Remove ads

A Golden Island To The West — California ISOT from 2018 to 1850

Reader mode
kaazmiz said:
Wasn't slave trade still hanging on strong between Spanish colonies in the Caribbean and CSA (geographically speaking) despite its illegality?
USN's ability to control its coastline at the time was marginal at best.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What was banned was the import of new slaves from Africa. I'm not even sure the import of slaves from the Caribbeans was. In fact, as abolitionist ideas grew, export of slaves to the deadly Caribbeans plantations took place if I remember correctly.
 
I don't know about that but a lot of the among the american slave trade was out of the upper south and border states which had smaller plantations and more diverse economies(what was then the largest flour mill in the world was in Virginia, there was also a major woolen factory and one of the largest ironworks in the country as well) and a relatively far more enfranchised population(poor whites were actually allowed to vote) than the deep south which was largely dominated by large plantations and tended to effectively limit the franchised populations to rich white plantation owners.
 
Instant Sunrise said:
It went to Cabo San Lucas and Puerto Vallarta first.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I originally thought 10 weeks was absurdly fast for all the diplomatic visits they would have had to do on a run down the Americans and then up the eastern coast, then over to Europe, and then around Africa.

Then I realized they couldn't have gone that route in just 10 weeks. But it seemed absurdly slow the other way... which I shall mathematically demonstrate here in hopes it helps your writing:

Let's check Google Earth!
It's about 4400 Nautical Miles from San Francisco to those two and then to Pearl.
A sailing ship could usually make about 4 knots, so 1100 hours. Or about 44 days. Realistically it would be much less than that given the trade wind belt across the Pacific, so more like 20-30 days...

10 weeks is 70 days.
So, unless they spent at least 26 days docked, they literally moved slower than a typical sailboat (and I don't mean a clipper, which could manage over 20 knots on average if the winds and current were right)

Hold on, let me check something... ah...
https://www.google.com/search?q=nor...=chrome.0.0.3431j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Google result for the North Equatorial Current Speed is
The North Pacific Current or the North and South Equatorial currents travel at speed of 0.03 to 0.06 m/s.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So about 0.06 to 0.12 knots.

Trade winds averaged 5-6 m/s or about 10-12 knots, blowing on the stern of the carrier on that particular route.

Given how low fluid resistance is at low speeds...

Rowing - Wikipedia
Longer, narrower rowboats can reach 7 knots (13 km/h; 8.1 mph) but most rowboats of 4.3 m (14 ft) can be rowed at 3–4 knots (5.6–7.4 km/h; 3.5–4.6 mph).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If I'm reading the speeds correctly, this suggests they let the wind on the stern provide most of the motive force on the trip from Mexico to Pearl, while the crew took shifts paddling to supplement that. It's still barely making steerage way... if it's making steerage way at all.

So I suggest we shave the total transit time down to 5 weeks, including some days at the first major stop and two weeks at the second to give the Mexican government time to travel to the port and tour the ship (using pigeon mail to notify them is an option, or just flying a plane over and broadcast to the Mexican President's new tablet). Because otherwise, well... it's a wee bit slow... and the carrier might actually not be possible to manoeuvre with the rudders, which is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS on the high seas!

J-Sail said:
Given that I have actually done that in a Naval vessel, that takes less than a week to get to Mazatlan direct at a slow 12-13 knot cruising speed. The usual transit time from San Diego to Pearl Harbor is one week, including training evolutions that take the ship in question significantly "off route." This would indeed be VERY slow-boating for a nuke carrier, even allowing for one to two weeks at each port for any sort of negotiations.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The only way I can see making 10 weeks sensible is if they decided to take a tour of Central America in general, but that raises the problem of where to stop. Just visiting Mexico and saving everyone else for the return leg up the west coast of the Americas makes political sense as it's dropping by the direct neighbours. But other than that... it would be rather rude to not go all the way around South America.

I did the math above and recommended the author change the time elapsed to let the carrier at least make steerage way. For most boats this is 3-5 knots, but I suspect for a supercarrier it is rather faster, at least 5-6 knots...
 
Last edited:
The Roosevelt left on August 29th, 1851, stopped in Cabo San Lucas and Puerto Vallarta before arriving in Hawai'i on October 2nd, 1851, 34 days later.
 
