World War III anyone?

[dragoner]

These threads all just get mashed together, I guess I'm guilty of just treating them the same. Also I just saw Interstellar, and it has some hokum disaster as 'why we have to leave'.

A timeline? I love making timelines.

Ok, I'll start.

2036: NASA launches international mission to Mars.
2057: While the mission to Mars only succeeds in placing a scientific colony, spacecraft development is greatly enhanced, the DeVass FTL propulsion unit is first tested.
2059: Unmanned probes sent to Alpha Centauri.
2061: First manned mission to Alpha Centauri.
2063: First colony founded on Alpha Centauri prime, "Harmony".

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

These threads all just get mashed together, I guess I'm guilty of just treating them the same. Also I just saw Interstellar, and it has some hokum disaster as 'why we have to leave'.

A timeline? I love making timelines.

Ok, I'll start.

2036: NASA launches international mission to Mars.
2057: While the mission to Mars only succeeds in placing a scientific colony, spacecraft development is greatly enhanced, the DeVass FTL propulsion unit is first tested.
2059: Unmanned probes sent to Alpha Centauri.
2061: First manned mission to Alpha Centauri.
2063: First colony founded on Alpha Centauri prime, "Harmony".

Rather bit rushed don't you think?

A more realistic timeline is this:
21st Century

2001 to 2033 Era of interplanetary exploration
Various space agencies launch space probes, towards the end of this period, the first humans set foot on Mars, this is basically 4 to 6 humans much as Robert Zubrin had foreseen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct

2034 to 2066 Era of Mars Colonization
the colonies are small and government supported, the Mars colonies are established the soonest because they are the low hanging fruit, and their is much government support for them, one of their chief tasks is to study the planet Mars in detail, look for life, experiment with growing crops in pressurized greenhouses and so forth, the population of the colony is around 100.

2067-2100 Era of commercial colonization
Larger colonies are built, this time for industrial purposes, private space tourism really takes off. People spend their vacations in orbit, there is some manufacturing going on in space. Solar power satellites become viable, beaming energy down to Earth. Some early asteroid mining ventures also begin at this time.

The 22nd Century

2101-2133 Era of space cities
Larger space colonies like this Stanford Torus are built at this time

2134-2200 Era of Terraforming
Society reaches a point where terraforming project begin. Also the first slower than light starships are launched at this time.

The 23rd Century

2300-2399 Era of interstellar colonization
With the invention of Warp Drive, colonization of nearby stars begins in earnest.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

It seems to me that we had a better idea of what World War III would look like in the year 2000 by 1984, than we do about what such a war would look like in 2030 today.

Today, people can't agree on what the past was about in order for there to be any discussion about the future.

 

[dragoner]

What's rushed? First flight to first jet, about forty years; first satellite to moon landing, twelve years. It's more realistic to actually have dates on a timeline.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

What's rushed? First flight to first jet, about forty years; first satellite to moon landing, twelve years. It's more realistic to actually have dates on a timeline.

My timeline gives more time for the various eras to play out rather than an immediate rush to the stars after someone makes a "Eureka" discovery in his garage, sort of like the Absent Minded Professor movies. You see some amature inventer is trying to create a new formula for better peanut butter, when suddenly his lab gets struck by lightning, and while sifting through the ruins, he discovers warp drive! Does that really ever happen?

 

[dragoner]

What eras are there to play out in reality? None; most of the stuff you posted is like the peanut butter, it won't exist. But the effects of technology are very real; oceanic ship travel was du jour for hundreds of years for passengers, air travel displaced it in about 30 years. There won't be long term colonies on Mars, it's a rock, it would be easier to build cities in Nevada's high desert or the Sahara. No orbitals, or even general mining of asteroids for a long time; about the only thing of immediate value is Titan, and maybe He3 on the moon later on. Finding a livable planet would be immediately useful and promote a land rush most likely.

