of the Security Council, what does that do?
And then there's the First Nations and Metis groups and treaties.
Alberta is the western end of a lot of treaties. I haven't dug into them, but I'd be surprised if Alberta and BC can honour all the clauses after the event. And making new ones is, well... I know I'd be doubtful about joining a group that had a history of sending my kids to Residential Schools, or even just boarding schools, involuntarily.
That said, I would like to put forward the name 'Free Northern Group' for the hypothetical unified political group, and 'Fingie' (Proposed pronunciation: Fin-gee) for the demonym. Northern, because it is. Group, because this sure wasn't a planned, voluntary action that brought everyone together to unite under a single banner. Free, because I'm hopeful that the anti-slavery forces can get their acts together fast enough to put in clauses banning supporting slave owners over slaves into this new constitution.
And we'd be so new. So very, very new guys.