Ninja author*
Guardian54 said:
I did the math above and recommended the author change the time elapsed to let the carrier at least make steerage way. For most boats this is 3-5 knots, but I suspect for a supercarrier it is rather faster, at least 5-6 knots...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You should include in your calculations that a carrier has escorts that have restricted speeds and fuel, and that Burkes would likely paddle at economy speed above 20 knt (37 km/h).
Fuel is not something Cali can spend in large quantities yet, or waste stocks.
 
Instant Sunrise said:
The Roosevelt left on August 29th, 1851, stopped in Cabo San Lucas and Puerto Vallarta before arriving in Hawai'i on October 2nd, 1851, 34 days later.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

As kaazmiz noted, the escorts' economy speeds, if about 20 knots, make 4400 nautical miles a 220 hour trip. This will work, given 3-and-a-bit weeks of pit stop in Mexico :)
 
I can understand how it can be confusing Fox Broadcasting and Fox News are owned by Murdoch but they are separate companies and for the most part from what I understand fox broadcasting network generally doesn't do regular newscasts of their own like the big three broadcast networks do, they tried to get into the broadcast news market and failed so focused on other things.
 
Alane1 said:
I can understand how it can be confusing Fox Broadcasting and Fox News are owned by Murdoch but they are separate companies and for the most part from what I understand fox broadcasting network generally doesn't do regular newscasts of their own like the big three broadcast networks do, they tried to get into the broadcast news market and failed so focused on other things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And Fox Broadcasting isn't afraid to bite Fox News viciously - just look at Family Guy and The Simpsons, their two big animated cash cows, when they take political stances.
 
Alane1 said:
I can understand how it can be confusing Fox Broadcasting and Fox News are owned by Murdoch but they are separate companies and for the most part from what I understand fox broadcasting network generally doesn't do regular newscasts of their own like the big three broadcast networks do, they tried to get into the broadcast news market and failed so focused on other things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A line that gets extremely fuzzy when you realize that the Los Angeles station KTTV and Bay Area Station KTVU are both owned by Fox itself, with KTTV being in the same building as the Fox broadcasting network.
 
kaazmiz said:
Ninja author*

You should include in your calculations that a carrier has escorts that have restricted speeds and fuel, and that Burkes would likely paddle at economy speed above 20 knt (37 km/h).
Fuel is not something Cali can spend in large quantities yet, or waste stocks.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Guardian54 said:
As kaazmiz noted, the escorts' economy speeds, if about 20 knots, make 4400 nautical miles a 220 hour trip. This will work, given 3-and-a-bit weeks of pit stop in Mexico :)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Figure mid to high teens for cruising, not 20+. Also, in the current environment, fewer than normal escorts would be required ("modern" cannon would only be making dents, not holes in an uptime Naval hull), so they could easily leach off the carrier's fuel supplies. Their biggest concern would be fresh food and misc. supplies, which could be delivered by COD aircraft for the trip to Mexico, but only part way to Hawaii.
 
J-Sail said:
Figure mid to high teens for cruising, not 20+. Also, in the current environment, fewer than normal escorts would be required ("modern" cannon would only be making dents, not holes in an uptime Naval hull), so they could easily leach off the carrier's fuel supplies. Their biggest concern would be fresh food and misc. supplies, which could be delivered by COD aircraft for the trip to Mexico, but only part way to Hawaii.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The other problems would be well there are places that are likely listed on modern charts as being navigable for deeper draft vessels aren't necessarily going to be so in the 1850s as the work to do so hasn't been done yet and of course 1850s port facilities which is something they've likely already taken into account.

Instant Sunrise said:
They are, and there's a statewide smallpox vaccination program for uptimers, but people still slip through the cracks or carry it and not realize it.

Also Marin County is ground zero for the Antivax movement in California.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And that is likely without getting into a number of animal and human diseases that can be carried by downtime wild animals and their parasites which wouldn't be subject to such quarantine methods for obvious reasons.
 
Less of a problem than you might think, with sonar navigation available. The biggest problem would be the port size: If I remember, Cabo was a fishing village at best before the resorts started going in in the 1980s, and Puerto Vallarta would not have the length of pier to service a carrier, but barely adequate for one of the escorts (figure twice the length of a Galleon, on par with some of the larger clippers of the day). The answer to that would be using the RHIBs and motor-whaleboats from an anchor point off the shore.

