Remove ads

Attempting to Fulfill the Plan MNKh Edition

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
Good point on the dams likely being remote and needing a bunch of extra infrastructure just so the power can get get to the grid, but I think just ponying up the cash for the high-capacity power lines will mostly be worth it.

Dwergar said:
We can just build power-hungry facilities on the spot, no? Seeing as we need a lot of copper/aluminum/steel/whatever, and thus more facilities to produce that, another planned city wouldn't be a bad choice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Aside from the extremely power-hungry task of aluminum smelting I don't know what other resources are worth building the middle of nowhere alone. For steel it's outright non-viable since that also requires coal deliveries alongside are. That said I wouldn't mind a new planned city or two for aluminum in the 70's, curious what a modern take on it would look like.

Though this reminds me of a Discord conversation from long ago: Blackstar teased that after building a dam on the upper Lena, we'd have the option to build an even bigger dam on the lower Lena. And that one would explicitly not be able to send all its power to the rest of the grid without an absurd amount of infrastructure. So why would we build that? Apparently there's plenty of bauxite nearby, because the suggestion was using it to crash the global aluminum market.
 
General_Urist said:
Good point on the dams likely being remote and needing a bunch of extra infrastructure just so the power can get get to the grid, but I think just ponying up the cash for the high-capacity power lines will mostly be worth it.


Aside from the extremely power-hungry task of aluminum smelting I don't know what other resources are worth building the middle of nowhere alone. For steel it's outright non-viable since that also requires coal deliveries alongside are. That said I wouldn't mind a new planned city or two for aluminum in the 70's, curious what a modern take on it would look like.

Though this reminds me of a Discord conversation from long ago: Blackstar teased that after building a dam on the upper Lena, we'd have the option to build an even bigger dam on the lower Lena. And that one would explicitly not be able to send all its power to the rest of the grid without an absurd amount of infrastructure. So why would we build that? Apparently there's plenty of bauxite nearby, because the suggestion was using it to crash the global aluminum market.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
there was also mentions of it causing BIG ecological problems... but honestly, any kind of power plant we build causes problems.

Coal is just more diffused/less concentrated than Hydro. also it requires more coal to be imported, so there's a recurrent cost that's far lower for hydro I imagine
 
Remove ads
Cannon Omake: The New Motor Rifle Squad
  • Sidestory
    • The New Motor Rifle Squad

    The 60s saw a wide range of improvements to the Worker's Red Army from the highly impressive if troubled T-64 that gave NATO planners nightmares, improved Self Propelled Air Defense and Self Propelled Artillery systems and much, much more. None of these developments were as impactful as the improvements and additions to the humble motor rifleman and his squad.

    On the individual level every man in the squad will be very appreciative of the new load bearing equipment, similar in shape and function to the US M-1956 ILCE. A belt supported by a suspender formed the 'base', with an optional field pack that can be included and more pouches able to be attached as desired. Better design and better material then previous equipment means this will be a significant improvement, although underappreciated compared to what comes next.

    When it comes to individual weaponry the AKM has already been in service for a couple of years. The AKMS variant with an underfolding stock would also be popular despite the stock being less suited for accurate shooting and being heavier to boot. The RPK however was new, replacing the RPD, being 2.6kg lighter at 4.8kg and using either a 75 round drum mag or a 40 round stick mag. The RPK also takes the standard 30 round stick mags of the AKM. The (in)famous RPG-7 replaced the RPG-2 and provided a large step up in anti-tank capabilities, as well as general purpose munition launching capabilities. The new PK GPMG replaced both the DP-36 LMG and the SGM MMG in infantry use, but would not be seen at the squad level, instead being used in the company weapons platoon.

    The BMP-1 was the star of the show. Weighing in at 16 tons, with a 60km/h top speed on roads and 40km/h top speed off road it was a nippy beast. A 20mm autocannon and co-axial 7.62mm machinegun stuffed into a small 1 man turret with an exterior rack holding four 9M14 ATGMs providing long range anti tank capabilities formed the armament. The front was armoured and sloped enough to shrug off 20mm cannon fire at 500m distance, and the passenger space could hold up to 11 dismounts on paper, although in practice that was cut to 9 dismounts. To round it of the BMP-1 was had amphibious capabilities to help it cross rivers. While the Swedish pbv-301 would technically beat the BMP-1 to the punch as the first IFV in service, the BMP was still remembered as the IFV and for good reason.