 

[Reynard]

Tom, give everyone a chance to express their ideas without shooting it down and replacing it with your much better idea. I don't mind, and often appreciate, you adding your ideas to the threads but not at other's expense.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

What eras are there to play out in reality? None; most of the stuff you posted is like the peanut butter, it won't exist. But the effects of technology are very real; oceanic ship travel was du jour for hundreds of years for passengers, air travel displaced it in about 30 years.

People were travelling on ships for a lot longer than 30 years, what do you think the Pilgrims came in on when they arrived in Massachusetts? There wouldn't be passenger air travel for another 300 years!

There won't be long term colonies on Mars, it's a rock, it would be easier to build cities in Nevada's high desert or the Sahara.

Have you looked at the number of people who volunteered for the Mars One colony?
http://www.mars-one.com/

No orbitals, or even general mining of asteroids for a long time; about the only thing of immediate value is Titan, and maybe He3 on the moon later on. Finding a livable planet would be immediately useful and promote a land rush most likely.

A livable planet would be livable for whatever life evolved on its surface, we didn't evolve on any other planet but Earth, if we wanted to live on another planet with its own comples ecosystem, we would have to fight that environment in order to live there, also you don't have to violate the known laws of physics or find hidden loopholes in them to terraform Mars. As far as we know, the speed of light is a barrier to colonizing distant stars, the other being the sheer distance involved, the other planets of our Solar System are reasonably close, and living on a rock is basically what we would have to do to get to the stars anyway, it would take decades to centuries to travel to the stars, so we would have to live in something that was very similar to an O'Neill colony while we wait to arrive at our destination. One of the requirements of star travel is getting very comfortable with living in space.

FTL travel is useful for science fiction plots, but that doesn't mean its possible though, that space colony pictures above is possible however, we don't need to find loopholes in the laws of physics to build it, and their are plenty of materials in the asteroid belt to build it with.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Tom, give everyone a chance to express their ideas without shooting it down and replacing it with your much better idea. I don't mind, and often appreciate, you adding your ideas to the threads but not at other's expense.

Is that what you think I'm doing? I don't know how you got this idea, I don't view this as a me win, you lose contest! Aren't we beings just a bit overly compedative here? Anyway its Dragoner that's saying these things are impossible, I disagree. I think it is easier to build an O'Neill colony as pictured above in our own Solar System, that traveling to the stars, but I believe that too will come in its own time. My point is, there are a lot of adventuring possibilities within our own solar system, that are often overlooked in the rush to get that FTL drive in science fiction. One of the draws for me in science fiction is the fact that in some cases, it could actually happen, the more "fantasy elements" one adds to the science fiction story, the less likely it is to be possible. Its quite an interesting challenge to write a story set within the known limits of natures laws, we don't have to wait for that mad scientist to discover warp drive completely and unexpectedly out of the blue. The Solar System is after all huge with the sun radiating energy into space that could illuminate one billion Earth's if fully harvested, such an idea is behind the development of the Dyson Sphere after all, and the way Dyson envisioned it, it wasn't an actual solid sphere completely surrounding the sun, but more like a swarm of O'Neill colonies intercepting up to 80% of the Sun's radiated energy. But I don't mean to belittle anyone's ideas, there is nothing personal in any of this, its just that I've heard the usual scenario in science fiction many times before. For instance 2063 is the year of First Contact in Star Trek.

I am 47 years old, I entertain no hopes of ever living to see the year 2063, and if I did, I would be 96 years old! I won't be participating in any adventures in outer space at that age, so to me as a science fiction scenario, it doesn't matter to me whether it occurs by 2063 or much later, as both time periods are equally inaccessible to me, as I probably won't live long enough to see them, barring a sudden breakthrough in medical science. If I had a choice between warp drive or eternal youth by 2063, I would pick eternal youth, then I can wait for warp drive to show up if ever, or else I could take the slow boat to the stars and wait a couple centuries to get there, no big deal really!

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Tom, give everyone a chance to express their ideas without shooting it down and replacing it with your much better idea. I don't mind, and often appreciate, you adding your ideas to the threads but not at other's expense.

So your saying I'm not allowed to disagree with anyone lest they get their feelings hurt?