Maps – Old Cabo shows it to be fairly low development in 1970, but the accuracy/resolution of the maps are questionable. A similar situation applies to Puerto Vallarta from the correct timeframe (Jalisco. - David Rumsey Historical Map Collection)
 
Instant Sunrise said:
Fox News Channel, not Fox the broadcast network. FNC is based in New York with a satellite studio in DC
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Alane1 said:
I can understand how it can be confusing Fox Broadcasting and Fox News are owned by Murdoch but they are separate companies and for the most part from what I understand fox broadcasting network generally doesn't do regular newscasts of their own like the big three broadcast networks do, they tried to get into the broadcast news market and failed so focused on other things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm just finding it hard to believe that Fox News doesn't have some kind of local setup that could get out there and start broadcasting "news" - even if it's just a bunch of local reporters with a radio transmitter. It's not like there isn't a fairly strong Republican presence in parts of Cali.
 
ToothMaker said:
I'm just finding it hard to believe that Fox News doesn't have some kind of local setup that could get out there and start broadcasting "news" - even if it's just a bunch of local reporters with a radio transmitter. It's not like there isn't a fairly strong Republican presence in parts of Cali.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Cable channels like FNC are pretty small outfits and can broadcast directly to cable headends. The major broadcast networks have to go through their various local affiliate/O&O stations.

Plus like, I've been in the building in LA where the Fox broadcast network and Fox sports broadcasts from, on Election Day 2008. It was a ghost town.

Fox News' parent company may have a presence in California, but the specific division of Fox News Channel is actually pretty small and it's pretty exclusively located in New York and DC.
 
Instant Sunrise said:
Cable channels like FNC are pretty small outfits and can broadcast directly to cable headends. The major broadcast networks have to go through their various local affiliate/O&O stations.

Plus like, I've been in the building in LA where the Fox broadcast network and Fox sports broadcasts from, on Election Day 2008. It was a ghost town.

Fox News' parent company may have a presence in California, but the specific division of Fox News Channel is actually pretty small and it's pretty exclusively located in New York and DC.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

At best there might be a scattering of Fox News reporters stranded in California covering California congressional races on the day of the event. I actually did some research into this, CNN has a news bureau in California, heck even the BBC has one, but Fox News doesn't. The various Fox affiliate stations in California, the local broadcast ones are pretty much the only thing owned by Fox that does news post-event, and they were never under Fox News Channel umbrella, but Fox Broadcast Network. Fox survives... Fox News is basically dead, as they operate mostly in as Instant said in NYC and DC, and pundits and interviews simply call in with a green screen at a local Fox affiliate or their own camera.
 
If we're talking about setting up a Fox News analogue for right-wing Californians, then there's always One America News Network. Based in San Diego, which like Orange County to its north, is a former Republican stronghold.
 
Instant Sunrise said:
California Semiconductors Plans new 32nm Fabrication Plant on Site of Former Sunnyvale Costco
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Instant Sunrise said:
Vallco Shopping Mall
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Instant Sunrise said:
Once passing the old theaters and the still closed Cold Stone Creamery
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

@Instant Sunrise, I have to commend you on your thoroughness, and I have to ask if you are a Bay Area, or even a California native yourself. I ask because I know exactly where all of those locations are, and have eaten at that cold stone before. Unfortunately that mall is closed, which is bummer, the theater was nice.

And to avoid a derail, I'm glad to see that even with the attempted appeasement and effective bribery by the southern politicians modern ethics, especially about slavery still hold strong.

Also, I recall in a much earlier chapter where some group of people were mentioning arming the south for the civil war, if you don't mind answering, will that play a larger part down the line?
 
Actually I live in Orange County but some of my co-writers live in the Bay Area.

The Sunnyvale Costco site though was me fucking around with google maps trying to find a good site.

The site I went with is right next to a CalTrain station, thus exempt from parking minimums ITTL, and currently there's a Costco and a robotic surgery company there.

Post-event that Costco failed a months after the event because they ran out of inventory. The robotic surgery company also struggled and ultimately took a land swap deal where CalSemi would take over their current HQ in exchange for moving that company over to a different office park across the street at a site that had been under construction at the time of the Event.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top