    The squad itself is organized with 11 men split into 3 teams, 2 4-man teams with AKs and an RPK each in the SAW role, with one of these teams also carrying the RPG-7. A 2-man vehicle crew operated the BMP, with one driver-mechanic and one gunner, with the squad leader commanding the vehicle in his own spot behind the driver while the squad was mounted and the gunner taking over to let the squad leader dismount with the rest of the squad. Meant to operate in close coordination with the BMP-1, the soviet motor rifle squad was for a time without peer when it came to protected mobility and firepower.
     
    Last edited:
  • Sidestory
    • Dracon Von Blood said:
    Honestly I would be happy if we arent using the same engine since the bt7 in this timeline, that would be enough improvements for me.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Post war tanks didn't literally use the same engine as the BT-7. Just because engines come from the same family doesn't mean they have the same performance, its like saying some modern cars use the same engine as the Ford T. Its technically true, but implies things have not improved since then, which they have.
     
    Last edited:
    Thinking more of it, any nuclear development we do next plan won't be a practical push to replace fossil fuels as a power source. It will best be small-ish scale, a pracyice un at rolling out non-experimental nuclear power. Once we build Atomash, which might be next plan but not promises, then we'll really be able to mass produce those cores.
     
    General_Urist said:
    Thinking more of it, any nuclear development we do next plan won't be a practical push to replace fossil fuels as a power source. It will best be small-ish scale, a pracyice un at rolling out non-experimental nuclear power. Once we build Atomash, which might be next plan but not promises, then we'll really be able to mass produce those cores.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    it was mentioned (I think on discord?) that basically next turn we get to choose how many dice (1, 2 or 3) of autonuclear we want to do, and each extra dice the cost goes up by a lot.

    It's something like x1.25 for one dice, 1.75 for 2 dice, and 2.25 for three dice (might not be the actual values, don't quote me on this). the multiplier would be compared to not-nuclear-powered energy, so probably autogas.

    more dice also means more experience with nuclear and more progress in technological development AND, later on, better economies of scale. But initially it would be really expensive.

    On the other hand if we go for the cheaper option it will take longer for nuclear as a tech to mature and become worth it.

    So... If we can afford it, it might be worth it to go all in on this, though as already pointed out it will take the whole plan for the +electricity to comne only
     
    think it def worth it to go all in on nuclear when we get the chance so we have more knwoeldge on how to work with it and mass produce make it safer ect and so we can move more of our eleictry to do that which should mitgaite climate change more
     
    Woltaire said:
    think it def worth it to go all in on nuclear when we get the chance so we have more knwoeldge on how to work with it and mass produce make it safer ect and so we can move more of our eleictry to do that which should mitgaite climate change more
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I tend to agree. depending on the budget available, of course.

    Keep in mind we won't see any return from this for at least 5 years, as it takes at least that long for nuclear plants to actually go active. And we'd be REALLY overpaying our electricity compared to gas, coal and hydro.

    On the other hand HOPEFULLY autogas and autohydro will still be able to keep up (mostly, with the occasional coal plant) with our rising needs, and the plan after that we should FINALLY have a surplus thanks to the nuclear plants going online.

    And, hopefully, the plants will also go down in price from all the investments in them.
     
    Pittauro said:
    I tend to agree. depending on the budget available, of course.

    Keep in mind we won't see any return from this for at least 5 years, as it takes at least that long for nuclear plants to actually go active. And we'd be REALLY overpaying our electricity compared to gas, coal and hydro.

    On the other hand HOPEFULLY autogas and autohydro will still be able to keep up (mostly, with the occasional coal plant) with our rising needs, and the plan after that we should FINALLY have a surplus thanks to the nuclear plants going online.

    And, hopefully, the plants will also go down in price from all the investments in them.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Ah yes, depending on available budget. Because when we were selecting funding and targets for the 7th plan, The Voz noted that the ministry was making plans for significant funding cuts after this plan to cool down the economy. I expect we'll be stuck on 15% GNP (compare to the 25% now). Maybe 20% at huge political cost. We still have 6 more turns to ramp up the overall economy and perhaps won't have as many automated projects, but we won't be rolling in dough.