 

[Reynard]

Never said that. I have noticed quite frequently someone posts something on a subject and you, whether you realize it or not, say it's wrong and here is your better idea. Contribute your ideas on their own, don't reply to someone pretty much overwriting what they say.

 

[dragoner]

Tom, give everyone a chance to express their ideas without shooting it down and replacing it with your much better idea. I don't mind, and often appreciate, you adding your ideas to the threads but not at other's expense.

So your saying I'm not allowed to disagree with anyone lest they get their feelings hurt?

No, but you don't even read what other people wrote. If you want to continue with some fantasy, that's fine.

 

[AndrewW]

Ok, let's get back to the subject at hand and leave any comments about other forum members out of it.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Tom, give everyone a chance to express their ideas without shooting it down and replacing it with your much better idea. I don't mind, and often appreciate, you adding your ideas to the threads but not at other's expense.

So your saying I'm not allowed to disagree with anyone lest they get their feelings hurt?

No, but you don't even read what other people wrote. If you want to continue with some fantasy, that's fine.

How do you know I didn't read it, did you see me not reading it? Just because I didn't comment on it, doesn't mean I didn't read it.
Back to the subject at hand, the discovery of FTL drive has little to do with World War III, it may be part of a new 2300 timeline or it may not. I guess I wanted to talk about World War III as its own setting rather than as a background for 2300, though it could be, but that's to be decided later.

Now as for World War III, I basically want it to be a realistic World War III, basically by doing the same thing that was done for World War II, such as Starting with the World War III vehicles of various different countries that we think will be the main players in a hypothetical World War III. Also World War III doesn't necessarily have to mean the end of civilization, both sides could still fight a conventional war against each other while remaining deterred from use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons, just as chemical and biological weapons were not used during World War II, though they could have been. The basic rule is that no one starts a war that he thinks he could not win. the corollary is that if nuclear weapons are used, then no one really wins, you just have massive destruction without significant gain for either side.

I think that many of the weapons that would be used in World War III, circa 2030 are ones that are now just being deployed today, the F35, I believe will be the mainstay of the NATO airforces in 2030 just as the F16 and F15 is today. As for ground vehicles, unlike the case in Twilight 2000, many of them will have electric drives and either be powered by batteries of hydrogen fuel cells. Electric vehicles have an advantage in that electricity can be generated in many different ways, burning coal, hydropower, solar cells etc, electricity can also crack water to extract hydrogen from it to fuel the fuel cell vehicles. And another advantage of electric vehicles is they are quiet. Fuel cells woukd probably be used for larger vehicles such as trucks and tanks. (Oh by the way, if you disagree with me, please say so. I promise my feelings won't be hurt)

Another thing that would be on the battlefield would be robots and drones. I think communications devices and computer screens would be built into each soldier's helmet, the helmet would also come with a visor which provides thermal vision and light intensification, it would also have a display keeping track of friendly vs enemy soldiers. Each soldier would be part of a wireless network allowing real time communication between each soldier in the field. Another thing soldiers would probably have is better ballistic armor.

 

[dragoner]

What eras are there to play out in reality? None; most of the stuff you posted is like the peanut butter, it won't exist. But the effects of technology are very real; oceanic ship travel was du jour for hundreds of years for passengers, air travel displaced it in about 30 years.

People were travelling on ships for a lot longer than 30 years, what do you think the Pilgrims came in on when they arrived in Massachusetts? There wouldn't be passenger air travel for another 300 years!

There won't be long term colonies on Mars, it's a rock, it would be easier to build cities in Nevada's high desert or the Sahara.

Have you looked at the number of people who volunteered for the Mars One colony?
http://www.mars-one.com/

No orbitals, or even general mining of asteroids for a long time; about the only thing of immediate value is Titan, and maybe He3 on the moon later on. Finding a livable planet would be immediately useful and promote a land rush most likely.

A livable planet would be livable for whatever life evolved on its surface, we didn't evolve on any other planet but Earth, if we wanted to live on another planet with its own comples ecosystem, we would have to fight that environment in order to live there, also you don't have to violate the known laws of physics or find hidden loopholes in them to terraform Mars. As far as we know, the speed of light is a barrier to colonizing distant stars, the other being the sheer distance involved, the other planets of our Solar System are reasonably close, and living on a rock is basically what we would have to do to get to the stars anyway, it would take decades to centuries to travel to the stars, so we would have to live in something that was very similar to an O'Neill colony while we wait to arrive at our destination. One of the requirements of star travel is getting very comfortable with living in space.

FTL travel is useful for science fiction plots, but that doesn't mean its possible though, that space colony pictures above is possible however, we don't need to find loopholes in the laws of physics to build it, and their are plenty of materials in the asteroid belt to build it with.

Here, the quote about air travel.

 

[Rick]

Tom - may have to disagree with you on a couple of points there. The F35 suffers from a lack of maneuverability - aha, not a problem, it is stealthy, you say; unfortunately there is some evidence that stealth detectors are much easier to develop and deploy than was previously considered, making the F35 risky to use extensively. The chances are that future fighters will continue to be fast and maneuverable, but incorporate less stealth technology.
I agree with you about the armour - I think we'll see more lightweight ballistic protection being used in boots and leg/arm protectors - giving 90-100% coverage against light shrapnel, and body/helmet armour being increased.
As to more drones and remote devices/comm tech - to be fair, I have doubts about their survivability on a modern high tech battlefield; sure they can be useful in asymmetric warfare, but not when your opponents are using multi-wavelength jammers, EMP, etc.

 

[sideranautae]

Tom - may have to disagree with you on a couple of points there. The F35 suffers from a lack of maneuverability - aha, not a problem, it is stealthy, you say; unfortunately there is some evidence that stealth detectors are much easier to develop and deploy than was previously considered,

That probably won't matter. With the missiles that are coming online now no manned plane can out maneuver them. Getting into a fight where you are close enough to get one shot at you means almost certain kill. Autonomous AV's are what will reign by ~2030.

 

[Ewan]

Now as for World War III, I basically want it to be a realistic World War III, basically by doing the same thing that was done for World War II, such as Starting with the World War III vehicles of various different countries that we think will be the main players in a hypothetical World War III.

This would be a very interesting series of books as nations such as the US, UK and Germany would be looking at a new generation of armoured vehicles such as Challanger 3 and Leopard 3 while other smaller nations would be using the hand me downs of Tier One countries such as the Leopard 2.

I imagine that even Tier One countries will still be using upgraded versions of current equipment such as the Warrior IFV which is scheduled to remain in service to 2025.

A good source of inspiration is the EuroWars supplement for Shadowrun.

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Tom - may have to disagree with you on a couple of points there. The F35 suffers from a lack of maneuverability - aha, not a problem, it is stealthy, you say; unfortunately there is some evidence that stealth detectors are much easier to develop and deploy than was previously considered, making the F35 risky to use extensively. The chances are that future fighters will continue to be fast and maneuverable, but incorporate less stealth technology.
I agree with you about the armour - I think we'll see more lightweight ballistic protection being used in boots and leg/arm protectors - giving 90-100% coverage against light shrapnel, and body/helmet armour being increased.
As to more drones and remote devices/comm tech - to be fair, I have doubts about their survivability on a modern high tech battlefield; sure they can be useful in asymmetric warfare, but not when your opponents are using multi-wavelength jammers, EMP, etc.

Assuming of course the drones and robots aren't autonomous, 16 years is a long time for computers, their might be some level of advanced AI capable of distinguishing "friend" from "foe" and picking targets by themselves without remote guidance. Familiar scenario isn't it? Remember these fellas?

I think the battlefields of World War III 2030 will look more like science fiction than the old Twilight 2000 boxed set. Beware of the robots!

 

[sideranautae]

Assuming of course the drones and robots aren't autonomous, 16 years is a long time for computers, their might be some level of advanced AI capable of distinguishing "friend" from "foe" and picking targets by themselves without remote guidance.

Already in use...