    And I actually doubt we'll get effective autohydro next plan. The current autohydro represents completing all the "conventional" dams that only take a few years to enter service, with its early generation representing modernization of existing infrastructure (EDIT: And filling up of the dams that were already started under Malenkov). Low-to-medium hanging fruit. The stuff that it unlocks is very big dams that will be lucky to fill up their reservoirs enough for much generation in 5 years, if they're even done pouring all the concrete by them. And there's no "easy" stuff for early generation. I still fully support building these dams of course for low-carbon power, but I expect a large lead time.
     
    midnight77 said:
    I'm just worried that mass building of nuclear power plants could start an arms race with the US.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    We want an armsrace with the US becuase we don't have to pay for it the people paying for it are the suckers in the army. An armsrace will only strengthen the MNKH and cripple the army as more and more of their budget and personal are going to be dedicated to a nuclear force that is never going to be used. The army has already gathered enough nuclear weapons to end the world 3 times anything more they build is just fucking themselves over.
     
    Hard committing to nuclear at high cost in the next plan seems like putting a long-term concern(CO2 emission) well ahead of short-term concerns like powering industry, keeping the Supreme Soviet happy, making sure we don't have the grid blackout when some extreme event happens or such.

    I know people want to stop the problems of today, but the Soviet Union has lots of present-day problems that are more urgent than problems like carbon emissions or expensive space launch.
     
    Nuclear does have a few short term benefits, like getting rid of coal plants which is a nice boost to our populations health and subsequently making coal a nice money maker.
     
    DeltaV11.2 said:
    Hard committing to nuclear at high cost in the next plan seems like putting a long-term concern(CO2 emission) well ahead of short-term concerns like powering industry, keeping the Supreme Soviet happy, making sure we don't have the grid blackout when some extreme event happens or such.

    I know people want to stop the problems of today, but the Soviet Union has lots of present-day problems that are more urgent than problems like carbon emissions or expensive space launch.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I mean, hard commiting to nuclear will power our industries, its just that it would be cheaper to do petrochems. And there are reasons in universe for us to do this, mostly regarding issues in bulk coal transportation among other things. Besides, if Climate Quest comes, it will be incredibly satisfying to say "we have done our part" condescendingly in climate meetings, and will make the transition to renewables much smoother, not to mention all the health effects. Also, I want my Atompunk USSR and by Marx we shall have it!
     
    General_Urist said:
    And I actually doubt we'll get effective autohydro next plan. The current autohydro represents completing all the "conventional" dams that only take a few years to enter service, with its early generation representing modernization of existing infrastructure (EDIT: And filling up of the dams that were already started under Malenkov). Low-to-medium hanging fruit. The stuff that it unlocks is very big dams that will be lucky to fill up their reservoirs enough for much generation in 5 years, if they're even done pouring all the concrete by them. And there's no "easy" stuff for early generation. I still fully support building these dams of course for low-carbon power, but I expect a large lead time.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    mh... we could fund similar dams in CMEA countries, and work on interconnecting the electrical grids.

    Basically kind of what China does in its Belt and Road initiative.

    midnight77 said:
    I was under the impression it was less than OTL.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    basically the propaganda is there, but the people in power mostly use it to strenghten their control of their country and stop internal problems.

    Of course people are people, and if you wear a mask for long enough...
     
    midnight77 said:
    I was under the impression it was less than OTL.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Blackstar has said by the end of the decade stockpiles should be at around 30k warheads each. We are dealing with richer superpowers, and a mentality of "we need to catch up" on both sides. Honestly, it doesn't matter, 10k nukes are more than enough to end both of us and we will have that several times over.
     
    midnight77 said:
    I was under the impression it was less than OTL.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Far far more in terms of nuclear buildup. The army can see the massive US bomber arsenal and wants a bigger domestic one. The US has a similar reaction to your missile and air defense network. Both sides are basically mass producing plutonium at rates far higher then the OTL cold war, because neither wants to have less bombs.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top